 |
| Credit: Holger Ellgaard |
So NATO secretary general Mark Rutte recently said that Europe can´t defend itself without the United States. He´s not wrong, of course. But that´s why we don´t trust the current occupant of La Casa Mucha Blanca. John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, come back, all is forgiven!
Trump just adressed the world concerning the US attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities. Does this mean that John Bolton and Mike Pompeo are rehabilitated? And what about Ukraine...
The geopolitical equations of the incoming Trump administration don´t
add up. Trump wants (or says he wants) a swift solution to the war in Ukraine,
presumably so he can concentrate on challenging Iran in the Middle East and
China pretty much everywhere. But Iran and China are Russian allies. So why
should Russia make peace with Trump, so he can go after their chief backers
instead? Indeed, what would a Ukrainian peace plan even look like in a
situation in which Russia has momentum, both on the battlefield and
economically? I suppose it´s *possible* that the Russians might stop the war if
given a really large chunk of Ukraine, Crimea and Donbass say, but why should
the Russians just give up additional territory without a fight? They currently
control a far larger area. If I had been Putin, I would simply ignore Trump and
Rubio. Or perhaps “play” them a bit. And continue the war, period.
What could the United States do in such a situation? They could tell
Zelensky to surrender and accept a neutral or Finlandized rump Ukraine. But
this will probably lead to serious strains within the Western alliance,
including both the EU and NATO. France and Germany have often been at odds with
the United States (under both Trump and Biden). This would resurface, with a
vengeance, even if the present governments of those nations remain in power.
The opposition is pro-Russian. And then there´s Turkey, the strongest military
power within NATO after the United States, but clearly more beholden to Putin
or Hamas than to whoever thinks he´s bigwig in DC this time around.
The second line of option would be for Trump to reinvite Mike Pompeo and
the war hawks to his admin, change its policy, and go all in for a
confrontation with Russia. But the traditional geopolitics in such cases is to split
Russia and China from each other. Can the US really take on both at the same
time? And why should China break with Russia and line up with the United States?
If Beijing ever moves against Putin, they will demand a big prize for their U-turn.
Taiwan, for starters! Also, the European nations would have to rearm
themselves. Is that really likely under present circumstances? Take Germany for
instance, this fraudulent “economic powerhouse” the “Green transition” of which
is really brokered by Russian oil and gas. Its military is so weak that Poland
could easily defeat it in a shooting war. Besides, an aggressive NATO posture
against Russia will probably lead to Turkey and Hungary leaving, making the
military alliance look like a joke.
There could still be some openings for the Western alliance. The Sunni
Arabs probably don´t want to be dominated by Iran or Turkey. Somewhat
ironically, this marriage of convenience might save Israel! Japan might fear a
dominant Sinosphere in Asia. But otherwise? Once again: The geopolitical
equations simply don´t add up.
2025 might become a very bleak year.
Look who´s back...
This summer, Trump´s former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo co-wrote an article with one David Urban called "A Trump Peace Plan for Ukraine", published in Wall Street Journal. The article is behind a pay wall (presumably only payable in dollars!), but summaries can be found below. I also link to a critical article about Pompeo´s and Urban´s supposed conflicts of interest in making their proposal. Short form: both have Ukrainian ties.
As for the "peace plan" itself, it´s really a plan to escalate the conflict with Russia and invest more in the US defense industry. In other words, an explicitly interventionist policy rather than the Russophile quasi-isolationism Trump is usually associated with. Indeed, it´s not even clear whether Trump has seen this particular plan.
But...
Mike Pompeo was a featured speaker at Trump´s last election rally. More isolationist MAGA supporters fear that Trump will again appoint him Secretary of State. There is currently a kind of campaign against Pompeo on X. So perhaps the last word on the future Trump Administration´s stance on Ukraine hasn´t been spoken yet.
Possible "Trump" Ukraine peace plan
A Trump Peace Plan for Ukraine (short summary)
Major conflict of interest in Pompeo "Trump peace plan"
From John Michael Greer´s astrology blog (most of which is closed to non-patrons). I assume this means that Trump and his litter buddy Pompeo won´t make Amerika great again, after all. Darn! After all this trouble...
>>>Which “horrid evils” are signaled by the arrival of any given comet are determined in large part by the sign in which the comet appears. Comet Tsuchinshan-Atlas was first visible to the naked eye in Virgo, low in the eastern sky just before dawn. A comet in Virgo predicts warfare, economic troubles, epidemics of feverish illnesses, and a decline in the birth rate.
>>>It also warns that the officials of some government will be driven out of their offices en masse; they may be imprisoned or forced to flee their country, and will not regain their positions, their influence, or their wealth. Since the comet was in the eastern sky, these will tend to happen relatively soon.
>>>The comet’s second appearance was in Libra, low in the western sky after sunset. A comet in Libra signals crop failures, famines, poverty, drought, and suffering through excessive cold; it warns of secret plots and treacheries, pandemic diseases, and the deaths of eminent persons. Since the comet was in the western sky, these will tend to happen later on in the period of the comet’s effects.
The first link goes to a pro-Russian site summarizing the article in the second link, which is from the New York Times, but might not be available to everyone (due to pay walls, etc).
Here is the gist of it (written from a pro-Russian perspective):
>>>On Sunday The New York Times published an explosive and very belated full admission that US intelligence has not only been instrumental in Ukraine wartime decision-making, but has established and financed high tech command-and-control spy centers, and was doing so long prior to the Feb. 24 Russian invasion of two years ago.>>>
>>>Among the biggest revelations is that the program was established a decade ago and spans three different American presidents. The Times says the CIA program to modernize Ukraine's intelligence services has "transformed" the former Soviet state and its capabilities into "Washington’s most important intelligence partners against the Kremlin today.">>>
>>>This has included the agency having secretly trained and equipped Ukrainian intelligence officers spanning back to just after the 2014 Maidan coup events, as well constructing a network of 12 secret bases along the Russian border—work which began eight years ago. These intelligence bases, from which Russian commanders' communications can be swept up and Russian spy satellites monitored, are being used launch and track cross-border drone and missile attacks on Russian territory.>>>
>>>This means that with the disclosure of the longtime "closely guarded secret" the world just got a big step closer to WW3, given it means the CIA is largely responsible for the effectiveness of the recent spate of attacks which have included direct drone hits on key oil refineries and energy infrastructure.>>>
>>>Clearly, Kiev and Washington now want world to know of the deep intelligence relationship they tried to conceal for over the past decade. It is perhaps a kind of warning to Moscow at a moment Ukraine's forces are in retreat: the US is fighting hand in glove with the Ukrainians. And yet the revelations contained in the NY Times report also confirm what President Putin has precisely accused Washington of all along.>>>
Also of interest is the claim that Trump didn´t know about the full extent of the CIA program, which was instead in the hands of anti-Russian hawks within his administration, specifically Mike Pompeo and John Bolton. Which suddenly explains some bold statements by the latter about Ukraine having the right to bomb Russia (my observation)...
Why isn´t the above headline news the world over?
Some analysts associated with the Trump Administration has leaked a document outlining the US strategy to counter China. Or perhaps what should have been the US strategy, since neither Trump nor Pompeo really followed it.
The "Indo-Pacific" or "Quad" strategy was perhaps leaked in order to lobby the incoming Biden administration to adopt it. It calls for stronger US ties with Australia, India and Japan to push back China's increased hegemonic ambitions in the region and beyond. Military encirclement seems to be part of the equation.
The article argues that although Trump was (of course) anti-Chinese, his nativist impulses and generally erratic course made the strategy difficult to implement. At one point, Trump even threatened to withdraw US forces from Japan! Pompeo, by contrast, wanted complete US hegemony in the Indo-Pacific, rather than the "multi-polar" approach of the Quad.
It will indeed be interesting to see if Biden will break up the globalist-Chinese alliance, and if so, to what end...
The secret plan for countering China
An interesting article on Pompeo's (and Trump's) foreign policy, and some speculations about his future ambitions.
The article points out that Pompeo haven't disavowed Trump, and wonders aloud if he wants to run for the presidency himself.
Note also that Trump prefers sanctions to war, but that the sanctions aren't working...
Presumably, whoever wrote the article therefore wants Biden to start some new wars!
PS. The link isn't working. Try search for "Pompeo doubles down on defending Trump, positions himself as the president's successor" on Yahoo News.
