First let’s dispel the lies.

Is Africa forever condemned to a life of economic squalor? Absolutely not. Africa’s diverse populations and low average IQ do contribute to a more difficult working environment but do not necessarily condemn them to economic death.

Consider Botswana. Botswana is an ex-British colony. It is dominated by the Tsawana people who make up roughly 80% of the population. By comparison the White Afrikaner population stands at 3%. Botswana is characterized by sparsely populated territory, stable political institutions, and a GDP per capita of $14,000. The country maintains a very small military and for some time had none at all. And its economic growth is to die for at over 8% currently. All this is combined by some of Africa’s most advanced and competitive banks.

Botswana is of course the exception to the rule. Most of Africa remains mired in the problems resulting from the backfiring of nature’s gifts and a lack of strong, dominant cultures. And the country is not without problems such as an explosive HIV rate. But it is impressive. It’s what Africa could be, expertly and patient managed, with Western technology adapted to the African situation demographically and geographically.

Second, Africa is still subordinated to colonialism that supposedly hampers their growth? Well yes and no, it depends where you go. Africa, having no powers developed and capable enough to stand on their own, has always been a playground of empires. There are some exceptions, like Algeria, Libya, South Africa, and Egypt, but most of these countries have been consumed by internal difficulties of one kind or another. Libya, which had the strength to look outwards and make significant progress in strengthening the till-then toothless African Union, was thoroughly demolished by the West not so long ago. It will require years of intensive economic input to restore it’s former glory. South Africa worsens every year as the ethnic divide and poor leadership of the country encourage the flight of Afrikanners there. And it isn’t going to end well.

And there’s no escaping the fact that France still utterly dominates its former West African colonies. Their central banks have about as much freedom as a franchise branch to operate. The French never really abandoned West Africa; They simply changed the shape of their control, from overt to covert, from judicial to financial.

But the bulk of Africa has escaped the confines of so called Western colonialism. Take Angola. Angola and Portugal have a complicated relationship. The Portuguese still maintain significant influence and strong economic ties to the country, while the Angolans clamor for further independence every so loudly every once in a while. But the Angolan leadership isn’t blind to the fact that the Angolan oil and gold industries were largely planned and developed by the far-sighted Salazar dictatorship during the 60s and 70s. Today the two countries enjoy a unique and fascinating relationship, one of distrust on one side and mutual economic benefit on the other.

Likewise for a variety of African nations. Africa south of the Sahara and East of the French possessions can be reliably characterized as independent nations in their own right, free of any real colonialism. Their failure to grow is their own complicated responsibility.

And this takes us to opportunity. Because Africa is economic opportunity incarnate. It is a continent of vast territories, vast populations, and little in the way of infrastructure or industry. The whole continent cries out not for foreign aid, but for investment, for entrepreneurship, for the challenge of development and the creation of prosperity.

This would not be easy. Kenya, the Jewel of East Africa, has attained considerable growth in the last few decades. This has come at a cost. It requires sacrifice, collaboration, and a recognition of the facts of nature especially as they apply to human beings. But when one makes human nature a feature, and not a bug, these difficulties become opportunities.

The young and ambitious should remember their home and love their countries. Their peoples, especially those of the West. But for those committed to economic development and the attainment of resources necessary to make such drastic changes possible then Africa is more than an option. It is the greatest, riskiest, and most dangerous market in the world. It is opportunity, and it is calling the opportunists.

Whoever answers is going to be mighty powerful.

The post Africa as Opportunity Incarnate appeared first on Social Matter.

The answer is yes, and maybe.

The Germans unhesitatingly want to be a Great Power again, to be respected and listened to for their ability and their economic power. The current EU which subordinates all members to German markets at the expense of their own economies is a clear example. If Germany wanted to play the whole equality and cooperation game they could have by using their influence in the EU to support existing production in non-Northern countries. But they don’t. Instead they seem to derive a kind of sadistic pleasure from raping Southern European markets and flooding it with their own superbly manufactured goods. Economically speaking, Germany already has Great Power status.

But a strong economy alone does not a Great Power make, or we’d all be quivering fear of Japan in the East. Great Power status comes with diplomatic and foreign policy requirements as well, requirements that are arguably more important than economic strength. This is why Russia, with an economy far inferior to that of Germany’s or Japan’s, remains a far stronger, far nobler power, having embraced its role as a Eurasian Great Power firmly with both hands. With this came the responsibility to use its power and influence swiftly and decisively which we have seen frequently with the Putin government.

Germany, in contrast, is still afraid of broaching any kind of military mission openly. Hell, they’re afraid of using their diplomatic and economic power openly too. All in all, Germany is a cowardly giant, and it possesses all the diplomatic power of the gentle fat kid in a high school class. Sure, he’ll steal your lunch, but deep down everybody knows he can’t take a hit.

This leads us to the arguably more important question: Is Germany willing to pay the price?

I think the answer is no. Germany has become comfortable. Their military, which is a joke, is a symbol of the strength of the determination of the country. I highly doubt they will be willing to take the enormous economic burden and continuing struggle with the West that turning against America will entail. There are certainly few signs that is the direction Merkel will take. Merkel’s foreign policy can be characterized by subservience and, despite increasing dissatisfaction, the German state continues to make every effort to align their foreign policy in the Ukraine and in Asia with that of the USA. Sure, the stars seemed as close as they’ll ever be to aligned for a German break from American dominance but we simply aren’t seeing those signals at present, Der Spiegel article on Breedlove be damned.

But Merkel may not have a choice. Public pressure is growing. If another European were to break the Germans might have to face a partition of the EU. This is where Greece comes in. Both Greece and Cyprus are taking explicit pro-Russian measures, with even talk of removing Greece, and Greece alone, from the Russian agricultural counter sanctions list. Greece could, by threatening to bring down the Euro house of cards, shove a reluctant German elite into Russian arms. It’s where they want to go anyway, at least in that ideal world where Germany reclaims its diplomatic authority without paying the corresponding geopolitical price.

The Greeks are hardly the only countries shifting East. Hungary, Serbia, Finland, Italy, and Spain have all made overtures of one kind or another, including visits by various ministers and heads of state during a time or supposed economic hostility. Anti-Russian sentiment, evidently, will not be last. And that’s simply not within the power of Germany to control.

As much as Germany would like to control Europe, they simply do not. They don’t have the political might, not at present, and as the Euro slips their ability to pull economic strings lessen. Furthermore an increasingly weak Europe is an increasingly desperate Europe, and the EU, being so phenomenally large, will inevitably find itself at the mercy of one increasingly desperate country or another. Greece is one. Cyprus another. But even little Portugal or Ireland could lose patience under the right circumstances and initiate events that would push Germany East.

There is a final factor: The USA. America is becoming more and more extreme in its demands of its vassals. Compliance, once covert and suspected, is not over and shameless. But the American state does not know when to stop. They will continue to push Europe, and Germany in particular, into increasingly costly situations for their own foreign policy benefits. Eventually the cost may be too high and the Germans may attempt a run for policy freedom. But the longer they wait to do that the higher the economic costs will be, so time is the enemy.

I think it will be a combination of the above factors, especially the Greek-Russo alignment and increasing American pressure, that will push Germany successfully from West to East. But I also think that the Germans will continue pandering for some time making this eventual shift all the more painful. One way or another though, the German Question will be resolved. For good this time.

The post The German Question appeared first on Social Matter.

On the 27th of March Saudi Arabia launched its first overt unilateral attack on Yemen with a bombing campaign against the Houthi Shia rebels. The Saudis fear the Houthis for a variety of reasons. For one, they fear them because they are Fiver Shia, which is reason enough for puritanical Wahhabis. Saudi Arabia has a large twelver Shia population in its oil producing eastern areas which has proven to be a source of repeated unrest, so they take their fight against heretics very seriously.

Second, they fear them because they fear encroaching Iranian influence. Although such influence is nowhere to be found at present it would undoubtedly coalesce if the Houthis consolidated power. After all, the Saudis fear the Houthis and will take deadly measures to destroy them, for which Iran is a useful counterweight. It is not a matter of Iranian guilt or the like, it is simply the situation. The Houthis must be dismantled before they gain strength to be those natural allies the Iranians so desperately need.

But here’s the strange thing about this situation; The point at which Houthi strength, with their allies, might be stopped has long been passed. After all they virtually control the country now in fact. And this isn’t because of a sudden explosion of deadly Houthi rebellions. This rebellion has been going on for years! And by and large, the Houthis have won it. They are more than 100,000 soldiers strong and are allied with the Yemeni military which we saw in action last year when they bombed the Presidential Palace.

And that strange President is at the center of this drama. President Hadi is a power mongering, corruption affirmed puppet of the Saudis. After being defeated last year by the Houthi forces he was forced to come to a power sharing agreement. A major cause of the current crisis is his failure to uphold his end of the bargain, in any way shape or form. Instead of doing so, he chose to flee to Aden, that critical southern city and from there flee again to Saudi Arabia. He could not be a better servant.

And that’s the trick here. The Houthis and Yemeni factions of note are fairly sick of Saudi and other Western influence in their little country. Yemen of course has all the geopolitical attributes of a blessed nation, with a key strategic chokepoint on its doorstep and potentially immense oil reserves that have yet to be fully explored. But foreigner domination of the country for the last century has made them, and kept them, as a third world hell hole that produces nothing but oil and stays poor.

The response of the various parties is telling. The Arab states aligned with Saudi Arabia, and therefore America, have been explicit in their support, nay, their demands for a negotiation with the twice-ousted President Hadi. Obviously that’s a sick joke, since the man is a liar in every way and constantly acts contrary to the interests of Yemen’s sovereignty. He is nothing but a puppet in the opulence of Riyadh, demanding a throne with the guns of another. And a lot of guns at that. More than a hundred thousand Saudi troops wait near the border as the airforce bomb Yemeni Houthi positions near Sanaa, the Yemeni capitol. Meanwhile the American separatist machine is into work, with media sources already mulling a (re)split between north and south Yemen.

Key to this drama is the response of Russia and Iran which is also critical. Both nations have been unusually vehement in demanding Saudi restraint and in rhetorical support of the Houthis. This is to be the new normal, I think. With the nuclear deal no guarantee for Iran and America’s overt hostility to Russia, there is no need to pull diplomatic punches. The Saudis act as a puppet of the Americans and an enemy to both countries and their interests are being treated accordingly. Meanwhile an anti-Saudi Yemen, regardless of who runs it, would be an immensely useful asset to the Eurasianist forces.

For the West itself, this whole situation is a disaster although the state department does not yet know it. Lines are being drawn in the sand, and motioned to with greater and greater vigor. All the while the legitimacy of the West leaks slowly like blood from a stabbing. The patient doesn’t always notice the numbness and the shock furthers the fatality of the act. By supporting the extremely overt Saudi intervention and the de facto uprising of Al Qaeda factions in the east of Yemen, America is acting as the ultimate hypocrite. Interventions are too be damned, except when America approves. By the same token revolutions in Syria, Libya, and Tunisia are to be glorified, except when they threaten American interests like in Yemen. Then they must be crushed with the mighty Wahhabi jackboot and the tacit support of their masters in Washington.

Every time the West engages in act of such diplomatic retardation it butchers its standing and prestige in the political world, for the rest of the world does not care for the solipsism the West so embraces. It is as if America is inviting diplomatic insult and scorn. Such is the degeneracy of our elites.

The post Bringing Freedom and Hypocrisy to Yemen appeared first on Social Matter.

For starters we must recognize that an America whose hegemony is broken does not cease to be America. Even a hypothetically divided America remains a geopolitical powerhouse. It will dominate the Mississippi River and remain the de facto premier trade partner for the Caribbean, Canada, and Mexico. Even if, hypothetically, America was divided into its constituent states, certain states will retain their own enormous power and economic capability. We can talk about the world after American hegemony, but we cannot talk about a world absent of American power. Any new American foreign policy must take this into account.

Second, we must realize that a principle force eroding America’s geopolitical power is its cultural degeneracy. American universalism remains the single most powerful culture the world has ever seen but it must be cured of its many deficiencies before the foreign policy can be effectively aligned with its geopolitical objectives.

This takes us to the third point: What does a healthier American foreign policy look like? How does it act?

A new American foreign policy must completely shift its frame. The current frame is that of domination or destruction. What we can control, we maintain and support, though we also stymie its growth. What eludes our control or threatens our dominance we destroy, utterly and without mercy. No challengers can be had. America must maintain the monopoly on power via interventionism and economic warfare. And all this is calculated from the framework of zero-sum gains and losses. We either win it all, or lose it all, and act accordingly.

The results in foreign nations of this frame are self-evident. Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Serbia, the Ukraine. All these countries are in ruins, either physical or institutional. Even the subservient nations acquired successful by American policy, like Croatia, Poland, the Philippines, Thailand, Mexico, and Panama are hardly worthy allies, but vassals dominated from afar, carefully kept economically undeveloped (Poland, Mexico, Croatia) or left mired in political instability (Thailand, Mexico, the Philippines). The few American allies that have grown have succeeded in spite of American support, not because of it, like we see South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. And all of them are tossed aside as soon as the gains of supporting them outweigh the overt costs (as we see in the betrayal of the Kuomintang of China by America during the Chinese civil war).

It doesn’t have to be this way. America is a uniquely productive nation, combining settler ruggedness and an entrepreneurial spirit. Even if the American spirit has died among the great mass of the population all the foundation remains. A shift in frame could easily recapture the spark that propelled America towards amazing economic growth. Such a cultural shift would be used doubly: To put America back on the path towards economic growth and entrepreneurship while offering mutually beneficial commercial opportunities in the Western hemisphere. The reality of the situation is that no country can produce economic growth in Cuba, in Mexico, in Colombia, or in Venezuela like America can. They need only change their frame and purge their destructive behaviors and ambitions in order to attain entry into a market that could be theirs. The Western Hemisphere is eagerly awaiting a more benevolent America, if only it would step up to the mantle and claim its place as the rightful economic leaders of the New World.

Nor would a healthy American foreign policy deny the world at large. Denying Neoconservative interventionism does not, after all, mean embracing Ron Paul Libertarianism. A multipolar world would be characterized by its own immense difficulties. A rising China is bound to be pushier and more aggressive in the South China Sea. Vietnam, the Philippines, Australia, and Japan are none to eager to join a China dominated Pacific. America has a role to play a mediator and bastion around which a Pacific alliance of non-Chinese intent forms. This is a natural role for America to take and can allow the country to maintain strength, though not hegemony, without needing to police the whole of the Pacific. The Australian, Indonesian, and Japanese navies are more than capable on their own, and American assistance can serve as benevolent supplementary force rather than cruel overlord in the area. Each of these major Pacific nations have already expressed interest in allying with America specifically for this purpose if only America would loosen its grip and universalism. It is strange to see, but a Communist Vietnam welcomes American influence as long as America promises not to destroy Vietnam once again.

In Europe too there are opportunities for American influence but not dominance. America has steadily estranged itself from France, Spain, Greece, and Germany through aggressive anti-Russian measures in the Ukraine. The Germans, economically and politically dominant in Europe, know the intent of American measures and find themselves increasingly unwilling to pay the price. By all accounts America’s strategy of sucking Russia into an aggressive, boots-on-the-ground war in the Ukraine has failed. This means that, so far, the American attempt to lock Europe into its sphere through a revival of NATO and an increase in military spending has failed also, but none of these measures have failed to force a high price on Europe. Consider ‘freedom apples’ in Poland. Nor are American allies in Europe particularly worthy. The Poles, though graciously accepting and encouraging American support now, have not forgotten the betrayals of erstwhile ‘allies’ in the past, nor have the Lithuanians who have been reduced to a shadow of their historical selves. These are hardly trustworthy long term allies especially against a Russia against whom they cannot protect.

Yet all of these European nations would welcome the enormous power of American foreign investment and restrained military support from a distance. That of course requires America to give up hegemony, to give up dictations in law and treaty, and to embrace partnership and construction rather than domination and destruction.

The Middle East is shaped by similar considerations. Turkey and Iran both jockey for power, amidst controversial Israel in the West and a pale Saudi Arabia in the south. While it is beneficial for American dominance to have these nations jockeying amongst themselves, it is not an effective long term strategy. After all, America cannot forever support the enormous cost that comes with forcing hundreds of millions of people to compete according to their whims.  And the Middle East is changing. Iran is slowly but surely attaching themselves to the Eurasianist camp. Turkey senses shifting winds and have moved to embrace the Turk Stream pipeline. Both Syria and Armenia are already aligned with Russia, with Armenia being a member of the EEU and Syria seeking future membership. Meanwhile Iraq will attach itself diplomatically to Iran should ISIS be eliminated. There is already a de facto stabilization occurring, one country at a time. If America insists on bleeding its coffers in the hot sun of the Middle East it can do so but will attain increasingly less success.

Even American allies there are turning aside. As Israel becomes increasingly polarized so too does AIPAC. Egypt without Mubarak is not a dependable American ally, as we see with its consorting with Russia. And Saudi Arabia, having seen how their American ‘friends’ abandoned Mubarak to his fate, are none too happy about the path the Middle East is set upon. Time is against them. Even if America could maintain their dominating power in the region they would be faced with diminishing returns and a tide dead set against them.

Every major region is experiencing a pushback against American domination and by extension American culture. It doesn’t have to be this way. If America were to take a more restrained approach it could reap enormous benefits. America could carefully pullback from Japan, encouraging a more assertive and nationalistic Japanese state to counter China. Shinzo Abe has certainly shown himself willing to take up that mantle. Absent of American influence Germany’s strength over Europe would begin to slip and America could pursue greater dealings with each one individually. Construction investment in Cyprus will do more to counter Russian influence than subordination to the EU would over the long term.

America can maintain itself as the worlds eminent power, but only by changing its frame. Today America is being poisoned internally by a dying, hedonistic culture and externally challenged by rising powers. These powers have been enabled by America’s foreign policy overreaches and frightening use of intervention. A retraction of this policy would drive half the world into America’s open arms. After all, would you rather work with ultra-alien Chinese, or the pleasant and industrious American? The answer is obvious. A new American foreign policy must embrace this perception and change its frame.

It must not leave a trail of destroyed, dominated vassals but a trail of creative, freely associating allies. There is no worse enemy than America and, should the American elite choose it, there may be no better friend than America.

The post A New American Foreign Policy, Part Two appeared first on Social Matter.

That is America’s foreign policy since the Second World War in a nutshell. My way or the highway. And it has been an unmitigated disaster: Not just for the world, but for America and the West itself. America has resided over a period of rampant and destructive crusaderism. And not the kind the restores to the West its historical patrimony, but rather the kind that embraces the universalism of ‘freedom’, ‘democracy’, and ‘human rights’. Worse than mere platitudes, America’s homegrown universalism has not only won the hearts and minds of generations across the world. It has poisoned them. And it has mocked them.

America’s progressivism has turned half the world into its puppets by hook and crook, by extortion and murder. The Ukraine is just their latest supplicant, but the pattern has played out many times before. And those countries that resist American hegemony, like China, must still deal with the progressivist fifth column that, knowingly or unknowingly, makes the whole nation vulnerable to American servitude. Worse yet these populations find themselves unable to distinguished reality from decadence, the good from the bad, the virtue from the vice due to the pernicious degree of brainwashing required for Cathedralist corruption embed itself.

All this has been done for a purpose. This attempted domination of the minds of the world has been done for a reason. This attempted domination of the nations of the world has been done for a reason. This attempted domination of their own domestic citizenry has been done for a reason. And it is not a good one. The reason is power. Power for its own sake, best summed in the American doctrinal term of Full Spectrum Dominance. Total dominance for its own sake. This is the nature of hegemony lacking grounding. Without virtue to guide the great powers of the world, they veer towards mere survival instead of thriving. And for a hegemonic state, mere survival means maintaining lone hegemonic status at insane potential cost. And no deviation from foreign subservience can be allowed.

But American hegemony is slipping. In the process of subduing the world its own people have been subdued. The great entrepreneurial spirit of America has been chained by bureaucracy. It has been chained by welfare. It has been chained by entitlement programs. It has been chained by its own narcissistic love and self-delusion. And so the great evils the America helped thrust on to countless nations are now placed upon itself as a great weight too heavy for even mighty America to maintain. Vice, decadence, and a failing citizenry have come home to roost in the American public. Civic spirit is all but dead and the closest one gets to enlightened patriotism is the crass exclamation of “‘Merica!” from 90 IQ mouthbreathers with more interest in the next episode of Game of Thrones than in sweating and bleeding for the nation.

But it is not the end, not yet. America and the West as a whole have produced countless wonders to extend the lifeline of American commercial life. Entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley and across the country are changing the way America and the world operates. They are shaking up the system in an organically creative way. Through the shifting of civil society and the birth of new industries it may just be possible to revival American economic prosperity in a way unimagined since the 60s.

American foreign policy requires a similar shakeup. It has become decadent, stale, and endlessly repetitive. Now American brute force provides the justification. And it cannot stand. Not ethically, not economically, and not practically. The brightest Americans have no qualms about going abroad and the population in general has little stomach for military losses. Meanwhile America’s economy can no longer support a military that guarantees full spectrum dominance, not in the age of Assassin’s Mace weaponry and advanced Russian air defense systems. Practically speaking America’s diplomacy is failing as well. The Germans have moved towards open criticism of America’s General Breedlove (and by extension American foreign policy) while the Egyptians select Russian nuclear companies, rather than American ones, to build their massive nuclear industry. Gone are the days where America was the unrivaled leader of the free world, dominating the world in industry, diplomacy, and prestige.

If America, and the Western World which it leads, want to maintain their positions as eminent nations, they need to think. And think big. America needs to redefine its ambition, return to the natural order of things, and then pay whatever price is necessary to get there. What America needs is a New Foreign Policy. I’ll approach what that must look like in Part Two next week.

The post A New American Foreign Policy, Part One appeared first on Social Matter.

This part of East Asia is characterized by three major powers and three lesser powers. The major ones are the Russian Federation, China, and the United States of America. Each of these nations has enough nuclear weaponry to wipe out the other. The three lesser powers are South Korea, North Korea, and Japan. While South Korea presently lacks a nuclear weapons program the North Korean program has been a major success. The Japanese have a ‘bomb in the basement’ program and stockpile a massive amount of weapons grade plutonium. All of them have large and formidable militaries with the Japanese and Koreans maintaining powerful navies as well.

Today the USA uses Japan and South Korea as a great shield protecting its western flank and hemming in two powerful rivals: China and Russia. Between the three of them China and Russia are thoroughly trapped. By encouraging the development of their collective militaries and maintaining America’s network of bases in the area the Pentagon keeps a close on their Asian neighbors.

Contrary to public thought, North Korea is a distraction. It provides a justification for the mass militarization of the DMZ and Japan’s considerable investment in naval forces, air defense, and fighter jets. But the real prize is the opportunity to station unique American forces so close to the borders of rivals, all the while maintaining a massive reserve in the form of the allied nations military. For the Americans this situation is beautiful; they hold all the cards. And at any moment they are capable of inflicting on China that great nightmare scenario of naval embargo via the massive and powerful Japanese navy.

There are only two chinks in the American strategy here: For one, South Korea is Sinophilic and have few problems with integrating into the Tianxia sphere which they’ve historically been part of. China need only apply a little leverage to cause diplomatic problems between South Korea and the rest of the alliance here.

The second gap is North Korea’s finicky nature. One can’t even trust them to be consistent in their hostility. This unpredictability is a deliberate strength of their foreign policy because it gives them enormous freedom of action. They’ve undertaken countless risky activities and escaped scot-free as a result.

This brings us to Russia’s pivot to Asia. Russia and China are clear allies now, so a Chinese weakness is a Russian weakness. A Chinese weakness is massive embargo and the rapid strangulation of their economy. A Russian weakness is an American dominated East Asia. Both weaknesses converge on an opportunity: Disarm North Korea.

The disarmament of North Korea would be the first step towards unification with the South. The South Koreans have voiced many times their desire to absorb their northern brethren despite historical differences. They certainly have the economic and industrial means to do so. The disarmament of North Korea and the opening of its markets would be a massive carrot for the South Koreans, one for which they’d pay almost any cost, including a turn towards the Russian-Chinese alliance.

America would then be left in a tricky situation: Decades of troops and hardware now stuck in a country amenable to the hegemon’s greatest rival whilst the justification of the presence of these troops would be stripped aside. A disarmed North Korea is not one that requires 30,000 troops armed with the latest in destructive equipment to watch over it.

The justification for the Okinawa and other American bases, notoriously unpopular among the Japanese, would also be stripped away. Japan, regional power of east Asia, would thus be left in a tricky position. It would be friendless in the region, with only a corrupted Taiwan and stubborn Phillipines to count on while America remains across the sea. And America’s bases would present a suddenly enormous PR problem for the state.

All at once the Japanese would have a domestic crisis on their hand while one of the worlds most formidable militaries, that of South Korea, will have turned to join its elder patron’s greatest rivals. A stunning turn around to rival America’s Maidan coup in the Ukraine.

But is this scenario occurring as described? Well yes, and as fast as it can too. The one difficult part for the Russians and the one the Americans love to encourage is the finicky nature of the North Koreans, fearful and concerned of being hung out to dry. Russia has been carefully bolstering ties for the last year to alleviate these fears with 2015 finally resulting in an official visit-to-be from Kim Jong-Un and the establishment of a Russo-Korean Joint Business Council. Both are immensely notable actions and when combined with the prospect of joint military drills we see that all signs are present.

Russia is pivoting towards North Korea as fast as it can, and the Koreans are happy to oblige. By 2020 the Korea that the West has counted among its own may very well be in the camp of its greatest rivals. Time will tell.

The post North Korea is Russia’s Pacific Pivot appeared first on Social Matter.

He’s also the mastermind behind the recent foreign policy hit, “The Hundred-Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy to Replace America as the Global Superpower”. In it he scares the bejesus out of American bureaucrats with predictions like “Beijing will push diplomatic demands that seem impracticable or inconceivable today – and other nations will yield to China’s pressure.” And they should be scared, because Pillsbury is right, but wrong and right again.

Pillsbury describes what he calls ‘The Hundred Year Marathon’. The Marathon is, according to the Ying Pao aka China’s Hawk faction, a multigenerational plan to attain global superiority economically with cultural, diplomatic, and military dominance not far behind. China will be the glorious beneficiary of this plan while the United States of America will continue to sink into the background of nations having lost its superpower status. China intends to accomplish this fearsome feat by employing the nine elements of the Marathon, listed below:

1. Induce complacency to avoid alerting your opponent.
2. Manipulate your opponent’s advisers.
3. Be patient – for decades, or longer – to achieve victory.
4. Steal your opponent’s ideas and technology for strategic purposes.
5. Military might is not the critical factor for winning a long-term competition.
6. Recognize that the hegemon will take extreme, even reckless action to retain its dominant position.
7. Never lose sight of shi.
8. Establish and employ metrics for measuring your status relative to other potential challengers.
9. Always be vigilant to avoid being encircled or deceived by others.

Gutsy news and gusty predictions I see. Not only does Pillsbury claim that China, the ever faithful friend and economic ally of America, intends to supplant the USA, he claims that China is using explicitly hostile measures to accomplish it! But is there any proof to those claims, or proof even of motive and desire for such a place? Pillsbury doesn’t wait for covert Sinophiles to derail the discussion and immediately proclaims proof for all these provocative claims. Let’s begin with motive.

For starters Pillsbury claims that the primary desire of the people of China is not the proclamation of freedom, democracy, and human rights, nor the general triumph of liberalism in the world. He claims what the Chinese people crave most, peasant and elite alike, is the uplifting of China as a power in its own right, as the great sovereign of East Asia that it has been so many times before. But this time the Chinese want to expand their hegemony world wide! They want a Chinese world, with a dominant Chinese culture and a dominant Chinese language. They want the 21st century to be theirs.

To call this motive ambitious would be an understatement, but to call it sinister would not. But is it true? Yes and no.

Like Pillsbury I enjoy the study of history. Like Pillsbury I think that the past shows us the solutions to problems of the present. And like Pillsbury I know the history of the Chinese. And I don’t necessarily agree with him. I think his extremely aggressive pro-American perspective blinds him to the subtleties of the Chinese position.

First consider history. China has at least 2500 years of well-recorded history, perhaps much more if current archaeological digs are successful. This has given China a penchant for patience and the long view. Now China has historically been the hegemon of its world. It has lorded over east Asia in ever sense and has enjoyed respect worthy of its hegemonic status. Neighbors didn’t alternate between bouts of power and lack thereof, they alternated between paying tribute and not paying tribute, depending on the strength of their nation and the weakness of the dynasty in power. China has always dominated the picture.

But during this hegemony China has always been extremely measured in its attitudes. Take the Koreans. China has dominated the various Korean kingdoms for hundreds of years, and China has certainly had a powerful cultural influence on the small peninsular country. Sometimes this influence was bullish, at other times it was soft, but it was always there. However, did they try to absorb them into the nation outright? Despite countless opportunities China has not.

Some might say that I misjudge China here, for China is vast and did not get that way by Han colonization alone. China stretches from Urumqi to Lhasa to Guangzhou to Manchuria. How would they attain these lands if not by force? For that again, we must turn our eyes to Chinese history for it will further enlighten us as to the question of Chinese ambitions. Under the Han people China very rarely goes conquering abroad. The Chinese priority has always been unification of the North China plain, the integration of geopolitically necessary locations, and the maintenance of stability. That is all. The bulk of China’s many conquests have been undertaken when China was under the control of a stronger foreign invader. For example, the Mongols expanded China under the Yuan dynasty far beyond the traditional Han or Jin dynasty borders, and the Manchus were responsible almost entirely for the modern China borders.

This is not to say that China isn’t aggressive, that it isn’t ambitious, or that it doesn’t want the 21st century to be a Chinese one. It absolutely does. What it means is that the Chinese don’t look at hegemony the same the West does.

Pillsbury focuses on the Spring and Autumn Annals as a source for Ying Pai inspiration and he’s right to do so. But I don’t think it’s lost on the Ying Pai hawks that the modern day isn’t the era of Warring States. The nature of the game has changed. The Warring States period provides timeless truths as to human nature and political governance to be certain, but it fails to deliver an appropriate mentality for modern dominance. The Chinese have clued into that.

The Chinese see that the only way forward for them is through cooperation. Cooperation given freely, cooperation given fully, cooperation undertaken now. That’s why the Chinese reach out to every nation on the planet and attempt to win them over with money and quaint Chinese culture. It’s not because they want to convert the world in their image. Unlike the Americans, the Chinese know that the whole world does not care to be Chinese. They want to spread out and cooperate because they know that’s the only way for them to survive. They must start offering win-win solutions everywhere.

This recalibrated idea of hegemony is Kryptonite to Pillsbury hypothesis, but only because he overextends himself in thinking that China wants to be the new America. China wants to be the new China, the restored China, but not the new America. Once we correct this by, at the very least, assuming we don’t fully know Chinese intentions we find the work is a veritable treasure trove of Chinese strategic thought.

Consider the first of nine elements in China’s Marathon plan: Induce complacency to avoid alerting the opponent. This is a classic Chinese maxim and is employed near universally, especially in business. The Chinese always seek to manipulate the thoughts and perceptions of their opponents, always. They only risk betting on outright confrontation when they’re sure they can win. This has filled the Chinese people with a kind of guile that extends to every field of their activity. In business they are always attentive not to marketing their own business but of manipulating the perceptions of their competitors. In science their institutions are notoriously opaque. And on the national-strategic scale they are extremely careful to hide their actions, always wishing to be thought of as non-threatening, non-hostile, strictly neutral. The entire Chinese foreign policy of non-intervention is oriented around this maxim.

Again, this is to be expected. The origin of the maxim reaches back into the depths of not only the Warring States period but into every other major period of turmoil and civil war that the Chinese remember. The Qin were always careful to mold alliances to the benefit of other parties while hiding their own goal of total hegemonic dominance. Liu Bei, future Emperor of the Kingdom of Shu Han, was always careful to tip toe around the mighty Prime Minister of the Han Empire, Cao Cao. His greatest fear was that his own ambition be found out and exposed, for he knew that would spell enormous risk at the least and rapid death at the worst. So Liu Bei bided his time, waiting patiently, ultimately overcoming the mighty Cao Cao at the epic Battle of Red Cliff. Shortly afterwards, employing the same principles, he stunned his former ally Wu and seized Jing province in a stunning act of boldness and strategic forethought. Such stories litter Chinese history. It should be no surprise that their foreign policy is full of such attitudes.

The second element of the Marathon plan reflects the spirit of the first. The Chinese have maintained large empires and bureaucracies for thousands of years and know full well that the most powerful players are often the advisers. The advisers advise, they hold influence, and they assist in the practical implementation of almost any plan. China has seen advisers run amok many times, as with the Eunuchs and the tyrant Dong Zhuo, or the usurpers to the Kingdom of Wei in the Sima clan. So they have made enormous investments into encouraging American foreign policy thought in specific directions. The result was 20 years of China naivete where countless professional analysts wrote China off as a simple Panda instead of a cunning Dragon. China continues to manipulate public perceptions across the world by utilizing adviser corrupting institutions such as the Confucius Institute. They come to teach Chinese bringing bags of money with them. And they do not hesitate to use these funds when they deem it in the Chinese interest to silence critics.

This leads us to the third element, the most critical one of them all if China is to overcome American hegemony: The necessity of patience. In the 1970s China was still recovering from successive catastrophes: Famine, military conflict with the Soviet Union, multiple embargoes, the catharsis of its own academic class. And yet China dreamed. It’s conflict with the Soviet Union, which China initiated, was an expression of its ambition. China had always intended to be a key player in world politics. It longed for its former status as the hegemon of East Asia. It could not tolerate its subordinate position to Moscow. So for 25 years it waited patiently in preparation for a turn away from Moscow and towards wherever else it could go, ultimately leading to the American-Chinese alliance under Nixon. The Hundred Year Marathon is simply another expression of this patience as China intends to climb all the way back to the top to what they feel is their natural place in the hierarchy of nations.

Again, this patience should not surprise anyone. Given Chinese culture and history all these qualities seem obvious in hindsight. China has always taken the long view of anything. Their behavior toward the valuation of the Yuan shows extensive foresight, their infrastructure projects, though often failing, show them reaching out into the future. This is the nature of China. Again we could look back to their history for further examples. Consider how the Chinese overcame the Xiongnu, as I described in previous discussions on the Chinese idea of hegemony, Tianxia. China, after being subordinated by the Xiongnu, spent a hundred years slowly reversing the situation until finally the Xiongnu ended up a vassal of the Chinese Emperor. What they Chinese lost in blood they regained by patience. China’s rise in the 20th and 21st century has been considered rapid, but there is still much farther to go. China doesn’t want to merely grow. It wants to grow the best, to be the most advanced, to enjoy the pinnacle of success as has been historically proper to it.

For this reason China employs the fourth element of the strategy, to steal the opponents ideas and technologies and utilize them for strategic success. China under Mao spent 25 years, longer if you count their years resisting the Kuomintang, under the thumb of the Soviet Union. Why? To gain their support for certain, but moreso to gain their technology, their culture, their understanding. The Soviet Union singlehandedly built Communist China in the years after the Nationalist expulsion to Taiwan. Eventually the Soviets caught wind of Chinese intentions and this lead to the dramatic escalations in Xinjiang and Manchuria between the two opposing red armies. After siphoning as much technology and cultural know-how from the Soviets as they could they began to look for a new benefactor, first to secure their position and security and second to learn from in return.

I don’t need to tell anyone how that turned out. Commercially and financially China is a phenomenally powerful country, second only to the USA and to the city of London on the financial front. They have learned the American lessons expertly, relying on the World Bank and the IMF to give them useful financial advice. The modern Chinese strategy of manipulating the Yuan and using state-owned enterprises in virtually every sensitive market area? A Western strategy, coming directly from the Western financial elite. They handed it to them on a platter with a note: If you want to beat America economically, follow this formula. Central to this formula was the importation of manufacturing from America especially into China under favorable terms. Why? Because it was the most effective way to gain access to decades of costly research for minimal cost.

Notice that countless Chinese manufacturing areas aren’t turning a profit. The state uses subsidies and runs its state owned enterprises (SOEs) at a financial loss. They do this to crush foreign manufacturing competition and to bring home massive amounts of foreign-developed technology. And the program has been a fascinating success. Consider that Iphones, some of the most advanced commercial electronics in the world, are constructed in China and not America. Its not because of labor. Its because China will do whatever it takes to bring these advanced technology companies to the country where they can pilfer the technology at will. Remember also that China has virtually no intellectual property or patent law enforcement. The market is a free for all! And that’s how the Chinese like it at this stage, the growing stage. All the while China engages in extensive industrial and economic espionage as well. There is a not-so-secret cyber war going on between Chinese and American hackers as the Chinese try to probe American systems and, where able, extract sensitive information. For example the Joint Strike Fighter program, aka the F-35 Lightning, has had its data pilfered multiple times. And that’s America’s most expensive military R&D program to date.

Notice that nowhere have I mentioned the prioritization of military force. While the nuclear age makes conventional superiority somewhat redundant the Chinese disincentive that kind of violence even more. They know that they could not engage the military of America and be victorious and worse, the declaration of open hostility between the Americans and the Chinese would constitute the immediate encirclement of China and a blockade by sea, the great Chinese strategic nightmare. Peace is a requirement for them. This does not mean military preparations are not important to the Chinese, for they are. Only that they are not the priority or the critical factor in the outcome of this drawn-out battle.

On the military front the Chinese have been keen to develop a number of mobile weapon systems to counter America superiority. The Chinese military perspective is, in one sense, similar to the Russian one: Build maximally low cost counter-weapons to high cost enemy armament. An expression of this could be seen in the Serbian Army’s counter to the American bombing campaign: They would build tank, artillery, and anti-aircraft shells out of wood, then stick tractor and truck engines in them. The total cost would be a few hundred dollars. The Americans would come in with their fancy fighters and their fancy weapons and drop $300,000 guided bombs on the targets. The result was a small mobile force financially bleeding the worlds most powerful airforce, and this contributed to the American move to target almost strictly civilian, commercial, and industrial infrastructure. The Chinese are engaged in the same game, except their targets are much larger. The Chinese have designed what they call ‘Assassin’s Mace’ weapons. And Assassin’s Mace is an extremely low cost weapon that acts as a force multiplier against something more powerful and expensive. For example the Chinese designed a great American naval fear, the anti-carrier missile. Each missile costs a few million dollars but should a single one strike an American aircraft carrier the Americans will lose a ship worth billions upon billions and which is not readily replaceable. Another such tool is the anti-satellite missile, which the Chinese notoriously tested last decade against their own satellite. Both of these weapons are low cost relative to the targets they destroy and both are mobile and can be utilized by roadside launchers. This makes them almost impossible to find. Clearly they are no strangers to military innovation.

While the Chinese have developed these fearsome, specifically anti-American military technologies they are under no illusions that using them is a good idea. Chinese history teaches time and time and again that a hegemon will go to drastic, desperate lengths to preserve its position at the top of the hierarchy. And in a nuclear age no one can afford desperate action, especially desperation in the USA. This desperation is becoming increasingly obvious today as the USA makes riskier interventions every year on increasingly flimsy justifications while suffering increasing amounts of societal destabilization. Asabiyyah has been eroded internally and intentionally, so the American state responds with kicking its hegemonic role into overdrive. How else would the USA find itself in both Georgia and the Ukraine, both clear Russian areas of interest? How else would it find itself virtually funding the Umbrella Revolution in Hong Kong when such a measure will obviously put the Chinese on edge and invoke a response? The Americans are clearly desperate to maintain their power, so all competitors must dance nimbly around them or risky catastrophic nuclear annihilation. And not just of themselves; of the whole world. So we have come to the place the Chinese fear most.

Finally we reach the final three elements: Awareness of Shi, the use of metrics maximally, and the avoiding of encirclement and deception. All relate to one another in a curious way. First is the concept of Shi which is critical yet unspoken of in the West. Shi is the political current so to speak, the current trend, the rising and falling of forces. I suspect it has a lot to do with the structure of the Chinese language, the idea of Qi or energy and the constant flow of information this way. The concept is excellent and has incredible amounts of utility. However Shi can be modified; All actions by all players affect it to varying degree. It is like each actor is walking in a very shallow, very sensitive creek. The movement of various actors will affect the flow of the water as it continues downstream. This is why metrics are so important. Every possible metric needs to be recorded, quantified and review. Maximal knowledge will reveal the maximal number of opportunities to influence Shi in the favor of one’s own party.  The Americans, for example, are experts at manipulating Shi via their propaganda and information warfare. They can create rebellion from almost nothing and rapidly turn small scale protests into full on riots. Always though Shi remains a somewhat impersonal force, open to influence but never control. The American failing is their constant seeking of control, which is doomed to failure.

This brings us to the final element, the need to avoid encirclement and deception. This is the traditional America weakness. The Americans all too often see what they want to see. Their foreign policy is best described as ‘You create your own reality’. Take the Ukraine. The Americans figure if they say enough times that Russia is fighting it will be the truth, or at least everyone will believe it. This approach leads to them getting deceived repeatedly as we saw in Debaltsevo, as we saw with Putin’s rise, as we see with continued Syrian survival, and as we see with countless other small events that fail to go the way of the Americans.

In contrast the Chinese fear this most of all, for wishful thinking leads to being deceived, and to be deceived leads to encirclement, and encirclement leads to catastrophic loss. This contributes to their love and devotion to metrics. Everything needs to be measured as accurately as possible; for if we do not measure it how do we know we aren’t being deceived? Only by avoiding deception and encirclement and outlasting the Hegemon as it makes increasingly foolish moves can the Marathon be completed successfully.

Having touched and explained each of the elements I want to move towards the American response. Pillsbury insists that America is unaware of all these Chinese ploys, of the games they play, and the Chinese suspicion of America’s counter encircling strategies constitutes projection. I think the exact opposite. In fact I suspect that Pillsbury is using the same deceptive counter-tactics to implore his audience to action and strengthen his rhetoric. After all if America really is altruistic in its policies towards China then China has utterly betrayed it, and actions according to Pillsbury’s prescription are necessary right away!

But of course this is silly. America is the hegemon of the world. It did not become hegemon by being altruistic, and Pillsbury must know he is presenting an intentionally false picture of the American worldview. He does this several times throughout the book, applying a kind of generosity to the American state that it simply doesn’t have. The Americans cultivate the illusion of generosity, of virtue, of freedom and kindness and all the good things in life. But in practice their state practices the opposite, leaving only chaos and destruction and suffering and pain in its wake. But always it does this in a specific fashion, in an orderly fashion, with intention and care.

Consider the Chinese fear of encirclement. Pillsbury laments that no measures are being undertaken to halt it, but this is a barefaced lie on his part. The Americans are presently attempting the ultimate encirclement gesture via the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement that specifically excludes China while uniting East and South-East Asia with North America in a vast common market that explicitly favors American economic domination. In the modern world strict military alliances are not needed. Economic extra-constitutional agreements like this signify alliance in all but name. Were this agreement ratified it would lock East Asia into the American sphere and cripple China which needs their growing economics to grow its own. A similar move is being played to encircle Russia with the Trans-Atlantic partnership. And of course America is masterful in its use of Shi, constantly creating or manipulating circumstances to suit larger geopolitical needs. Nobody does it better than the Americans.

We must also consider the Ying Pais themselves, the faction that most heavily follows and supports the elements of the marathon. Their strength derives direct from the over imperialism of the Hegemon, of America. When America is quiet Ying Pai strength diminishes. When America is loud and aggressive, as it is now, Ying Pai influence explodes and China changes course accordingly. A pacifistic American regime could easily instigate major reform in China by simply backing off, making the Ying Pai and their hawkish rhetoric seem foolish. But obviously America will never do that, although Pillsbury portrays exactly those qualities in America.

Clearly Pillsbury’s notion of the innocent America reeks to high heaven of the same Chinese deceit and manipulation that he deplores in his book. Of course it is natural to use it, it is the way for those who receive that excellent education into the nature of political method and life. And that’s what the this book is: A glimpse into the Chinese political paradigm, and a largely accurate one at that. That Pillsbury uses the very techniques he laments is testimony to that.

I will say this: China definitely has a Hundred Year Marathon, but the outcome of the Marathon will be decided within the next 5 years. It is our collective curse and blessing to live in such exciting times!

The post Reviewing China’s Hundred Year Marathon appeared first on Social Matter.