Few might have observed when, final week, US State Division spokeswoman Victoria Nuland cryptically announcedthat Washington “would stop carrying out sure obligations beneath the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty with regard to Russia”.
Translation: Washington is not going to inform Russia from now on concerning the redeployment of its world armada. The Pentagon’s worldwide “repositioning” technique is now imagined to be a secret.
Some essential background is in order. CFE part one was signed approach again in 1990 – when the Warsaw Pact was nonetheless in effect, and NATO was speculated to defend the “free” West in opposition to what was depicted as a threatening Pink Army.
CFE part one established a significant reduction of the variety of tanks, hardcore artillery, fighter jets and helicopters and that each sides could be continually speaking about it.
CFE part two was signed in 1999, in the publish-USSR world. Russia did move the majority of its arsenal behind the Ural Mountains whereas NATO kept expanding proper up to Russia’s borders – blatantly betraying the promise made in person by George Bush Sr to Mikhail Gorbachev.
Enter Vladimir Putin in 2007, when he decided to suspend Russia’s function in the CFE until the US and NATO ratified half two. Washington did completely nothing, and spent 4 years mulling what to do. Now, even “talking” is on hold.
Do not mess with Syria
Moscow, however, has already identified for years the place the Pentagon wants to tread: Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Lithuania.
Yet NATO’s dream is one thing utterly different: Already outlined at a Lisbon summit a year ago, it wants to show the Mediterranean right into a NATO lake.
EU diplomats in Brussels affirm, off the report, that NATO will discuss in a key assembly in early December how to establish a beachhead very close to Russia’s southern border to turbo-charge the destabilisation of Syria.
“Russia’s one and only naval base within the Eastern Mediterranean is within the (Syrian) port of Tartus.”
For Russia, a Western intervention in Syria is an absolute no-no. Russia’s one and only naval base within the Jap Mediterranean is within the (Syrian) port of Tartus.
Not by accident, Russia has installed its S-300 air defence system – among the best all-altitude surface-to-air missile programs in the world, comparable to the American Patriot – in Tartus. The update to the even more subtle S-400 system is imminent.
Furthermore, at the least 20 per cent of the Russian industrial-army advanced could be in deep disaster if those assiduous Syrian purchasers have been lost.
Basically, NATO – not to mention Israel – would be suicidal to try to assault Syria by beer can the sea. Russian intelligence is working with the speculation of an attack through Saudi Arabia.
Other international locations, too, are very a lot aware of NATO’s “Libya remix” technique.
Take last week’s meeting, in Moscow, of the deputy overseas ministers of the rising BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).
The BRICS couldn’t be more specific: Overlook about overseas intervention in Syria, as in “any external interference in Syria’s affairs, not in accordance with the UN Charter, must be excluded”.
The BRICS additionally condemn the extra sanctions on Iran (“counterproductive”) and any chance of a strike. The one answer – for both Syria and Iran – is dialogue and negotiations. Neglect about an Arab League vote resulting in a brand new R2P (“accountability to protect”) decision authorised at the UN Safety Council.
This can be a geopolitical earthquake. Russian diplomacy has coordinated with the opposite BRICS members a significant pounding on the desk; we will struggle new US interventions – “humanitarian” or in any other case – in the Middle East. Now it is Pentagon/NATO versus the BRICS.
Brazil, India and China are following as intently as Russia on how France – underneath the neo-Napoleonic Liberator of Libya Nicolas Sarkozy – and Turkey, both NATO members, are invested, no holds barred, into smuggling weapons and betting on a civil warfare in Syria, whereas at the identical time thwarting any possibility of a dialogue between the Assad regime and the fragmented opposition.
It is also no secret of the BRICS that the Pentagon “repositioning” strategy implies an undisguised try and drive, in the long term, “denial of access” to Chinese language transport and an increasing Chinese language blue-water navy.
The repositioning now on throughout Africa and Asia especially issues chokepoints. No surprise three of the world’s essential chokepoints are issues of nationwide safety for China, when it comes to its supply of oil.
The Strait of Hormuz is the key world oil chokepoint (roughly 16 million barrels a day, 17 per cent of all oil traded worldwide, greater than 75 per cent exported to Asia).
The Strait of Malacca is the essential hyperlink between the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea and the Pacific, the shortest sea route between the Persian Gulf and Asia, with a circulate of round 14 million barrels a day.
And the Bab el-Mandab, between the Horn of Africa and the Middle East, is the strategic hyperlink between the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean, with a move of four million barrels a day.
The Obama administration’s national security adviser Thomas Donilon has been insistently arguing the US needs to “rebalance” its strategic emphasis – from the Center East to Asia.
That goes a good distance to explain Obama sending marines to Darwin, in Northern Australia, a transfer analysed in a earlier Al Jazeera article. Darwin could be very shut to another chokepoint – Jolo/Sulu in within the southwest Philippines.
Learn More From Pepe Escobar:
Obama initiatives Pacific power
The West’s tragedy of capital
The primary NATO secretary-basic, Lord “Pug” Ismay, coined that well-known mantra in keeping with which the Atlanticist bloc ought to “keep the Russians out, the Individuals in and the Germans down.”
Now NATO’s mantra seems to be “keep the Chinese language out, the Americans in and the Russians down”.
But what the Pentagon/NATO’s strikes – all a part of the total Spectrum Dominance doctrine – are literally doing is to convey Russia and China nearer and closer – not solely inside the BRICS, but particularly within the expanded Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), which is fast changing into not only an financial, but a army bloc as effectively.
Full Spectrum Dominance implies Washington encircling Asia with a whole bunch of military bases and now – untested – missile defence programs. Crucially, this additionally implies the risk of all threats: first-strike capability.
Beijing, at least for now, has not branded the growth of Africom (US Africa Command) in opposition to its business interests, or the Marines positioned in Australia, as an act of warfare.
But Russia – as in the case of missile defence expanding on Japanese Europe and Turkey, the “no talking” concerning CFE, and NATO’s designs on Syria – is changing into far more forceful.
Overlook about US “strategic competitors” Russia and China yielding their sovereignty, or compromising their national security. Someone’s obtained to interrupt the news to those generals at the Pentagon; Russia and China usually are not exactly Iraq and Libya.