La cada vez más comentada integración eurasiática tiene un formidable proyecto integrador: el Nuevo Corredor de la Seda, en rigor de verdad una ultratecnológica serie de corredores ferroviarios, viales, energéticos e informáticos que permitirán la conexión rápida de Eurasia y, por lo tanto, una nueva fase de expansión económica global a niveles nunca antes vistos por el hombre. Todo este proyecto tiene un efecto/propósito/problemita adicional: los EEUU quedan afuera. En dos palabras, el Imperio deja de serlo. Esto los tiene a los chicos del Pentágono y el Departamento de Estado echando espuma por la boca desde hace unos años. Hasta que alguien salió con una idea extraordinaria: qué tal si hacemos mierda a Europa y, en consecuencia, les estropeamos el proyecto a los rusos y a los chinos?
Increíblemente, y con el beneplácito de los europeos, los chicos del Imperio avanzan con su proyectito día tras día. Ocurre que, mientras Europa no se suba los pantalones de una vez, va a seguir siendo violada serialmente por aquel. La triste realidad es esa, digan lo que digan y piensen lo que piensen los payasos que ocupan cargos en Bruselas. El problemita es que, vía NATO, están empezando a molestar a los rusos, gente tranquila pero que ya avisó que la paciencia tiene un límite. Esto no parece inquietar a los EEUU, quien tiene la increíble teoría de que una guerra caliente entre Rusia y la NATO sólo va a transcurrir en territorio europeo. Créase o no, este festival de idioteces, cálculos de verdulería y especulaciones de neocones alucinados está realmente dictando la política en ese conglomerado heterogéneo denominado Unión Europea. Entre los 500 millones de personas que lo ocupan, no parece haber un solo estadista capaz de decir las cosas como son. En fin, chicos, cosecharán su siembra, como en el teleteatro. La nota que sigue es de Pepe Escobar para Sputnik News. A ver si les gusta:
Increíblemente, y con el beneplácito de los europeos, los chicos del Imperio avanzan con su proyectito día tras día. Ocurre que, mientras Europa no se suba los pantalones de una vez, va a seguir siendo violada serialmente por aquel. La triste realidad es esa, digan lo que digan y piensen lo que piensen los payasos que ocupan cargos en Bruselas. El problemita es que, vía NATO, están empezando a molestar a los rusos, gente tranquila pero que ya avisó que la paciencia tiene un límite. Esto no parece inquietar a los EEUU, quien tiene la increíble teoría de que una guerra caliente entre Rusia y la NATO sólo va a transcurrir en territorio europeo. Créase o no, este festival de idioteces, cálculos de verdulería y especulaciones de neocones alucinados está realmente dictando la política en ese conglomerado heterogéneo denominado Unión Europea. Entre los 500 millones de personas que lo ocupan, no parece haber un solo estadista capaz de decir las cosas como son. En fin, chicos, cosecharán su siembra, como en el teleteatro. La nota que sigue es de Pepe Escobar para Sputnik News. A ver si les gusta:
Título: NATO Paranoia
Versus Eurasia Integration
Epígrafe: As the
NATO summit in Warsaw gained traction, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov could
not contain a wry observation; "We aren't the ones getting closer to
NATO's borders.”
Texto: This is a
statement of fact. But NATO does not dwell on facts; only myths. One of the
Beltway’s ironclad myths is that NATO periodically drags the US back into its
“traditional role” of guaranteeing the security of Europe. It’s actually the
other way around; Washington periodically needs to re-imprint on European
vassals the absolute need for more NATO.
For too long NATO
had been focusing on “out of area” operations; since at least 1993, when the
concept first sprang up. This has resulted
in NATO “projecting stability” in Afghanistan – miserably losing a war to a
bunch of tribesmen with Kalashnikovs — and Libya — turning a stable
nation-state into a wasteland ravaged by militias.
That’s still far
from over. Just look at item II of the Warsaw summit: “Projecting stability”.
Here’s the mission: “To safeguard security at home, NATO must also project
stability beyond its borders.” That’s NATO as
Global Robocop – a project bound to pick up speed again in case the official
neocon/neoliberalcon candidate, Hillary Clinton, is in command of the White
House in 2017.
Most of all NATO
is now back to its (remixed) Cold War mission of confronting Russia. That’s the
key theme of the Warsaw summit – and beyond, whatever the spin.
So it’s all about
“Russian aggression”. And to spin it, NATO is bent on creating a New Iron
Curtain, as plastic as it may be, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, and
mightily deliver that “clear message” enounced by secretary-general Jens
Stoltenberg; "If any of our allies is attacked the whole alliance will
respond as one."
The New Iron
(Plastic?) Curtain for the moment takes the form mostly of four puny
multinational battalions deployed on a rotational basis to Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania and Poland.
And this while
the real “threat” to NATO members is not Russia, but what pertains to a taboo
debate in Europe; the blowback for Washington’s direct and indirect Middle East
blunders — from Shock and Awe to “leading from behind” to weaponizing “moderate
rebels”, classic Empire of Chaos moves that contributed to a massive refugee
crisis.
The best way
Stoltenberg could frame it is that "we will establish a framework to deal
with threats and challenges from the south". In NATO speak “south” means, in theory,
ISIS/ISIL/Daesh active in MENA (Middle East/Northern Africa). But not al-Qaeda
spinoffs who may be bundled as “moderate rebels”.
Stoltenberg also
insists, "We don't want the new Cold War." Yet NATO’s projection of
“stability” on the ground spells otherwise. And if there were any doubts that
the EU and NATO are one in the whole project, the joint declaration signed in
Warsaw by Stoltenberg, president of the European Commission (EC) Jean-Claude
Juncker and president of the European Council Donald Tusk dispels them for
good.
After all, even
the British establishment has been forced to admit that the EU, from the
beginning, was a CIA project, as much as NATO is a Pentagon spin-off.
Check out our
trade deal projection
So this is the
“project” NATO has to offer to the West – and the Global South. Let’s see
what’s happening on the other side.
A game-changer
took place only a few days ago, at the annual summit of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Tashkent. The SCO is now in the process of
turning geopolitics upside down. Not accidentally a key thermometer of the
Beijing leadership’s state of mind compared it with the fracture of the
super-continent Gondwana 180 million years ago.
As Brexit may
have prefigured the slow motion implosion of the EU – to the consternation of
the elites who run the Empire of Chaos – the SCO was admitting both India and
Pakistan into its fold. It’s too early to identify the long-term winners in the
post-Brexit geopolitical configuration. The Beltway hysterically proclaimed,
“Putin won”. Beijing, in a measured response, admitted that the US dollar won.
Moscow, without enouncing it, considered that the Russia-China partnership
might have won.
What Beijing
actually wants is in fact way more complex; no less than a China-Europe strategic
partnership, side-by-side with the Russia-China strategic partnership, evolving
in parallel to the SCO.
Once again, it’s
all about massive Eurasian inter-connectivity – reflected in the non-stop
action to build multiple economic corridors. That involves, for instance, the
development of the China-Europe freight train service, now growing steadily
under the “China Railway Express” brand. Trade, investment and infrastructure
projects are booming all across Eurasia – from the Hungary-Serbia railway to
the Qamchiq Tunnel in Uzbekistan, from power transmission lines in Kyrgyzstan
to the China-Central Asia natural gas pipeline system.
Chinese Commerce
Minister Gao Hucheng practically gave the road map away, when he stressed that
future regional economic cooperation will happen within the framework of the
SCO, and guided by One Belt, One Road (OBOR), the official Chinese denomination
for the New Silk Roads.
This implies, for
instance, China signing border trade currency settlement deals with Russia,
Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan; a cross-border trade settlement currency deal with
Tajikistan; and currency swap deals with Russia, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan.
The Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank
And that’s how
the whole thing merges; SCO, OBOR, the AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment
Bank), the BRICS’s New Development Bank (NDB), the Silk Road Fund. Investment
and financing fueling total
interconnectivity.
All this may be
possible because the SCO — unlike EU-NATO — is neither an alliance nor a union.
It took the SCO years to define its core mission; are we the Asian NATO or are
we a trade bloc? The SCO is in fact a mutant, a hybrid; a very Asian, pragmatic
concept of unity in diversity.
“Open
regionalism” is not far off the mark. For instance, India can be part of the
SCO but also maintain some symbiosis with the US.
Yet some key
concepts are clear, especially the concerted drive to build an all-encompassing
infrastructure capable of unifying in practice all its members, from Southwest to
South, Central and East Asia.
This is all part
of a complex, highly strategic Chinese geopolitical project – which involves
turbo-charged trade/commercial relationships with every player from Europe to
Central Asia to Southeast Asia.
No wonder the
president of AIIB, Jin Liquin, has been adamant to emphasize OBOR projects will
be supported by AIIB; what they need is to “promote growth, be socially
acceptable and be environmentally friendly.”
The
Russian-German love affair
As much as Russia
will be deeply implicated in Eurasia integration, Moscow also keeps a close eye
on the European front. Russia and Germany may still be far from forming a
strategic partnership, but they are on their way. Economics Minister Sigmar
Gabriel is on record saying sanctions should be lifted; he’s also a supporter
of Nord Stream II, which will increase the capacity of the original Nord Stream
pipeline. Foreign Minister
Frank-Walter Steinmeier for his part has qualified Polish/Baltic anti-Russian
maneuvers as “saber rattling.”
German Social
Democrats always keep in mind that the spirit of Willy Brandt’s Ostpolitik must
be kept alive, and expanding.
Were he still
alive, Zhou Enlai might say it’s too early to tell whether post-Brexit Britain
will establish a new, geo-financial alliance with China. What’s certain is that
the City of London salivates with the prospect of offering its financial
services to the benefit of Eurasia integration. Beijing, for its part, seems
quite certain that “the US is unable to beat down the Chinese dragon and the
Russian bear at the same time”; so Eurasia integration business involving both
strategic partners should keep advancing.
Under these
circumstances, what does the Beltway really want?
The British
Army's annual conference on Land Warfare took place only a few days before
Brexit. As reported by one of the conceptualizers of Shock and Awe – actually
the destruction of Iraq – the money quote was what a US Army general told the
conference. He said that for the Pentagon, the top priority was "to deter
and if necessary defeat Russia in a war."
So in the end it
all comes down – predictably — to a Dr. Strangelove scenario. NATO’s new
“projecting stability” normal, as stated in Warsaw, is just one more pointless
P.R. exercise masking the real agenda; the Pentagon bent on planning for the
dire possibility of a hot war with Russia.
La integración euroasiática no es, en principio, una desafío a Occidente, es un intento cuerdo de organizar una alternativa al desastre de la crisis financiera, monetaria y económica occidental.
ResponderEliminarMientras persista ese desastre los peligros de guerra mundial son cada vez mayores. La única manera que veo como para disminuir ese peligro es que en Occidente haya alguna clase de solución a dicha crisis. Y, para que esto suceda, tiene que haber cambios muy profundos a nivel político tanto en USA como en Inglaterra, Alemania y Francia.
La integración eurasiática no es un desafío, pero en la práctica constituyó un intento de partir a Occidente en dos: un bloque continental (Eurasia) y otro bloque "atlantista" (EEUU, Gran Bretaña y poquito más). El Brexit acelera el ingreso de Londres a la órbita china, por lo que el bloque atlantista ya se rompió. Habrá que ver si Europa ve su propia oportunidad, o no.
ResponderEliminarCordiales saludos,
Astroboy