To Bluff or Not to Bluff
By William Schryver – imetatronink – November 18, 2023
The map pictured below has been circulating:
It purports to portray the current positions of the impressive array of US/NATO naval assets in the eastern Mediterranean, Red Sea, and the Arabian Sea / Gulf of Oman.
Maybe most of it is more or less accurate in terms of the positioning it indicates. But I do not, at present, believe it accurately represents the position of the USS Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group, which it suggests is sailing in the far reaches of the Gulf of Oman, more or less at the gates of the Strait of Hormuz.
The Eisenhower CSG is indicated by the bright green number 5 on the map. I am very dubious it has ventured into those dangerous waters.
Many believe the strike group will transit the straits, and take a cruise in the Persian Gulf.
I do not believe that will happen.
It would be, in my opinion, an extraordinary blunder of hubris.
That said, it will be a sure indicator of US intent towards Iran.
If the Eisenhower enters the Persian Gulf, it means the US aims to put it in optimal position to strike Iran — or at least to raise the stakes of its bluff to a level that it will very likely be called.
In other words, if the USS Eisenhower and its escorts enter the Persian Gulf, it will almost certainly compel an engagement with Iranian forces — likely ignited by an Iranian shoot-down of US ISR assets.
If, on the other hand, the Eisenhower remains sailing in the relatively safe deep blue waters of the broad portion of the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea, then you can be sure the US actually has no desire to escalate to war with Iran.
That would be, in my estimation, a very wise course of action.
UK government keeps secret files on critics – Observer
RT | November 18, 2023
At least 15 British government departments have been engaged in a deliberate social media and internet profiling campaign against public experts in various fields to ensure that none of its critics are allowed to speak at the cabinet-sponsored events, the Observer reported on Saturday, citing a trove of data it had seen.
The government officials in each department had specific guidelines regulating what exactly they should look for and requesting them to compile and keep “secret files” on the speakers deemed to be critical of the cabinet, the paper said.
The profiling usually involved checking a person’s Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn accounts as well as doing a Google search on such individuals using specific keywords like “criticism of the government or prime minister.” The officials were then advised to look through up to 10 pages of the search results or a period of between three and five years, the report said.
The UK Education Department – one of those engaged in the profiling campaign, according to the Observer – outright denied resorting to such practices in a response to the freedom of information request filed by the Privacy International group last year. The group was investigating social media monitoring by the government at that time.
“Making a concerted effort to search for negative information in this way is directed surveillance,” the Privacy International legal director, Caroline Wilson Palow, told the Observer.
The data on the practice were shared with the paper by a law firm, Leigh Day, that is currently pursuing legal action against the government on behalf of at least two persons affected by such practices.
“This is likely to have impacted large numbers of individuals, many of whom won’t know civil servants hold secret files on them. Such practices are extremely dangerous,” Tessa Gregory, partner at Leigh Day, told the Observer. The lawyer maintained that such hidden checks are in violation of data protection laws and potentially of equality and human rights laws as well.
One of those who hired Leigh Day was Dan Kaszeta, a chemical weapons expert and an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), one of the UK’s leading security think tanks. “The full extent of this is shocking and probably not fully known. I was lucky enough to be given clearcut, obvious evidence,” he told the paper, adding that he was also aware of 12 other experts who had found out that the government had been blacklisting them.
According to Kaszeta, he received a public apology from the government in July and was informed in August that the 15 departments in question had withdrawn those guidelines pending a Cabinet Office review.
A spokesman for the Cabinet Office told the Observer that the government was “reviewing the guidance and have temporarily withdrawn it to prevent any misinterpretation of the rules.”
Why were German politicians so eager to vaccinate children, and why are they lying about it now?
eugyppius: a plague chronicle | November 18, 2023
Here is a riddle:
Why were German politicians so eager, in summer 2021, to vaccinate children? Why did they place public pressure on vaccine regulators to recommend child vaccination?
Even a few months ago, I would’ve said this was no great mystery. Before August 2021, everybody still operated on the insane assumption that the vaccines would eradicate Covid. They believed (or professed to believe) that a vaccination rate in excess of some magic number would end the pandemic, and that magic number was presumed to be unachievable if children were spared the jabs. I’d still say that was the case, but a recent news story has caused me to consider this question more deeply. Where did the specific pressure come from? What drove, for example, random regional ministers of education to mount their own appeals to vaccinate schoolchildren? What did these dumb people ever know about viruses or reproduction numbers or population immunity? What was going on?
There has been a lot of talk in the German press about the need for an appraisal of pandemic policies. This talk has flowed in directly inverse proportion to anybody’s willingness to actually appraise anything. Almost the only exception is the state parliament of Brandenburg, where Alternative für Deutschland are strong enough to have forced the convening of a Corona Investigatory Committee. The revelations so far have been extremely eye-opening, despite the limitation of the inquiry to Brandenburg and substantial obstruction from the political establishment.
The Committee publishes no protocols, many of their sessions are closed to the public, and with a few exceptions the media studiously avoids reporting on their work. Nevertheless, every time its members meet, something new and very bizarre comes to light. During their third session, in October, the Committee summoned Britta Ernst, Minister of Education in Brandenburg from 2017 to 2023, and also since 1998 the wife of Chancellor Olaf Scholz. At one point in the proceedings, Saskia Ludwig asked Ernst a very important question, namely the one that stands at the head of this post:
Why did Ernst advocate the vaccination of children in 2021?
The Nordkurier reports on the exchange that ensued:
Ernst had always campaigned in favour of vaccination and said in November 2021 that a “high vaccination rate” was “crucial for child welfare.” Ludwig asked … whether Ernst would repeat this statement given the current level of knowledge about the risk of side effects when vaccinating children against Covid.
Ernst … replied that the recommendation of STIKO [the Standing Committee on Vaccination] had been decisive for her.
STIKO “set the standard” and she had “no doubts about the work of STIKO,” which is why she had “naturally adopted their findings, which they make on a scientific basis.” Regarding her statement from November 2021, she said: “I suspect that this quote regarding the vaccination rate referred primarily to adults.” Ernst continued: “In addition, STIKO also recommended the vaccination of children and adolescents, and we followed this recommendation.”
In other words, Ernst was just Following the Science. She was just doing what the expert regulators of STIKO told her to do.
Except, that’s not true at all. Ernst was calling for the vaccination of teenagers as early as July 2021, well before that body had made any such recommendation. She was circulating flyers among Brandenburg schoolchildren that assured them they might even be able to get vaccinated without their parents’ permission. And what is more, she was even demanding that STIKO expand their recommendation to include everyone over 12 years of age.
From an rbb return-to-school article published on 29 July 2021:
The new school year begins in Brandenburg in just over a week. Primary school pupils will then be required to wear masks and there will continue to be plenty of ventilation. The Minister of Education believes that schools are in a good position – but there is still a need for action when it comes to vaccination.
Brandenburg’s Education Minister Britta Ernst (SPD) is calling for children and young people to be vaccinated from the age of 12 …
Until now, the Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) has advised that 12 to 16-year-olds should only be vaccinated if they have certain preexisting conditions. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has already approved the vaccines from Moderna and Biontech/Pfizer for this age group.
Ernst called on STIKO to issue a clear recommendation in favour of these vaccinations. The committee has already established that the incidence of infection among children is not dangerous and that illnesses among children are not severe. “This gives us further support in favour of opening schools,” Ernst said. A clear recommendation from STIKO, however, would be “helpful in any case, because many parents are naturally unsure how they should act.”
It wasn’t just Ernst. The day before, the Minister President of Brandenburg, Dietmar Woidke, had also renewed his demands that STIKO approve the vaccines for healthy adolescents:
On rbb television, Brandenburg’s Minister President Dietmar Woidke (SPD) once again called for the vaccination of children aged twelve and over to be considered. “STIKO already recommends vaccination for children with pre-existing conditions,” Woidke said. He would welcome it if … STIKO were to make a recommendation for the vaccination of adolescents in view of the spread of the Delta variant. According to Woidke, Delta has increased the risks for children and adolescents. STIKO must now weigh “the risk posed by Covid and the risk that vaccines may pose to younger age groups.”
Confronted with these contradictions at the Committee last month, Ernst became oddly evasive. She said vaguely that “many parents were waiting for a recommendation from STIKO” and that she “seem[ed] to remember that children in other countries were already vaccinated.” She did not refer to Woidke or describe any broader discussions within the Brandenburg government, although demands for child vaccination were clearly bigger than her. Nor did she refer to pressure from teachers’ organisations or any specific epidemiological goals.
The excuse about parental pressure is very strange and unsatisfying, when you think about it. First, the vaccines had already been approved by the EMA for the 12-and-up group. Parents who really wanted to jab their kids just had to find a willing doctor. Second, and more importantly, it is not the job of state education ministers to pass the concerns of local jab-crazed parents on to national medical regulatory bodies in the media. Why can’t Ernst clearly describe her motives? Where did the demand to vaccinate children come from?
At another revealing moment, Ludwig asked Ernst about a pro-vaccine flyer circulated among Brandenburg schoolchildren. This flyer assured kids that “There are hardly any long-term side effects; the vaccine is broken down quickly by the body.” It also enthused that “In some cases, you can even be vaccinated without your parents’ consent.” Here, too, Ernst had no good answers. She would say only that the flyer merely described “the legal situation” and “that underage girls are given contraceptives by doctors without parental consent.”
I looked into this flyer, which is a creepy exercise in marketing vaccines to children. The version that was circulated in Thüringen is still online:
Ernst couldn’t say much about its contents because it came from on high. The flyer was funded by the Thüringen Health and Education ministries, and masterminded by odious health communicator, Erfurt professor and villain-of-the-blog Cornelia Betsch. In later months, Betsch would go on to advise the government on how to nudge German vaccine uptake higher. We are dealing with the upper reaches of the German vaccinator-industrial complex here, in other words. The flyer was designed according to interviews its authors conducted with teenagers at the Henfling Gymnasium in Meiningen, for the purposes of figuring out out how best to manipulate kids into getting excited about vaccines.
There are two things about this document that make it extremely obnoxious. The first is that it is full of highly manipulative propaganda. It tells children that “The virus spreads primarily among the unvaccinated,” that “if you are not vaccinated, you have a greater risk of becoming infected,” that “the virus is becoming more contagious,” that “it is very rare to be infected despite vaccination and it is rare to infect others” and that “if you are vaccinated, you also protect others who can’t be vaccinated.” It contains a specific section explaining that the vaccines won’t impact fertility, and so I expect it was targeted specifically at girls, for whom the get-vaccinated-to-protect-your-family subtext would be especially effective.
The second obnoxious point is that this flyer, advising teenagers to seek the jabs even in the absence of parental permission and providing them with the contact information of local vaccination centres, was published on 14 July 2021. That is, it came out in advance of any official STIKO recommendation that this age group should be jabbed at all, and just two weeks before leading Brandenburg politicians like Ernst and Woidke began calling for STIKO to expand their recommendations to include teenagers.
There was, then, an unauthorised child vaccination campaign underway in summer 2021, which consisted of vaccine propaganda circulated to school children on the one hand, public pressure on vaccine regulators on the other hand, and who knows what else on however many other hands. It was timed around the summer holidays, for the clear purpose of scaring children into seeking the jabs before they returned to school. For some reason, Ernst will not tell the Brandenburg parliament why she participated in this campaign, and she will not say who its orchestrators were.
‘Israel’s’ ‘Nakba Doctrine’
By Alastair Crooke | Al Mayadeen | November 17, 2023
“We are now actually rolling out the Gaza Nakba”, says Avi Dichter, “Israel’s” Minister for Agriculture and former head of Shin Bet. The Israeli cabinet has been briefed that up to 1,700,000 Gazans (out of a total population of 2.2 million) are no longer able to live in their own homes, either because they’ve been ‘displaced’, or because their homes have been destroyed/damaged.
To project the image of the Israeli military as ‘bounding ahead’ with its operation to eradicate Hamas however, we see many videos of tanks and armoured personnel carriers around Gaza City — but by contrast, observe notably few images of IOF soldiers patrolling on foot – either to protect the tanks, which are subject to sniper or RPG fire, or (as many commentators suspect) out of fear of Israeli casualties.
Plainly, “Israel” sticks to their armoured vehicles, though they are taking regular losses of their vehicles from ‘flash’ mini squads of Hamas fighters emerging suddenly from concealed tunnels to destroy the vehicles – before disappearing again underground.
The IOF has entered Gaza City, progressing a couple of kilometres over the month, yet showing no serious evidence to date of having encountered the Hamas’ forces, nor having eliminated an appreciable number of them. Why?
Simply put, the Israelis are fighting a conventional war-model (an armoured ‘fist’ inching ahead under massive air support). But the contradiction to this model is blatantly obvious: the so-called ‘enemy’ on the ground simply are civilians, who are dying in horrifying numbers, whilst the Hamas forces remain intact, deep underground. That, too, is where the Hamas infrastructure lies.
The contradictions inherent to this approach lie rooted in the IOF’s evolution over decades to become a quasi-colonial police force, used to policing occupation through the twin vectors of massive force, plus absolute force protection. It is no secret that the IOF fears to engage in hand-to-hand firefights with Hamas units in the tunnel complex (for which their fighters are not adapted). So instead, we have a show of armoured vehicles parading on the surface, coupled with largely unsubstantiated IOF claims of damage inflicted on Hamas.
The most obvious contradiction is the Israeli Cabinet’s claim that the near non-existent military pressures on Hamas per se, are creating the conditions for the releasing of hostages; whereas the real pressure — the incessant air strikes – that are devastating the civilian population and its infrastructure (hospitals, schools, bakeries and refugee camps), is facilitating a second Nakba — more than any hostage release.
Maybe Hamas will release more hostages (calculated in terms of its strategic aims). If so, this likely will be construed – wrongly – as Hamas feeling pain. The conclusion, therefore, may be drawn that carpet bombing ‘works’. As Zvi Bar’el outlines in the liberal Israeli daily, Haaretz:
“According to Israel’s conception, the humanitarian crisis is part of an arsenal at its disposal, which can be used not just as a bargaining chip in negotiations over the release of hostages. Its role is to sear into Palestinian consciousness the apocalyptic punishment facing anyone who from now on dared challenge Israel.
This is a continuation of the deeply rooted strategic concept according to which humanitarian suffering might yield security-related gains …
More importantly, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza now gives Israel diplomatic leverage which includes getting concessions … Above all, it entails a defanging of the American rush to reach a two-state solution.”
The ineluctable logic to this analysis therefore is to continue with the status quo: If it isn’t working in respect to freeing hostages, or degrading Hamas, it can be presented to the Israeli public as ‘working’ through forcing civilians to flee their devastated communities (what Dichter calls the “Gaza Nakba”).
With the ‘Nakba Doctrine’ taking a hold, so favourable conditions for the release of hostages (which Hamas predicates upon a lengthy ceasefire and humanitarian supplies) melts away. The IOF can have one or the other: Either continuous destruction, or conditions for hostage releases. (It seems the cabinet has opted for the former.)
The other (more profound) dilemma is that international pressures for a ceasefire (and hostage release) are accumulating. Time is short, and the military operation may be required to cease. The issue for the Netanyahu Cabinet is — once stopped — will it be possible to resume the massacres of civilians and the Gaza Nakba pressures?
In this context, Israeli popular sentiment — even amongst former liberals — is moving toward a Greater Nakba. Gaza is under Nakba pressures. So is the West Bank, as settler violence against Palestinians surges. Even a ‘liberal’ such as former opposition leader Lapid now agrees that ‘settlers’ in the occupied West Bank are not ‘settlers’ at all, since the land is but the ‘Biblical land of Israel’.
Nakba ‘ambitions’ are widening to South Lebanon (up to the Litani River) too. The radical members of Netanyahu’s government say Israelis will never return to the kibbutz adjacent to Lebanon, without Hezbollah’s removal from the border area.
So, the call is heard for “Israel” to ‘take’ Lebanon up to the Litani (a key water source) — and ‘serendipitously’ the Israeli air force has begun operating up to 40 kms inside Lebanon. Cabinet members now openly speak of the IOF needing to turn its attention to Hezbollah once Hamas has been ‘obliterated’.
The northern border inevitably is heating up. Hezbollah is using its more sophisticated, and more lethal weaponry against IOF positions in northern “Israel” as the ‘rules’ of engagement continuously blur. And “Israel” is responding, with attacks shifting ever deeper into South Lebanon (ostensibly to strike at Hezbollah’s rear infrastructure).
Last night the Israeli War Cabinet voted for striking a major blow at Hezbollah — but Netanyahu demurred. The US reportedly suspects that “Israel” is provoking Hezbollah, hoping to entice the US into a war on Lebanon.
Plainly, the White House is struggling to avoid the slide towards full regional war, as both the Lebanese front and the Iraqi front heats up: On Sunday, Iraqi movements again fired missiles at the American base in Shaddadi.
“Israel” is sensing the present crisis to be both an existential risk, but an ‘opportunity’ too – an opportunity to establish “Israel” across ‘its Biblical lands’ over the long term. There is no mistaking it — this is the direction of travel of Israeli popular sentiment, from both Left and Right wings, to bloody eschatology.
As one prominent Israeli commentator wrote after watching (the unsubstantiated) 47-minute IOF film on the 7 October events:
“After seeing the film I have no compassion for any person in Gaza, not a woman, not a child, and certainly not a man. Everyone deserves a painful death, you were all complicit in this massacre. I hope that no one is left alive in Gaza, period! … I am sure that your God despises you, is ashamed of you, and would burn you in hell, just as the IDF is doing to you now”.
The ‘tribe of Amalek’ today is quoted widely. (King Saul, in the first Book of Samuel, commands Samuel to kill every person of the Amalekites: “Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys”).
As the Israeli mood swings Biblical, so the global majority’s anger rises. And so Muslims come to see the crisis as an uncompromising civilisational war — The West versus ‘us’.
The concomitant two conferences — the Arab League and the OIC (held concurrently in Riyadh) — underlined the complete collapse of “Israel’s” image across the Islamic world. The outpouring of anger and passion was palpable, and is metamorphosing new global politics.
In the West, the anger is splintering mainstream political structures, and causing wide convulsion. Global protests are massive.
Thus, as “Israel” swings towards a Biblical “Greater Israel”, the Islamic world turns increasingly uncompromising. Though the conferences did not agree on any action-plan, the image of President Raisi sitting next to MbS; and that both Presidents Erdogan and Assad were co-mingling at the conference, was arresting.
The strategic implication is stark: Israelis now abjure the risks of living with Muslims, and the sentiment is fully reciprocated by Palestinians towards Hebraic zealotry. The old paradigm for a political solution is rendered obsolete.
Acting PLC Speaker Ahmed Bahr martyred in Gaza
MEMO | November 18, 2023
The Acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council Dr Ahmed Bahr died on Friday as a result of his wounds from an air strike during the attack launched by the occupation forces on the Gaza Strip.
On 23 October, his son Muhammad, his wife and children were martyred when the occupation aircraft bombed their house.
PLC Deputy Speaker elected in 2006 Hasan Khreisheh mourned the martyr Bahr, expressing: “In my name and in the name of the members of the Legislative Council elected in 2006, we mourn with all pride the acting Speaker of the Legislative Council, Dr Ahmed Bahr (Abu Akram), who was martyred as a result of the occupation’s bombing.”
Khreisheh posted on Facebook: “You will remain present in the memory of our people and everyone who knew you as an honest and genuine national symbol and a partner in advocating for Palestine, Gaza and its people. We are a nation that sacrifices its leaders for the sake of pride and freedom. To Him we belong, and to Him we return, my dear brother and colleague Abu Akram.”
The martyred Palestinian politician Bahr was born in the Gaza Strip in 1949. He was a member of the Hamas political bureau and assumed the position of first deputy speaker of the PLC after obtaining around 74,000 votes in the legislative elections.
After the occupation arrested PLC President Aziz Dweik in the West Bank, Dr Bahr became the acting speaker of the PLC.
The martyr obtained a doctorate in the Arabic language, and the occupation forces arrested him for two years without charge in 1989.
On 23 October, Jamila Al-Shanti, a member of the Hamas Political Bureau, was also martyred. Al-Shanti was the founder of the Women’s Movement of the Hamas Movement and the first female member of the political bureau.
On 10 October, the two leaders of the Hamas Movement, Zakaria Abu Muammar and Jawad Abu Shamala, were martyred as a result of an Israeli bombing.
Zakaria Abu Muammar was the head of the National Relations Department of the Hamas Movement in the Gaza Strip, while Jawad Abu Shamala was the head of the Economic Department.
Gaza: Al-Qassam Brigades reveals truth about occupation finding bodies of 2 female captives
MEMO | November 18, 2023
Al-Qassam Brigades announced that the occupation’s claims that the bodies of Israeli captives were found in hospitals in the Gaza Strip were false and that they were undergoing treatment there.
The brigades conveyed in an official statement on its Telegram channel: “We transferred a number of prisoners to care centres to receive treatment due to the seriousness of their health condition and to preserve their lives. This happened recently with the detainee, Aryeh Zalman Zdmanovich, card number 0010185791, who received intensive care.”
Al-Qassam Brigades explained: “After he recovered, he was returned to his place of detention. He died due to panic attacks as a result of the repeated bombing around his place of detention, and we will publish material documenting this.”
The occupation forces on Thursday announced the discovery of two bodies: a female Israeli soldier, who Al-Qassam confirmed was killed as a result of the occupation bombing her detention site, in addition to another female detainee, whose body they claimed was found in a building next to Al-Shifa Hospital.
Al-Qassam Brigades stated that the occupation forces have so far caused the deaths of more than 60 of its captives in the Gaza Strip due to the continuous brutal bombing of all parts of the strip, especially Palestinian homes.
U.S.-China Reset? Biden Offers Hand of Friendship to Xi While Holding Enmity in the Other
Strategic Culture Foundation | November 17, 2023
Despite the hype in the U.S. media about their much-anticipated summit in California this week marking a putative return to normal bilateral relations, the Biden administration continues pushing unprecedented aggression towards China.
Just like San Francisco’s notorious Third World-like homelessness and squalor being hurriedly cleaned up (swept under the rug, more like it) for the media spectacle, all the signs point to no return to decent U.S.-China relations in the longer term. It’s all a duplicitous facade for a passing moment on a path of enmity.
Biden held a four-hour summit with Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping on Wednesday in San Francisco ahead of the annual conference for the 21-nation Association of Pacific and Economic Cooperation (APEC).
It was highly notable that Biden and Xi did not hold a joint press conference following their lengthy discussions. Nor did the two leaders issue a joint statement. So much for a new beginning!
Almost comically, the supposed positive meeting was later thrown into disarray when Biden at the end of his solo press conference made a hallmark embarrassing gaffe by repeating an earlier epithet for Xi. Asked by a reporter if he still considered the Chinese president “a dictator”, Biden responded, “Yes”.
Antony Blinken, the U.S. Secretary of State, was visibly perplexed by his tone-deaf boss’s remarks, sensing that all the effort to create an apparent amiable reset in relations was in danger of collapsing in farce.
Chinese media tended to overlook Biden’s undiplomatic gaucheness. Surprisingly, China’s foreign ministry and media appeared to talk up the presidential summit as bearing prospects of more friendly bilateral relations. Global Times reported in an upbeat mood on a “strategic summit” for “greater stability in the world”.
The American and Chinese media spinning or wishful thinking about a seeming turnaround in positive relations is misplaced.
As Biden’s foolish and gratuitous remark about Xi being a “dictator” shows, the U.S. rulers have nothing but contempt for China. Biden may have held out a friendly hand to Xi, but the American president and the U.S. establishment are harbouring endemic and growing hostility towards Beijing.
The two presidents last met a year ago during the G20 gathering in Bali, Indonesia. Since that encounter there has been a worrying downturn in U.S.-China relations with many commentators in the U.S. and China, as well as around the world, fearing a possible outbreak of war between the two global nuclear powers.
Frankly, the belligerence stems from one side: the United States. It’s not just the administration of President Joe Biden that espouses aggression by deploying contrived economic sanctions against China. There is a preponderance of irrational hostility in Congress towards Beijing as well as among the U.S. military. Only a month ago, the Pentagon once again labelled China as a growing military threat to American global interests. The alleged threats that Washington traduces are baseless or, ironically, a projection of its own intimidatory actions, such as sending countless naval and aviation patrols near China’s borders on the cynical pretext of “freedom of navigation”.
The Biden White House has continually provoked China with false claims of Chinese expansionism in the Asia-Pacific while the U.S. relentlessly builds up its own military power in the region. Washington is also assiduously recruiting regional allies to gang up on China in the event of war. The AUKUS coalition with Australia and Britain armed with nuclear submarines is a particularly tendentious development. So too is the Quad group involving the U.S., Japan, South Korea and India which arrogantly denigrates China as a hemispheric threat, thereby turning reality completely on its head.
Biden is merely continuing an escalation in hostility that began ramping up under the Obama administration (2008-16) more than a decade ago. Trump maintained the belligerence during his four years (2016-20), which Biden has redoubled. The latter was vice president when Obama launched the so-called Pivot to Asia in 2011.
The trajectory unmistakably shows a systematic policy of U.S. power to confront China, and that policy prevails regardless of who sits in the White House, and no matter whether the president is a Democrat or Republican. So much for democratic choice!
As American hegemonic dominance goes into rapid decline owing to inherent economic and societal failure under sclerotic late U.S. capitalism, it has become all the more imperative for Washington to try to scale up military aggression towards perceived geopolitical rivals. It’s a desperate gambit to offset an historic decline.
China, being the world’s ascendant second largest economy after the U.S., is logically seen as the Number One threat. So too are Russia and other nations that advocate a multipolar world order free from arbitrary U.S. and Western privileges. This is the geopolitical context for why the NATO axis is waging a proxy war in Ukraine against Russia, and why the United States seems hellbent on fomenting chaos and conflict in the Middle East. The would-be hegemon needs violence, chaos and tension like a drug addict craving a narcotic fix.
The deterioration in U.S.-China relations has caused many observers to be apprehensive of a looming war. Pentagon commanders remark openly about an anticipated armed conflict breaking out between the two nuclear powers, especially in relation to tensions over Taiwan.
One reason why Biden seems to be seeking a belated easing of tensions with China is precisely because Washington has stoked the war tendency too much and therefore needs to dampen it, albeit for short-term practical reasons.
Another reason for seemingly engaging with President Xi this week is Biden’s electioneering. He faces a tight presidential race next year and no doubt is looking for something positive to show American voters. Significantly, Biden chose to prioritize his top achievement from discussions with Xi as “counter-narcotics policy”. Over 70,000 Americans die every year from opioid overdosing, more than from gun violence or road accidents. It is a major national scandal in the U.S. China is blamed as a source of fentanyl precursor chemicals. Biden boasted this week that the U.S. and China would cooperate more on controlling illicit drug trade. It seems that Biden was looking more at scoring favour with the U.S. electorate than to genuinely restoring normal bilateral relations with China based on principles of ensuring global peace.
Under Biden, the U.S. has recklessly intensified military and political interference in Taiwan, an island province of China. The Biden administration has proliferated weapons sales to Taiwan in flagrant defiance of China’s warnings to desist.
High-level political delegations from the U.S. to Taiwan have gone hand-in-hand with the increasing American militarization of the island, which is only some 130 kilometres from China’s southeast mainland. The provocation is similar to how the U.S. and NATO weaponized Ukraine to antagonize Russia.
The breakdown in military communications between the U.S. and China was instigated by the visit to Taiwan in August 2022 by Nancy Pelosi, the then Speaker of the House of Representatives, which is the third most senior political office in the U.S. after the president.
This week’s summit between Biden and Xi declared a resumption in military communications between the U.S. and China.
We’ll see how long the supposed detente lasts. Not for long, one suspects going by past form.
After Biden met with Xi in Bali at the end of last year, there were similar professions from the U.S. side of tamping down tensions and resuming normalcy. A couple of months after that supposed “reset”, the Biden administration sparked a crisis when it shot down a Chinese weather balloon that had been blown off course.
The notion that the U.S. can easily repair relations with China is naive. All the signals indicate that Washington is on a collision course with China. Provocative name-calling of China as a threat, the relentless arming of Taiwan and the pursuit of aggressive trade war policies all spell out confrontation.
That dire direction is, unfortunately, unavoidable because the U.S. sees itself as the indispensable sole superpower that will not tolerate any global arrangement other than its hegemonic dominance. That zero-sum mindset of the United States is intrinsic to its imperialist power. That is why the U.S. as it is currently formulated as a state is destined to be a warmonger. World peace is anathema to U.S. imperial power.
China, Russia and other nations aiming for a new multipolar world must be cognizant of that nefarious reality. Aspiring to have normal relations with the U.S. as a global hegemonic power is like trying to have normal relations with a psychotic predator.
President Teddy Roosevelt (1900-10) once jocularly described the practice of U.S. foreign policy as speaking softly while carrying a big club. That’s the essence of a global bully. U.S. power always relies on wielding a military club. The only difference now under Biden is that instead of speaking softly, the U.S. stutters over its lies and deceptions.