|
from
Strategic-Culture Website
Some of these decisions have undoubtedly received popular support from far beyond America's shores.
Observing the consequences of these political choices in the months since, it is easy to see how the world has reacted in a more or less similar fashion, which has been by ignoring the United States and emphasizing cooperation amongst themselves.
In addition to withdrawing from the above treaties, Washington has started a serious trade war and is imposing tariffs on allies and enemies alike.
From Russia to the EU, as well as China, South Korea, Japan and Turkey, everyone is facing the unprecedented decision to apply tariffs on trade.
In Trump's mind, this is
the only way to balance a trade deficit that has now reached more
than 500 billion dollars.
The suggestion that NATO may be obsolete has shaken the European capitals to their core, even as the Russian Federation may see it as signaling the prospect of positive relations with the United States.
Later it was understood
that Trump's strategy was to present himself before his electors
with tangible achievements, in this case a substantial increase in
military spending by NATO countries in Europe. Trump wants a
commitment of 2% of GDP to be spent on defense, and NATO's leaders
are now agreeing on the need to invest more money.
Washington has decided to
impose sanctions on companies that do business with Tehran from
November 2018. The EU immediately passed a law to shield EU
companies from American fines, but many French and German companies
appear to have already abandoned their projects in Iran, fearing
Washington's retribution.
The Italian government intends to present itself in contradistinction to France and Germany, returning to influencing the European decisions.
We shall come to see how
valid this political path is, especially in light of what Trump will
ask Conte in exchange for political support, especially with regard
to Libya and on various trade and tariff issues.
With Obama, the strategy turned to operating under the cover of democracy and human rights, using more subtle means for bringing about regime change, such as color revolutions. It seems this general strategy continues with Trump, through the means currently available to him.
U.S. military planners
nowadays must contend with an effective military force that keeps
throwing a spanner in their works, Moscow returning Crimea to the
Russian Federation and intervening in Syria to support the
legitimate government of Syria.
Trump has weaponized the dollar and is wielding it against allies and enemies alike to extract benefits for the United States.
What the current administration intends to do is use the status of the dollar (already a reserve currency and the medium of exchange for such things as oil) as a weapon against adversaries and allies.
And it is painful for
those at the receiving end, given that the global economy revolves
around Washington and the dollar.
As noted, following the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, several countries began to anticipate and plan against scenarios of American aggression.
Alliances have been strengthened:
Many issues are being
slowly resolved (India and Pakistan, South Korea and North Korea)
and many countries prefer to buy arms from Russia and China in order
to keep American imperialism at bay.
After the wars in 2002 and 2003 in Iraq and Afghanistan, China, Russia and Iran drew a red line regarding Washington's interventionism.
The effectiveness of
color revolutions was
diminished when the Russians, the Chinese and Iranians started
expelling the various NGOs funded by the likes of
Soros and other globalist
financiers to bring about regime change under the cover of
democracy and human rights...
In terms of color
revolutions, the artifice has now been brought to light, and
countries on the receiving end of such attacks can now recognize
them and quickly act to forestall them, as happened in Hong Kong in
2014.
...offering him the opportunity to shape events.
It is a strategy with short-term benefits by devastating effects for Washington in the long run.
Indeed, the only way to combat U.S. financial dominance is to ditch the U.S. dollar for other currencies. Washington's economic power derives from the use that the world makes of the dollar.
Clearly, then, Trump's decision to use the U.S. dollar as a weapon will cost his country dearly in the future, the dollar probably bound to lose its role as a global reserve currency. As history has shown, when a reserve currency is transferred to another currency, the empire that depended on this reserve-currency status itself went into decline.
This occurred with France
and Britain, and it will likely occur with
the United States...
Just look at the situation in Turkey, with almost 100 billion dollars in foreign debt. Ankara suffers from the excessive dollarization of its economy. It thus remains vulnerable to a U.S. dollar attack by Trump, and without Qatar coming to the rescue with 15 billion dollars worth of investment, the Turkish lira would have not been able to resist for much longer.
The danger of an economic collapse is real, along the same lines as was experienced in Asia in the late 1990s through devastating financial-speculation attacks.
In contrast, Moscow finds
itself with a very low public debt and just 13 billion in
dollar-denominated securities, continuing apace the de-dollarization
of its economy.
As long as Washington is,
...Trump will be free to
use the U.S. dollar as a baseball bat with which he can whack
friends and opponents over the head.
The United States, as a declining empire, is lashing out, employing every weapon available to try and arrest its diminishing status as the world's sole superpower.
Now it is the turn of America's allies to relinquish the dollar, coming to understand that real sovereignty is ensured through economic sovereignty.
|
