text: It would of course be best for the US not to seek the ‘containment’ of Russia or China, but since that course of action seems unrealistic due to the grand strategic inertia of this fading unipolar hegemon, one or the other will inevitably be prioritized.
  The US’ permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) are divided into two fiercely competing factions: the comparatively more presently influential anti-Chinese one that stands as among former US President Donald Trump’s most enduring legacies and their subversive anti-Russian rivals that are trying to return to the policymaking fore by hook or by crook. They’re split over which of these two Eurasian Great Powers constitutes the greater long-term strategic threat to the US.
  Up until the prevailing Trump-backed faction came to power and was surprisingly inherited by incumbent US President Joe Biden, the hitherto indisputably ruling anti-Russian one did its utmost to neutralize Russia’s nuclear second-strike capabilities through the deployment of so-called “anti-missile systems” and strike weapons (including under the cover of the aforementioned systems) towards Russia’s borders.
  It wasn’t until the former US leader succeeded in redirecting his country’s grand strategy against China that America began to countenance cutting a pragmatic series of compromises with Russia to de-escalate tensions in Europe. That could then enable the Pentagon and its NATO allies to redeploy some of their forces from there to the Indo-Pacific in order to more aggressively “contain” China. This was Biden’s intent in meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin last summer, for example.
  Regrettably, the subversive anti-Russian “deep state” faction leveraged their extensive network of influence in the Baltics, Poland, Ukraine, UK, and within the US’ own academia, media, and policymaking circles to sabotage this. Through the regional tensions that they provoked, they established the pretext for potentially deploying strike weapons – including hypersonic ones – closer to Russia’s borders under the cover of “anti-missile systems” in response to another round of civil war in Ukraine.
  This prompted Russia to publicly declare its red lines and immediately request security guarantees from the US, which in turn led to the recent round of negotiations between them that haven’t yet resulted in any tangible agreement. The very fact that they took place and are planned to continue, though, speaks to the Biden Administration’s sincere intent to seriously explore this possibility in order to continue with the anti-Chinese grand strategy pioneered by its predecessor.
  That, however, can only happen if the subversive anti-Russian “deep state” faction doesn’t sabotage this process by successfully provoking another round of civil war in Ukraine that could then serve as the pretext for deploying the suspected strike weapons closer towards Russia’s borders. There are also reportedly plans in place for the US to deploy between 1,000-5,000 troops to the region in the event that tensions escalate, with the possibility of even multiplying that number by a factor of ten.
  Should that scenario fail to be averted through either the prevailing anti-Chinese faction of the US “deep state” clinching a deal with Russia and/or this group removing Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky (whether directly or by passively facilitating this even by at least just standing aside as it unfolds), then their grand strategic plans to prioritize “containing” China in the New Cold War will collapse. There’s no way they’d ever be able to return to that policy in the aftermath of that scenario.
  In that case, the “deep state’s” grand strategic calculations would have changed since the anti-Russian faction would have flipped the dynamics around on their prevailing anti-Chinese peers in order to become the permanent bureaucracy’s most powerful force. That would see them imposing a policy of maximum pressure on Moscow in spite of the expected consequences entailing considerable collateral damage for their European allies’ economies.
  The US’, though, would be largely insulated from that since it isn’t closely connected to the Russian economy like theirs is. Moreover, American businesses could even potentially swoop in to buy off European companies on the cheap in the event that this artificially manufactured economic crisis leads to them becoming desperate enough to seek outside assistance. That could in turn eventually enable the US to restore more of its economic influence over the continent.
  The long-term goal that the anti-Russian “deep state” faction would be aiming to achieve is to successfully place their targeted Great Power in a position of nuclear blackmail. This would be accomplished by winning the ongoing arms race taking place in Europe related to the mass deployment of various US strike weapons – including hypersonic ones – and accompanying defensive ones like “anti-missile systems” as close to Russia’s borders as possible.
  The end game is to retake control of Russia’s economy after coercing it into carrying out never-ending unilateral concessions in this respect so as to ultimately deprive China of those resources. This is of course a political fantasy in the present and there aren’t any credible reasons to expect it to achieve any progress, not even in the far future, but it nevertheless attempts to explain the anti-Russian “deep state’s” calculations in as seemingly “rational” of a manner as possible.
  If Russia can eventually be turned back into a US-led Western client state, then it could be ordered to join that bloc’s global “containment” measures against China. That could see it “choking off” the People’s Republic, which in the US “deep state’s” expectations could then repeat the same process against this Great Power as they would have by then succeeded in doing to the other. The end goal, just like before, is to place their target in a position of nuclear but also economic blackmail.
  Conjecturing about the anti-Russian faction’s calculations, they might try to sell their grand strategic shift to their anti-Chinese peers by pointing out how the economic consequences of their maximum pressure campaign against Moscow entail far lesser blowback for them than doing the same against Beijing. That’s because the American economy hasn’t “decoupled” from China’s whereas it has no similar such complex mutual interdependence with the Russian one.
  With this in mind, they might try to make their policy pivot come off as a more pragmatic one in terms of the bigger picture even though it’s unrealistic to expect China to initiate its own “decoupling” from the US in the event that tensions between those two continue deteriorating if the anti-Chinese “deep state” faction’s grand strategy continues to unfold. Having said that, the greatest drawback of the anti-Russian faction’s plans is that the military consequences of an uncontrollable conflict are apocalyptic.
  That wouldn’t necessarily so much be the case if things went wrong with China, though that’s also not to say that there wouldn’t be any unacceptably high costs to such a conflict either. It’s just important to remind everyone that Russia is a nuclear superpower whereas China has yet to become one and doesn’t seem interested in even aspiring for that status, seemingly content with solely retaining a credible nuclear second-strike capability.
  Regardless of which “deep state” faction comes out on top in this intra-bureaucratic competition, which will be determined by the outcome of the undeclared US-provoked missile crisis in Europe, the end result will still be extremely destabilizing for the world. It would of course be best for the US not to seek the “containment” of Russia or China, but since that course of action seems unrealistic due to the grand strategic inertia of this fading unipolar hegemon, one or the other will inevitably be prioritized.
  From a so-called “pragmatic” perspective, arguments in that case can be made for and against prioritizing either of them. As was explained, targeting Russia entails less economic consequences for the US (and potentially enormous economic benefits vis-à-vis gobbling up desperate European companies) but could literally end the world if there’s a war by miscalculation. This angle of analysis, however, might naturally find disfavor among most Europeans except for the most anti-Russian ones.
  As for targeting China, this could be economically disastrous for the entire world, though with the People’s Republic likely proving to be much more resilient than the Western economies due to its socio-economic and governing system. Any kinetic conflict by miscalculation might not end the world, but it could utterly destroy Northeast, East, and Southeast Asia, at the very least. This could wipe out a huge chunk of humanity in the worst-case scenario. Americans and Europeans might not care, though.
  The observations made in the last two paragraphs are admittedly insensitive but that was deliberate in order to sober everyone up into realizing the enormity of what’s at stake in both scenarios. Neither of them is advantageous since they’re both zero-sum in their own way and entail immense collateral costs. Nevertheless, since it seems inevitable that clarity will soon emerge about which of them will be prioritized upon the outcome of the undeclared US-provoked missile crisis in Europe.
  By Andrew Korybko
  Source: OneWorld
  Facebook
  twitter
  Copy
  Post Tags: #China#Deep State#Russia#US
  Post navigation
  Previous Previous
  It’s Fake News to Insinuate That Russia’s Arming Anti-Taliban Forces
  NextContinue
  Mr. Xi Plays Davos Man
  Similar Posts
  Opinion
  Shadows of Doklam Crisis on BRICS Summit
  September 10, 2017
  The BRICS Summit 2017 of Xiamen clearly had a historical significance. It pointed out for the first time in nearly three centuries that the West can no longer monopolize global economic and political activities. The South and East are definitely uniting to undermine the remnants of Western power by first seeking to establish a non-Western…
  Read More Shadows of Doklam Crisis on BRICS SummitContinue
  Opinion
  UK and BJ: When Will Words Have Meaning Again?
  June 10, 2022 June 5, 2022
  When we talk to people about things which have negatively affected us at some point we are told to “move on”. Whatever may have happened to us, we should put the past behind us and think of a better and brighter future, rather than dwell on old hurts forever. There are generally three reasons why…
  Read More UK and BJ: When Will Words Have Meaning Again?Continue
  Opinion
  The Most Lethal Virus Is Not COVID. It Is War
  December 19, 2020 December 17, 2020
  John Pilger describes the invisible weapon of past and current wars, and the threat of nuclear war, under cover of the Covid pandemic. This is propaganda, aided by censorship by omission. Watch Pilger’s 2010 film The War You Don’t See here. Britain’s Armed Services Memorial is a silent, haunting place. Set in the rural beauty…
  Read More The Most Lethal Virus Is Not COVID. It Is WarContinue
  Opinion
  Nigeria’s Upcoming Elections Exacerbate the Situation in the Country
  October 7, 2022 October 3, 2022
  Nigeria occupies a very important place in current world politics. This country is home to almost a fifth of the African continent’s population, about one in six Africans is Nigerian. Its already large population is expected to have doubled to 400 million by 2050, moving Nigeria from the 7th most populous country in the world to…
  Read More Nigeria’s Upcoming Elections Exacerbate the Situation in the CountryContinue
  Opinion
  The Long History of America’s Violent Intervention in Afghanistan
  August 6, 2018
  In October, America’s war in Afghanistan will turn 17. At that point, it will be old enough to go and fight in itself—and there is no end in sight. The United States escalated the war in 2018 by increasing the number of its troops and airstrikes, and this year is bringing a record-high number of…
  Read More The Long History of America’s Violent Intervention in AfghanistanContinue
  Opinion
  Greece’s Migrant Crisis Has Further Exposed Turkish Fake News
  March 14, 2020
  Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s attempt to intimidate the Syrian Army and force them to withdraw to the Sochi Agreement lines in Idlib utterly failed, resulting in the Turkish leader having to embarrassingly accept large swathes of liberated territory will remain under Syrian sovereignty despite his attempts to occupy it. This was especially embarrassing as…
  Read More Greece’s Migrant Crisis Has Further Exposed Turkish Fake NewsContinue
  Leave a Reply Cancel reply
  Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
  Comment *
  Name *
  Email *
  Website
  Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
  Search for:
  Search
  POPULAR POSTS
  The US’ Hybrid War on Turkiye Just Escalated After Kiev’s Failed Sabotage of TurkStream
  World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders” Revealed
  As the World Fixates on Ukraine, Another War is Brewing in the Middle East
  Zelensky Trapped by Moscow and Washington
  The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’État Against Humanity
  Tags
  Afghanistan Africa BRI China CIA COVID-19 Elections EU Europe France Germany Hybrid War India Iran Iraq ISIS Israel Joe Biden Kurds Libya Mainstream Media Middle East NATO North Korea Oil Pakistan Palestine Pentagon Propaganda Putin Russia Saudi Arabia Syria Taliban Terrorism Trump Turkey UAE UK Ukraine US Venezuela War West Yemen
  Recent
  Zelensky Trapped by Moscow and Washington December 5, 2022
  As the World Fixates on Ukraine, Another War is Brewing in the Middle East December 5, 2022
  Fact Check Ukraine December 5, 2022
  China Factor in Recent International Fora December 5, 2022
  Reading Proust in War December 5, 2022
  The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’État Against Humanity December 5, 2022
  Recent Comments
  Zašto Washington Post rehabilitira imidž predsjednika Xija u svijesti Zapada? - Kriticizam on Russia Is Waging an Existential Struggle in Defense of Its Independence & Sovereignty
  Zašto Washington Post rehabilitira imidž predsjednika Xija u svijesti Zapada? - Kriticizam on The Wizard Of Oz: The Dark Reality That the Deep State Hides from the World
  There Might Be Unpredictable Consequences From Capping Russian Oil - The Crude Truth on Russia Is Waging an Existential Struggle in Defense of Its Independence & Sovereignty
  Moglo bi doći do nepredvidivih posljedica ograničenja ruske nafte - Kriticizam on Russia Is Waging an Existential Struggle in Defense of Its Independence & Sovereignty
  There Might Be Unpredictable Consequences From Capping Russian Oil - Exposing the Matrix on Russia Is Waging an Existential Struggle in Defense of Its Independence & Sovereignty
  Archives
  Archives Select Month December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016