DISCLOSURE: Sourced from Russian government funded media
by Dan Mueller
Geopolitical sketches and the prospect of a Russian century
“Take away the law – what is a state then but a great band of robbers?” quoted Pope Benedict XVI in his speech to the German Bundestag on September 22, 2011, from the late antique church teacher Augustine of Hippo. According to Germano Dottori, professor of international security and strategic studies in Rome, the German pope was forced out of office a little later with the help of financial blackmail from American government circles not only because he opposed the Islamization of the West, but also because he geopolitically supported the European integration of Russia.
The gang of robbers Benedict XVI spoke of had already been let off the leash at that point. Even after a superficial study of the 2011 Libyan war, the observer of political events could see what agreements and treaties with Western democracies were worth: Nothing. And what their foreign currencies, especially dollars, euros and pounds, are still worth in case of doubt: likewise nothing, especially when they lie in accounts of the Western community of values and can be “frozen” there – colloquial German: stolen – and even their own currency is no longer accepted in economic exchange. As part of the White House’s recently publicized plan to drive Russia into national bankruptcy over the Ukraine war, the U.S. Treasury Department these days prohibited domestic banks from accepting U.S. dollars for repayment of Russian government debt.
The “value West” has blocked several hundred billion euros and dollars of Russian foreign currency in the accounts of its banks. Hardly stolen, they are to be shifted to the state buddy Ukraine (“reparations”), in order to flow from there again into the own pockets (“reconstruction”). What has been done with the stolen goods of one’s own wars – Iraq and Syria send their greetings – can also be done with the wars of others, especially if one has provoked them oneself: even the subsidiaries of Russian companies are to be expropriated.
In view of the reserves of the Libyan Central Bank and the Iraqi National Bank, which miraculously disappeared into thin air during the NATO wars, the few billions that the U.S. government recently seized from the Afghan Central Bank look like peanuts. And that’s not even counting the blocked funds from Venezuela’s foreign accounts, including its gold holdings in London. The attempted blackmail of the American government to release a part of these funds if the owner turned against Russia was recently rejected by the Venezuelan government with reference to the questionable character of the blackmailer.
Pax Americana: from stealing & stealing…
Even diplomatic rules, the basis of state coexistence, are no longer valid: NATO countries break off de facto relations with their mass expulsions of diplomatic personnel of the Russian Federation, the USA even expels Russian diplomats from the UN representation, Poland blocks the account of the Russian embassy and confiscates its property – contrary to existing international agreements and treaties under international law.
But what the “value West” thinks of international law, it has already impressively demonstrated in Yugoslavia and Libya. Who else but their own kind wants to do business with such scoundrels, who break their contracts and promises as they see fit, even among themselves (as in the case of the French-Australian submarine contract a few months ago), and whose currencies are worth nothing in case of doubt?
It fits like a glove that the EU Commissioner for Justice and the Rule of Law, Didier Reynder, of all people, has given his placet to the transfer of confiscated Russian property to Ukraine and that Josep Borrell, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize winner, the European Union, prefers war against Russia to peace negotiations with Russia. The states of this “community of values” behave worse than mafia clans – they are also word-breaking and brutal, but at least they know a code of honor.
However, the Anglo-Saxon advocates of democracy seem to have lost such a code much earlier, as they flirted with piracy centuries ago. In addition to stealing and pilfering foreign assets, dictatorships were installed and dictators were courted with the taxes of their own citizens, in order to reap a rich harvest years later by means of revolutions and wars against the same.
This has not only been known since the “Maidan” and the military support of Ukrainian right-wing radicals; the National Socialists were already enabled to organize the rise and armament of their brown regime with foreign, especially American, money. That the democracies do not take over these highly placed confidants of their cynical policy of violence into a witness protection program, but know how to get rid of them in a rather unpleasant way, the Germans experienced after the “Nuremberg Tribunal”, when their political and military leaders were hanged according to the verdicts of the victor’s justice or silenced by long prison sentences.
…and hanging & impaling
But “Nuremberg” seems to have been only a blueprint for our time. First, the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was armed with chemical weapons by the then U.S. Special Envoy Donald Rumsfeld, only to be hunted down for the use of the same by the same Rumsfeld, years later in his new capacity as U.S. Secretary of War, along with the Iraqi government members. According to Franz Seidler, professor emeritus of military history at the German Armed Forces College, the American torture prison Abu Ghraib also has a historical predecessor: in the American-occupied Schwäbisch Hall in the 1940s. To cite just two examples.
Now Vladimir Putin, former protégé of Wall Street favorite Boris Yeltsin, wants to accept only rubles for Russian raw materials, tying it to the price of gold, while Mohamed bin Salman, until now under the wing of the U.S. empire, is negotiating with the Chinese to swap Saudi oil for renminbi yuan. The last two oil state magnates to try to emancipate themselves from the U.S. dollar and the Pax Americana were Saddam Hussein and Muamar al Gaddafi.
One wanted to sell his oil for euros, the other to introduce a gold-backed currency; one was hanged for it, the other staked. Will Salman and Putin let them do the same? Already, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier is suggesting a war crimes tribunal against the Russian president and his foreign minister, who dared to proclaim that he wanted to end the U.S. and its allies’ striving for dominance with the Ukraine war. In addition, the heir to the Saudi throne had the U.S. arm him for his war of aggression against Yemen – didn’t we already have something like that in the Arab world? Exciting times.
History in the mirror
Times in which the unbiased observer cannot help feeling that, in view of the erection of a new Iron Curtain initiated with great propagandistic fanfare, the historical situation has turned 180 degrees in many areas since the 1980s and 1990s. This applies not only to questions of political and economic stability – for example, Russia has replaced the U.S. as the world’s largest exporter of wheat – but also to the quality of West-Eastern media and that of their political leaders.
While Yeltsin’s staff and advisors had to repeatedly row after the statements of the alcoholic Russian president in order to deny his verbal outbursts (“World War III”) and steer him into politically less dangerous waters, after Biden’s blabbering about the intended overthrow of the Russian government, three U.S. staff offices were busy reinterpreting the words of the demented old man in the White House. The latter’s increasing decline is fatally reminiscent of that of the general secretaries of the CPSU in the incipient final era of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. And the qualitative decline of the Western press is reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s “Pravda” and the GDR’s “New Germany.
The new Iron Curtain, this time initiated by the West and along the eastern borders of the “Cordon Sanitaire,” is welcomed above all by the countries of the former Eastern Bloc on the northwestern flank of the former Soviet empire, which have mutated into NATO states. Poland, in particular, seems to be fond of the past century, for its politicians are already dreaming again of a Polish hegemonic power and tinkering with the borders as they did a hundred years ago.
In contrast, Hungary – hundreds of thousands of whose people live outside its borders as minorities in neighboring states – is conspicuously reticent, as if its elite had learned its lesson from history. The Russian president, too, seems to have studied the first half of the 20th century in particular very carefully and to have seen through the British Empire’s geopolitical game of defining the cultural borders of the peoples of great empires as predetermined breaking points and breaking continental empires into manageable individual parts along these lines. Thus, the empires of China and Austria-Hungary were filleted into appetizing morsels and then nationalistically indoctrinated, so that they had to rearm themselves and first become indebted to the victorious banks of the world war, in order to subsequently be able to wage their own wars for gaining power and land or warding off their opponents.
The Anglo-Saxon nationality trap…
The German Reich, also a victim of the banks by the “Treaty of Versailles”, was, like Austria, confronted with large parts of its own population as national minorities in the victorious and the newly created states. The commander-in-chief of the Allied Western Front, French Marshal Ferdinand Foch, saw through the dictate sold to the world public as a peace treaty and presciently called it an “armistice for 20 years.” This policy has a system: wars resulting from arbitrarily drawn borders, for example, followed in the footsteps of the withdrawing colonial powers in resource-rich Africa, and the terrorist organizations of the present day followed in the footsteps of the ideologically dressed up resistance groups of the Cold War. To this day, the spoils are shared by international banks and the arms and raw materials industries.
This policy of “divide and rule,” which was also imposed by the German Empire in 1917/18 and later by the Allies on the defeated Tsarist Empire, failed in Russia because of the staying power of the Bolsheviks and their Red Terror and led to the destruction of the German Reich a quarter of a century later. While the victorious powers of World War I had cut their teeth on the emerging Soviet empire, the filleting of the Soviet Union, including the exclusion of Russian citizens from the now independent former Soviet republics, began in the early 1990s; the wars described above inevitably followed during the reign of the first Russian president, Boris Yeltsin. His successor, Vladimir Putin, succeeded in pacifying the conflicts, and, unlike Adolf Hitler, he did not allow himself to be lured into the carefully orchestrated nationalist trap of the Anglo-Saxon powers a second time after the Georgian War (Czechoslovakia 1938/Poland 1939 – Georgia 2008/Ukraine 2014).
…and the Russian chessboard
Instead, the Russian government upgraded its country’s transformed army with newly developed weapons systems, achieved nuclear first strike capability in the middle of the last decade with its nearly insurmountable missile defense, tested soldiers, materiel, strategies and tactics in the Syrian war, and has been unrivaled in long-range offensive weapons since this decade. Russia used the U.S. and EU sanctions imposed since 2014 to further develop its economy, make it more independent and diversify. Its success was evident in its economic as well as social resilience when the attempt to destabilize Russia, similar to the Soviet Union in the 1980s, by means of a drop in oil prices provoked by an oversupply of extracted oil, came to naught. The delay caused by the operational accident of U.S. politics, Donald Trump’s presidency, also enabled the Russian government to set a decisive course in its own financial economy so as not to be coerced into war, cut off from financial flows as Japan was from raw material supplies in 1941.
To all appearances, the peak of coercion after years of humiliation occurred in February of this year. As hastily as the attack on Ukraine – the Anglo-Saxon “mainland sword” of the present day – was launched, the Russian government must have found itself in a (from its point of view) hopeless situation. The Russian leadership is countering the sanctions barrage of the immediately intensified economic war of the NATO and EU states, which, in the words of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, had been “prepared for a long time,” with hybrid measures of financial war.
Economic war vs. financial war
By propping up domestic mining companies – which can no longer sell on the world market because of the sanctions – by buying up their gold output through the Russian Central Bank, the government decreed a defacto gold peg of the ruble, initially at the rate of 5,000.- rubles per gram (note the unit of weight mentioned versus that used internationally). The government-set price (one ounce of gold thus costs 155,500 rubles, or 1,943 U.S. dollars at a conversion rate of USD/RUB 1:80) devalued the dollar by several percent against the Russian gold price in one fell swoop. This was followed by the announcement that in the future it would sell its own energy raw materials exclusively in rubles to those states participating in the economic war against the Russian Federation, with the procedure being designed in such a way that existing contracts could be honored.
There is already a discernible tendency to settle all of Russia’s own commodities – including soft commodities – on the world market only in rubles in the future, which would automatically lead to a stabilization, because worldwide demand for the Russian currency would increase. And indeed, after its short-lived crash, the ruble recovered within a few days, which is certainly also due to the pegging of Russian oil to the ruble, making it not only a gold-linked but also a commodity-backed currency. It seems that the Russian government has also carefully studied the monetary pitfalls of the 20th century, because with this move it avoids repeating the systemic mistakes of the gold and later petrodollar. In this way, it is creating a new Bretton Woods system, this time Russian, bypassing the Triffin dilemma: a kind of combined gold and petrodollar, only in rubles.
Sketches of the upheaval….
With this combination, the newly created ruble has a very good chance to last longer than just one Kondratjev cycle compared to system-dependent short-lived artificial currencies such as the ECU/Euro; even more: it has the potential to become the most stable currency in economic history, because it is the most stable in value. Also, a crypto ruble pegged to the gold&Petro ruble would possess a correspondingly stable value backing, which could collapse a large portion of the previous cryptocurrencies. Once these findings have become accepted on the financial markets, an increasing demand for this new, gold-linked, commodity-backed and thus “hard” currency must be expected. If it is also integrated into a reference currency of the Eurasian Economic Union and China, there will be no stopping the fiat currencies. They could share the fate of the ruble at the time of the Cold War and only be tradable within their own, sealed-off economic area – behind the new, this time Western Iron Curtain.
Another part of the hybrid financial war already visible is the flanking of the new currency by financial engineering measures in the form of newly developed national payment systems. The SPFS (“Financial Messaging System”) was planned by the Russian Central Bank after the Crimean crisis, when exclusion from the international SWIFT process was threatened. Compatible with China’s CIPS (“Cross-Border Inter-Bank Payments System”), it could be open to other countries beyond the Eurasian Economic Union and offered as an alternative especially to those also sanctioned by the West. The recent visit of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to New Delhi is fueling speculation that the mechanism of a common payments system developed with India is also about to be launched. These new alternatives to SWIFT are intended to allow banks to settle international transactions in local currencies, bypassing the previous sanction-prone monopoly.
The strengthening of the ruble to the hardest currency in the world is tantamount to a change of times. It will reinforce the already emerging bifurcation of the world monetary system and the world economy, ending both the era of the U.S. dollar as the petroleum and world reserve currency and the globalization based on it. The gold peg, in turn, is likely to lead to a decline in “paper gold” on the commodity markets in London and New York, since, in addition to the dollar, the ruble would now have to be weakened for gold price manipulation. What would be badly possible only with a further uncovered currency and could therefore also mean the end of the freely tradable fiat currencies. Independently of this, a sharply rising gold price in these currencies would make their devaluation clearly visible.
The inevitable decline of the Western states could only be delayed by their political and economic demarcation, similar to the “Council for Mutual Economic Assistance” of the former Eastern bloc states. In economic terms, the emerging bloc fits in with the fact that a bill has just passed the U.S. Senate with the aim of ending all trade relations with Russia and Belarus, as well as in political terms with Russia’s pushed exclusion from international bodies, such as the exclusion from the UN Human Rights Council and the already planned exclusion from the UN Security Council. Both shake the foundations of the Anglo-Saxon postwar order. If Russia were to push this development – the United Russia party has introduced a bill in the Duma to withdraw from the World Trade Organization (WTO) – it would not be without impact on the states that are aligned with Russia. If Russia were to leave the UN, this would also hardly happen without consultation with other governments – the current world order would collapse. The same threat would arise if the Ukraine war were to spread to NATO or if NATO were to become further involved in the conflict: the tensions arising in the alliance could break it apart and also end the postwar era. But no matter how the future will turn out: The world as we knew it no longer exists, and “Corona” was only its beginning of the end.
…and the outlook…
Should the outlined scenario of the ruble as the new hard currency prevail, it is almost certain that in the coming weeks and months the world currency system will be split into two, with a commodity-backed and gold-linked ruble competing with the American dollar, which is (still) regarded as the world’s reserve currency, and deepening the already emerging division of the world economy in addition to the economic sanctions imposed. In this way, a new world political situation with a new economic area and a new economic order would emerge before our eyes, with not only winners but also losers.
The first loser could be China, whose ambitious project of the “New Silk Road” shares the fate of the Baghdad Railway and thus fails to achieve its goal of economically uniting the world island of Eurasia. This also weakens the future prospects of the renminbi yuan, which is based primarily on the economic power of the red giant empire, but which, unlike its Russian counterpart, lacks commodity backing. Moreover, the People’s Republic still holds more than three trillion dollars from its decades-long export surplus in foreign government bonds-more than two-thirds of them in u.s. bonds-while the Russian Federation had largely freed itself from this financial ballast in the years before the outbreak of the Ukraine war. Linked to the fragile Chinese treasury, moreover, the Taiwan question remains in the geopolitical function of a Gordian knot.
…to the new “New World
The second loser is likely to be the euro zone, which has been in a currency crisis for years because it cannot be resolved systemically. Rising inflation is an indication of the loss of value and confidence in the economy and politics of the European states, which can no longer be glossed over. Whereby the dwindling common currency only appears as a portent: Europe, flooded with supply-seekers of transcontinental cultures of violence with massive propagandistic effort of its own political caste, shows itself in our days as a dying continent – at least the part which is under the “Western values” influence. Whether and how the pound and dollar Anglo-Saxons (“Five Eyes”) spread over the planet will be the third losers depends on the political development in the USA.
Europe’s easternmost state, on the other hand, has seized its historical opportunity to lay the foundations for a century of its provenance. If the last century was the “American” century, which laid the foundations for its world domination through the settlement, reclamation and industrialization of the climatically most favorable part of the northern subcontinent, the 21st century could be shaped by Russia: like America’s Wild West back then, Russia’s “Wild East” is at the beginning of its economic development. And unlike China, Russia does not have a forcibly induced demographic problem that will almost certainly cause the Middle Kingdom to implode in population terms in a few decades – with all the economic and political consequences that will follow, in addition to the unprecedented repression of its own population.
“BRICS” or “RIC?”
The new “New World” is experiencing its birth pangs – so far – primarily in Europe; the violent resolution of the Taiwan question could accelerate this development. But whether the BRICS countries will actually form the heart of a new world order, as announced by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, remains an open question in view of the different political and economic developments of these countries. While Russia, China and India seem to be comparatively stable, South Africa is lurching toward the status of a “failed state” and the power struggle in Brazil has not yet been decided. However, the “RIC states,” i.e. Russia, India and China, certainly have the greatest geopolitical chances of shaping a new order according to their own ideas. No ocean separates their countries; on the contrary, their common borders predestine them to become the new economic and political heart of Eurasia and thus of our world.
Thus Halford Mackinder’s “heartland” would shift to the southeast – the nightmare of nightmares for the Anglo-Saxon powers and their satraps. After all, the Chinese are buying up more and more German world market leaders and technologically advanced companies, thus turning the horror vision of the Anglo-Saxons, transatlanticists and their Pacific counterparts – known at the latest since Georges Friedman, CEO of the American intelligence agency STRATFOR, addressed the “Chicago Council on Global Affairs” on February 4, 2015 – into reality: the combination of German engineering with the resources of the Eurasian Economic Community and the population potential of China and India. A coercive community growing together due to the global political situation, comprising almost three billion people, which one believed to be able to prevent with the help of the new Cold War on the occasion of the Ukraine conflict, and whose traffic and economic routes cannot be interrupted with the aircraft carrier fleets of the USA and NATO, which are outdated in terms of military strategy anyway.
The decisive factor for the development of a Russian century is likely to be above all the answer to the question of who will call the tune in Eurasia and whether China will refrain from (re-)exporting its social model in the old socialist tradition as soon as the common adversary, the USA, has become militarily and economically harmless. However, if this model, in combination with Chinese capitalism and its digital surveillance technology, were to prevail in Eurasia, it would turn the world island into a huge concentration camp with the potential to transform the whole earth into a slave planet. Which also raises the question of whether and how long a “RIC” confederation of states would last without the common Anglo-Saxon enemy. A division of power into economic dominance on the one hand and military on the other could end in an unprecedented arms race in the medium or long term.
Germany’s deindustrialization and Europe’s decline
The fact that the economic sanctions against Russia, which are likewise unprecedented and planned well in advance, will in the short term and foreseeably fall back on their authors is probably a further indication of a deliberate, if not likewise well in advance planned deindustrialization of Europe and above all of Germany, which has systematically destroyed its secure domestic energy supply since the fall of the Berlin Wall without economic necessity. Since then, it has been true that German industry is competitive only because of cheap Russian natural gas as a readily available energy source. Spain also seems to have a vested interest in its own energy emergency – above and beyond the EU sanctions marathon – because it is simultaneously annoying its second most important natural gas supplier, Algeria, by feeling compelled, of all things, to abandon its neutrality in the Western Sahara conflict and indirectly recognize the occupation of its former colony by Morocco, which is contrary to international law.
The new Iron Curtain will lead to the impoverishment of EU-Europe in every respect and will once again divide the world into two halves politically and economically, this time with the signs reversed. Also significant is the decadent arrogance with which the EU administration, facing economic decline, in the person of EU “political commissioner” Margrethe Vestager, pulls its subjects through the political ring on the nose ring: surely the citizens should get even with Putin by taking care to use less water and energy in their daily personal hygiene. In view of the conspicuous accumulation of incompetent personnel not only in Berlin, but in almost all government offices of the EU countries and their disposal terminal in Brussels, one no longer wants to believe in coincidence in view of this aberration: the parallels to inhuman “real existing socialism” are just as unmistakable as the turn to the Chinese social model of the surveillance state – and the historical and future consequences of this political aberration.
They are the opposite of the vision that Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation, put into words in his historic speech to the German Bundestag on September 25, 2001: “I am convinced: Today we are turning a new page in the history of our bilateral relations and we are thus making our joint contribution to building the European house.” With the fall of the Yugoslav warrior Gerhard Schröder and the enthronement of the socialist Angela Merkel, the opportunity of the century for a lasting European peace was squandered.
The world is changing and so are the history lies of the Anglo-Saxons. AnderweltVerlag is the leading publisher in Germany in this respect with the works of Peter Haisenko and Reinhard Leube. If you want to be among the first to be enlightened, visit us at the Anderweltverlag site here (https://anderweltverlag.com/).