It's a trap! The USA only seeks a pretext to detach itself from the (US-designed, US-directed and US-promoted) upcoming NATO-Russia war (or extension of the Ukraine war), leaving the dirty job to their European (and Canadian) semi-colonial minions.
Would the PDF be for real, then Russia would not only have won in Ukraine but in all Europe, what would mean that the US domination of the continent would be over and that "normal" Russian (and Chinese via Russia) exports would resume. That's not happening and will not be allowed to happen, they did not blow up Nord Stream for that, they did not make huge profits out of hyper-expensive US LNG and fertilizers just to lose them on a PDFed whim, they did not push the EU to sanction China just to open our door to the Silk Road again.
Sorry but the PDF is nothing more than an intoxication. It pretends to be one thing but it is a very different thing: a deadly trap to allow the Euro-Russian war to happen while Uncle Sam washes his hands like Pilate (the USA cannot fight a direct war with another major nuclear power).
I would agree with you, except for the fact that Europe is totally incapable of fighting Russia in Ukraine. They have neither the troops, the firepower, or the logistics.
Especially the logistics. They don't have the road and rail network needed. They don't even have bridges strong enough for all their tanks, and the would be able to hit them before they ever get to the front, much like what happened to the Germans after D-Day.
If the Europeans try to do this, you're going to see a lot of governments collapse.
Europe can reinforce Ukraine with European cannon fodder, at least for as long as the current rulers (Macron, Starmer, Merz, etc.) can retain power, which is at least several years (Macron probably needs emergency powers but the war and the Gaullist constitution will provide them). Furthermore, Ukrainian refugees will be deported-conscripted first of all (except the rich ones, of course).
"To the least European..." is part of the plan IMO, however the greatest contribution will be another: aero-naval power. The "coalition of the willing" has air forces at the level of Russia and a much much larger array of navies. Thus, beyond helping Ukraine to resist the Russian push to demilitarize and "denazify" (de-NATOize) it with troops and mechanized vehicles (which Europe also has plenty) on the ground, they will back them with air force, allowing for "better warfare", which Ukraine alone can't do.
A key part of the plan is anyhow (I believe) to expand the war to the Baltic and West Artic seas, blockading Russian ports, activating the Finland land front near St. Petersburg (Murmansk and Kaliningrad enclave are also threatened) and even to the Aegean Sea (Greece), effectively cutting Russia from the wider Atlantic Ocean region (including its Syrian and African presence and any projection to the Caribbean, etc.) and leaving them only able to trade via Asia (East Arctic, China and Central Asia).
In a later moment (2027?) Turkey-Azerbaijan will be probably mobilized too, providing not just even more land troops (Turkey is famously "the second largest NATO army") but also allowing for naval deployment in the Black Sea and a very dangerous re-scenification of the Crimea War. Worse: Turkey's Islamist and Turkic influence will be activated in the form of North Caucasus insurgency (again) and Central Asia's agitation of uncertain results. In the worst case scenario all European Russia and West Siberia will be encircled by the coalition as result.
I doubt that the logistics matter that much. Tanks are also not too relevant, Russia has plenty, many more and they're not exploiting that suppossed advantage much.
“This is extraordinary language for an official strategy document.” – That’s because it’s not a strategy document. It’s more like a PR announcement. The sort that gets issued to middle management in order to steer them in the right direction after the top-level decision makers have agreed the REAL strategy… which they definitely won’t share publicly.
Why would you believe that NATO are going to issue a public strategy memorandum saying to the EU: “Hey Ursula, just thought we’d let you know we’re planning to destabilise you. Have a nice day!”
This ‘revelatory’ document is just a PR memo to the Professional Managerial Class to formally announce the ‘multi-polar’ charade and the re-organisation of the globe into regional technocracy management hubs.
As for the China bullshit, the “pivot to China” nonsense has been going on since the end of the Ming Dynasty. It means absolutely nothing, other than signifying the need to keep a placeholder for a perennial bogeyman. War and conflict must be kept continually on the back-burner.
Independent media desperately needs to update its outdated classic great power politics framework, and to stop thinking of the US, the EU, Russia, or China as sovereign actors.
The world, and geopolitics is controlled more by Transnational Big Money than by nations or even blocs of nations. The restructuring of the globe and the transition to the multipolar world order is being dictated in places like the Bank for International Settlements. Not by dicks with guns in NATO.
The unipolar project has not failed. It was a necessary transition to the next phase of financial consolidation – ‘multi-polarity’. “Consolidation” via “multi-polarity” seems like a contradiction but it isn’t when you consider that China and its BRICS block were an inevitable consequence of neo-liberal economics and offshoring that began in the 80s/90s.
I mean, how can the US / NATO realistically treat China as an ‘enemy’ while also transferring technology and capital to them, which is what they’ve been doing since relations were normalised with China in 1979. China was granted Most Favoured Nation Trading status in the 1990s. You don’t behave that way towards a military threat.
America will NOT re-industrialise. That ship sailed in 1980. They only thing they care about is the tech/data/AI sector. That actually demands further de-industrialisation.
I think we all need to start looking a bit higher up the chain when looking at the Big Picture. The geopolitical paradigms that most of Independent Media is locked into are outdated. They were probably outdated in 1950, but they’re definitely outdated after the end of the Cold War.
We need to think MONEY, not guns and chessboards. War is a weapon of finance. There is only one global hegemon – the Owners and Controllers of Global Financial Capital. They took control of the globe at the beginning of the LAST century. The reorganisations taking place around the globe are being dictated by them. As they always have been. If you’re looking at geopolitics without looking at Money, you’re half-blind.
We also need to think teleologically, in all matters but also particularly in relation to finance. Take the recent UNSC vote on Gaza. China and Russia both caved in and gave Israel and the US what they wanted. So what is the final gameplan and purpose? Having destroyed Gaza, it’s now all about ‘reconstruction’. That’s how it works with the money psychopaths. Make money on the destruction and make more money on the reconstruction. And whoever puts the money in will control the outcomes there. The GCC is backing it and the money is coming from them. What’s happening in the ME now is a financial shift to transfer greater control of the ME to the GCC. That includes the developments in Syria. As depressing as that is, it’s happening with full GCC approval. Under multipolarity, the GCC is going to be the regional controller of the ME. That ties in with the US upgrading the military partnership with the Saudis to Major Non-NATO Ally. Money must be backed by bombs. That means the decline of Israel and Zionism. That’s my bet. Follow the money. Not the NATO memos!
Emperor Basil II of the Byzantine Empire would have recognized this strategy. It's classic imperial retrenchment after the Empire has taken some major hits and its leaders finally realize they're never going to get everything they had back, at least not in their lifetime.
Basil's Empire had lost most of the Balkans and all of its possessions in Syria, Palestine, and Africa. Basil reconquered the Balkans, much closer to Constantinople, and stabilized what was left of the Empire for several centuries.
That's what this is, except that for these planners, their Balkans is the entire Western Hemisphere. Lol, now they're only overreaching half as much. It is clear, however, that Europe is being written off. All those EU elites, they're on their own. I don't think they can politically survive. They certainly don't deserve to hold onto power.
Seems to me the 21st Century version of 1848 is going to happen in Europe this decade.
This is excellent analysis but of “a PDF”. While the new NSS may appear revolutionary (it’s not too dissimilar from Trump’s first) it is very hard to believe that the momentum of decades of US-EU/NATO integrative effort will suddenly turn on a dime. The next administration’s NSS may well announce “America is back” or pivoting towards somewhere else.
In another exceptional essay, Nel Bonilla describes in detail the construction of a vast physical, doctrinal and psycho-social infrastructure underpinning the militarisation of Europe (of Germany in particular) in what is the United States’ and the West’s last desperate grasp on its rapidly slipping global hegemony.
Pivot from W. Asia to trying to steal Venezuela. Not good. tRump means nothing good.
There are still plenty of hawks in Congress. Of course, they are still arming Israel as they keep up the killing.
It's a trap! The USA only seeks a pretext to detach itself from the (US-designed, US-directed and US-promoted) upcoming NATO-Russia war (or extension of the Ukraine war), leaving the dirty job to their European (and Canadian) semi-colonial minions.
Would the PDF be for real, then Russia would not only have won in Ukraine but in all Europe, what would mean that the US domination of the continent would be over and that "normal" Russian (and Chinese via Russia) exports would resume. That's not happening and will not be allowed to happen, they did not blow up Nord Stream for that, they did not make huge profits out of hyper-expensive US LNG and fertilizers just to lose them on a PDFed whim, they did not push the EU to sanction China just to open our door to the Silk Road again.
Sorry but the PDF is nothing more than an intoxication. It pretends to be one thing but it is a very different thing: a deadly trap to allow the Euro-Russian war to happen while Uncle Sam washes his hands like Pilate (the USA cannot fight a direct war with another major nuclear power).
I would agree with you, except for the fact that Europe is totally incapable of fighting Russia in Ukraine. They have neither the troops, the firepower, or the logistics.
Especially the logistics. They don't have the road and rail network needed. They don't even have bridges strong enough for all their tanks, and the would be able to hit them before they ever get to the front, much like what happened to the Germans after D-Day.
If the Europeans try to do this, you're going to see a lot of governments collapse.
Europe can reinforce Ukraine with European cannon fodder, at least for as long as the current rulers (Macron, Starmer, Merz, etc.) can retain power, which is at least several years (Macron probably needs emergency powers but the war and the Gaullist constitution will provide them). Furthermore, Ukrainian refugees will be deported-conscripted first of all (except the rich ones, of course).
"To the least European..." is part of the plan IMO, however the greatest contribution will be another: aero-naval power. The "coalition of the willing" has air forces at the level of Russia and a much much larger array of navies. Thus, beyond helping Ukraine to resist the Russian push to demilitarize and "denazify" (de-NATOize) it with troops and mechanized vehicles (which Europe also has plenty) on the ground, they will back them with air force, allowing for "better warfare", which Ukraine alone can't do.
A key part of the plan is anyhow (I believe) to expand the war to the Baltic and West Artic seas, blockading Russian ports, activating the Finland land front near St. Petersburg (Murmansk and Kaliningrad enclave are also threatened) and even to the Aegean Sea (Greece), effectively cutting Russia from the wider Atlantic Ocean region (including its Syrian and African presence and any projection to the Caribbean, etc.) and leaving them only able to trade via Asia (East Arctic, China and Central Asia).
In a later moment (2027?) Turkey-Azerbaijan will be probably mobilized too, providing not just even more land troops (Turkey is famously "the second largest NATO army") but also allowing for naval deployment in the Black Sea and a very dangerous re-scenification of the Crimea War. Worse: Turkey's Islamist and Turkic influence will be activated in the form of North Caucasus insurgency (again) and Central Asia's agitation of uncertain results. In the worst case scenario all European Russia and West Siberia will be encircled by the coalition as result.
I doubt that the logistics matter that much. Tanks are also not too relevant, Russia has plenty, many more and they're not exploiting that suppossed advantage much.
Here’s my take on the ‘revelatory’ NSS PDF:
“This is extraordinary language for an official strategy document.” – That’s because it’s not a strategy document. It’s more like a PR announcement. The sort that gets issued to middle management in order to steer them in the right direction after the top-level decision makers have agreed the REAL strategy… which they definitely won’t share publicly.
Why would you believe that NATO are going to issue a public strategy memorandum saying to the EU: “Hey Ursula, just thought we’d let you know we’re planning to destabilise you. Have a nice day!”
This ‘revelatory’ document is just a PR memo to the Professional Managerial Class to formally announce the ‘multi-polar’ charade and the re-organisation of the globe into regional technocracy management hubs.
As for the China bullshit, the “pivot to China” nonsense has been going on since the end of the Ming Dynasty. It means absolutely nothing, other than signifying the need to keep a placeholder for a perennial bogeyman. War and conflict must be kept continually on the back-burner.
Independent media desperately needs to update its outdated classic great power politics framework, and to stop thinking of the US, the EU, Russia, or China as sovereign actors.
The world, and geopolitics is controlled more by Transnational Big Money than by nations or even blocs of nations. The restructuring of the globe and the transition to the multipolar world order is being dictated in places like the Bank for International Settlements. Not by dicks with guns in NATO.
The unipolar project has not failed. It was a necessary transition to the next phase of financial consolidation – ‘multi-polarity’. “Consolidation” via “multi-polarity” seems like a contradiction but it isn’t when you consider that China and its BRICS block were an inevitable consequence of neo-liberal economics and offshoring that began in the 80s/90s.
I mean, how can the US / NATO realistically treat China as an ‘enemy’ while also transferring technology and capital to them, which is what they’ve been doing since relations were normalised with China in 1979. China was granted Most Favoured Nation Trading status in the 1990s. You don’t behave that way towards a military threat.
America will NOT re-industrialise. That ship sailed in 1980. They only thing they care about is the tech/data/AI sector. That actually demands further de-industrialisation.
I think we all need to start looking a bit higher up the chain when looking at the Big Picture. The geopolitical paradigms that most of Independent Media is locked into are outdated. They were probably outdated in 1950, but they’re definitely outdated after the end of the Cold War.
We need to think MONEY, not guns and chessboards. War is a weapon of finance. There is only one global hegemon – the Owners and Controllers of Global Financial Capital. They took control of the globe at the beginning of the LAST century. The reorganisations taking place around the globe are being dictated by them. As they always have been. If you’re looking at geopolitics without looking at Money, you’re half-blind.
We also need to think teleologically, in all matters but also particularly in relation to finance. Take the recent UNSC vote on Gaza. China and Russia both caved in and gave Israel and the US what they wanted. So what is the final gameplan and purpose? Having destroyed Gaza, it’s now all about ‘reconstruction’. That’s how it works with the money psychopaths. Make money on the destruction and make more money on the reconstruction. And whoever puts the money in will control the outcomes there. The GCC is backing it and the money is coming from them. What’s happening in the ME now is a financial shift to transfer greater control of the ME to the GCC. That includes the developments in Syria. As depressing as that is, it’s happening with full GCC approval. Under multipolarity, the GCC is going to be the regional controller of the ME. That ties in with the US upgrading the military partnership with the Saudis to Major Non-NATO Ally. Money must be backed by bombs. That means the decline of Israel and Zionism. That’s my bet. Follow the money. Not the NATO memos!
Emperor Basil II of the Byzantine Empire would have recognized this strategy. It's classic imperial retrenchment after the Empire has taken some major hits and its leaders finally realize they're never going to get everything they had back, at least not in their lifetime.
Basil's Empire had lost most of the Balkans and all of its possessions in Syria, Palestine, and Africa. Basil reconquered the Balkans, much closer to Constantinople, and stabilized what was left of the Empire for several centuries.
That's what this is, except that for these planners, their Balkans is the entire Western Hemisphere. Lol, now they're only overreaching half as much. It is clear, however, that Europe is being written off. All those EU elites, they're on their own. I don't think they can politically survive. They certainly don't deserve to hold onto power.
Seems to me the 21st Century version of 1848 is going to happen in Europe this decade.
This is excellent analysis but of “a PDF”. While the new NSS may appear revolutionary (it’s not too dissimilar from Trump’s first) it is very hard to believe that the momentum of decades of US-EU/NATO integrative effort will suddenly turn on a dime. The next administration’s NSS may well announce “America is back” or pivoting towards somewhere else.
In another exceptional essay, Nel Bonilla describes in detail the construction of a vast physical, doctrinal and psycho-social infrastructure underpinning the militarisation of Europe (of Germany in particular) in what is the United States’ and the West’s last desperate grasp on its rapidly slipping global hegemony.
https://open.substack.com/pub/themindness/p/weaponizing-time-part-iii-the-steel