|
monopoly river of forgetfulness--a couple of months ago, that China, Russia and I think India (but not Venezuela) held a meeting to discuss how to deal with the lawless, out-of-control, nuclear-armed bullies and warmongers in the White House. It was a short article--no hint of what their strategy might be. But I immediately thought that strategy #1 would be economic. And Chavez, who is more open than these other leaders, and says what he thinks, may be revealing a piece of the strategy, here. To wit: attack Iran and we will crash the U.S. economy (already teetering--part of the strategy?).
Notably, Chavez just signed a big oil deal with China, on Venezuela's behalf, which could well mean that Venezuela won't need their 15% or so of the U.S. oil market in the future. He also recently made a deal with Russia for rifles for the Venezuelan military (because the U.S. is insanely prohibiting arms deals with Venezuela, a democratic country--and, indeed, a far better democracy than the one we have hear). (We are going to PAY for the Bush Junta's nutso alienation of most of South America, where democratic governments and policies of social justice are flourishing!) In any case, Chavez, having recently had dealings with both China and Russia, may be privy to their "containment" strategy regarding Bush/Cheney and their obsession with expanding the disastrous war in the Middle East. Iran's security is particularly essential to China, which gets much of its oil there, and is running a 'tanker economy' (fuel in, trinkets out). But it is also vital to Russia, for its oil. (Also, the Bushites have sorely provoked and threatened Russia, with new missile emplacements in middle Europe, on Russia's border.)
This is probably why both China and Russia seem to have zero concern about Iran getting nuclear weapons, and may even want them to. Iran acquiring a nuke defense would create "detente" in the Middle East (like the "detente" in the Cold War--both sides have nukes, less chance anyone will use them). China and Russia want STABILITY in the Middle East. Bush/Cheney do not. They want war. They want to take over Iran's oil fields by force, as they have done Iraq's. They don't want a level playing field for China, Russia, South America or anyone else. They want all the marbles.
Iran has exhibited no territorial ambitions, and has invaded no one. But they now have the entire U.S. military on their border, and chaos and disaster in their neighbor state, Iraq. They are shit scared. They have been extremely careful NOT to get drawn into a "Gulf of Tonkin"-type incident with the U.S. (Remember the UK sailor thing last year, during our elections? They couldn't give those sailors back fast enough, with flowers and chocolates to their families.) (...just kidding--but you get my point). Anyway, China and Russia seem to know that a nuclear Iran is not a threat to anybody. They certainly would act decisively to DENY Iran nuclear weapons capability, if they thought it was. A nuclear Iran threatening Israel, for instance, would create INSTABILITY, and, if nukes were exchanged, massive disorder, on an unprecedented scale. Iranian oil is a linchpin of their economies. They wouldn't risk that. THEY clearly believe that Iran's intentions are defensive--aimed at stability, not instability. The REAL de-stabilizer in the Middle East is the U.S., with its catastrophe in Iraq, and its continual saber-rattling against Iran, with no justification whatsoever.
Indeed, Bush/Cheney aggression against Iran could be seen as a proxy war against China and Russia, like Vietnam, but their threats against Iran are even more direct threats against China and Russia than Vietnam was. Vietnam, which just wanted independence, got caught in the Cold War vise (two million people slaughtered in Southeast Asia, before it was over). Iran is somewhat similar, except that it is providing an essential commodity to China and Russia. The threat of world war, triggered by a U.S. attack on Iran, is even more serious than it was with the Vietnam War. What Russia and China seem to be aiming at is a "balance of power"--stopping U.S. aggression in the Middle East, and permitting Iran to seek nuclear power--and potentially nuclear weapons--to even things out, vis a vis U.S./Israel.
China has perhaps the most formidable weapon to deter U.S. aggression against Iran, and to punish the U.S. if it attacks Iran--they own a load of U.S. debt paper. China, Russia, and countries like Venezuela and India--and Iran itself--acting in concert, can create powerful deterrence or punishment. And if Iran gets nukes--and has its own defense against the U.S. (in addition to conventional defense)--then China doesn't have to go too far, in harming its own U.S. markets, as a deterrent to a U.S. attack on Iran. Another factor in this situation is the rise of South America as a force in world politics. A South America united in a South American "Common Market," with a common currency, and with South Americans in control of their own oil, gas, minerals and other resources (where things are headed), could conceivably replace the U.S. as a market for Chinese goods, among other things. In any case, clearly, the world is re-aligning itself, to our detriment, in response to the worst, most criminal, most irresponsible regime in Washington that we have ever suffered.
Some of the developments in reaction to the Bush Junta are good. Democracy in South America, at long last, is good. South Americans benefiting from their own resources, at long last, is good. And non-violent resistance to U.S. aggression (using economic tools) on the part of nuclear powers is good. Stability in the Middle East is good--even if it's the stability of "detente" (far better than war). But the economic fallout on ordinary Americans will not be good. As so often happens with fascist regimes, the poor take the hit.
And stopping the U.S. bully--an entity that is no longer in the control of the American people, in any way, and whose political establishment has agreed to rotten, criminal, thieving, warmongering leadership--is good. WE can't stop them. What an irony that our former "enemies"--Russia and China, whose governments are very undemocratic--may be the ones doing so.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
Replies to this thread
)
-
-