« The Pursuit of Happiness by Richard Sale | Main | Lights in the Darkness - TTG »

18 November 2015

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Brunswick

Yup, what you said, although,

I'm not sure it's an actual Plan, but more a case of mindset and opportunism, reacting to events, and throwing gas on fires.

Bandolero

ORIGIN

"Please convince me I am in error."

The fact that you seem to miss in the picture is the rise of China.

In the year 2000, the US was the one and only true leader of the world, leading with great distance, economically, militarily, even culturally. There was no real challenge to the US dominance over the world. There were very few countries in the world which did not accept global US hegemony, and they all were small, weak and poor, like Iran, Iraq, Syria, North Korea, Cuba and so on.

The following 15 years of wars changed that. While the US was occupied with devastating small opposing powers in the middle east to serve Israel's wishes - and even neglected infrastructure investments in the U.S., a real global challenge to US world hegemony has risen: China and the China-led drive for a multipolar world. Economic output of China measured in GDP on PPP basis has already surpassed that of the US and in terms of GDP on actual exchange rates China is also catching up. China has managed to cultivate a set of subtile allies, some of whom are quite powerful, like the BRICS, ASEAN and a newly expanded SCO. At the same time China has also built so strong economic ties with some major US allies, see as prime example South Korea, but also Japan, Australia, and Germany, that some of these US allies seem more verbal than real US allies now. One may say, that the US is still the greatest power on earth, and it's likely correct, but what is very clear, is that the edge with what the US led has clearly become smaller in the last 15 years, economically, culturally - think of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo - and even militarily the Chinese-Russian-alliance seems to have catched up a bit.

So, if the aim was to break US hegemony over the world, neglect infrastructure and other public investments in the US to weaken the US, and facilitate the rapid rise of a major foreign challenge to US hegemony, than the CABAL policy of spreading chaos has served the US well.

tjfxh

Pepe Escobar has been writing about the strategy of destabilization for some time and has a book on it, too — The Empire of Chaos. Part of this strategy is the current American "lead from behind" strategy of getting others to do the dirty work, on the cheap if possible.

It's become clear to the US leadership that voters don't want to expend blood and treasury on anything that they cannot see accruing immediate benefit to themselves. So they have to be keep afraid rather than greedy for domination.

What you have missed is the endgame, which is partitioning Russia and China into smaller "democratic" states so that they can never challenge US global hegemony in the future. "Democracy" is really an American euphemism of plutonomy, and "freedom" means freedom for US business and finance to operate under rules that America chooses, that is, the people that run America.

These folks are contemplating 1000 year empire with their descents in the seats of power.

Now that Russia and China are aware of the plan, we'll see where it goes.

What could go wrong?

FB Ali

Origin,

Much of your description of events is correct. The question is whether there are any other possible explanations for these developments. I do not know the answer, but I think that question is worth considering. Especially by people who have much better knowledge of the US.

As for Bandolero's objection re China, I don't think it's conclusive. After all, the US has just recently turned towards China, and started putting a "crescent" around it. (Though I agree with him that so far this has not worked too successfully).

What I find mind-boggling is the way public discourse in the US, especially in the media, is so totally 'brainwashed'. I don't think it was this bad under the Soviets or in Nazi Germany. It is this kind of thing that enables one to consider possibilities such as yours; after all, if the bulk of the population of such a vast, diverse country can be so lobotomized, anything is possible.

Dominic

Have read this but have no idea who the author is. As noted before me, Pepe Escobar has been talking of this for a good while and Empire of Chaos a good term for it as well as his book title.

Dominic

OK, figured it out, ORIGIN is the author. Confusing, or at least confusing to me. Is this from a regular I've not noted before?

DeWitt

Very interesting thesis, Origin. I am wondering how this thesis maps closer to home; Central and South America from the 70s through today. Interesting how the supposed danger of communism in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, etc. seamlessly morphed into the 'War on Drugs' with similar results. I am reminded of this today due to the re-emergence of Duane Clarridge, member of the Iran-Contra cabal, who ordered the mining of Nicaraguan harbors, now engaged as Ben Carson's foreign policy advisor.

ralph

loved the article, just spent 7 months in Vietnam. how did that debacle fit into the authors narrative? i do not understand how the endless war in MENA will end up any differently than Vietnam with total defeat for America. simply said if we had done nothing in Vietnam, we would all be better off. i would suggest the same situation exists in MENA better to withdraw military involvement and offer humanitarian aid

Bill H

Origin,
How do you fit America's increasing irrelevance in South and Central America, an area once totally domnated by us, into this picture?

rjj

RE chaos:

have no way of knowing if this is on the Wurlitzer yet.

Honduras detains Syrians bound for U.S. with doctored Greek passports

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/19/us-france-shooting-honduras-idUSKCN0T72UE20151119#wPTcYd2xsEX9JyxT.99

and then what? .... and THEN what? ... and so on.

VietnamVet

Origin,

I believe that your narrative is basically true. The contradiction that is best seen is the fact that the Western citizens are being killed by radicalized Islamists but the White House places a higher priority on removing Assad and refuses to join Russia to eliminate the Islamic State. My position is that since the end of the draft, the ruling elite are contemptuous of the people. Propaganda, surveillance and torture are necessities for control. Endless wars are intentional. The foot soldiers are neo-Nazis and the Jihadists. The new world war makes money, assures promotion, spreads chaos and keeps Israel secure.

William R. Cumming

This post is a wonder and many thanks for its existence. I have studied Washignton and it minions since the 1st grade and now 73 and still studying Washington and trying to understand and learn about its minions.

To some extent US FP is like SITUATION ETHICS with no real ethics or overarching strategy or catechism.

The long wars, hot and cold, with the dictators caused the US to learn many lessons from its opponents mostly bad ones. We became our enemies in many ways. And now the contradictions are just too great to bridge or even paper over.

We [US] may be about to prove that government of the people, by the people, and for the people does not last because of its internal contradictions. Even David Hume and Adam Smith and Marx may have accurately focused on greed destroying CAPITALISM.

Time will tell!

Ghost ship

There is an alternative - no conspiracy, just a cock-up on a truly monumental/global scale. A conspiracy would require too many people with disparate positions but common objectives to come together to make it work and could not be kept secret.
The current situation was born out of hubris, arrogance, ignorance, incompetence, delusion, infantilism, and vanity among the Washington Borg that has not been challenged by the subservient MSM.
These characteristics are all quite visible in this article from The Washington Post:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/as-france-seeks-a-grand-coalition-obama-is-wary-of-allying-with-russia/2015/11/18/c2f98030-8e1d-11e5-baf4-bdf37355da0c_story.html

euclidcreek

The creation of a Muslim state (Bosnia) could be useful for the destabilization of Europe. Why did Germany push so hard for its creation? Have wondered if there is anything to the story the US flew Mujahadeen and Chechen fighters into Bosnia to help bring about that states creation.

David Lentini

Actually, the idea of the so-called "chaos strategy" has been around for awhile. Personally, while I think the idea makes some sense (if one should never let a crisis go to waste, then one should start crises as often as possible), we should be wary of making (evil) geniuses out of fools.

Since none of the "masterminds" of our failure to stop 9/11, invade Afghanistan and Iraq, and start our "Long March" of the various "color revolutions" (although they seem to end in the same color, black), the sad fact may well be that we have nothing but serial failures by people who are deluded into thinking the they truly control the world. So, since the truly deluded (and the intellectually and morally corrupt) cannot be relied upon to examine their own failures, nor can we for some reason bring them to account for those failures, nor will anyone even replace them, we see first one disaster that must be addressed with another disaster, and so on . . . . Otherwise, someone will have to be held to account (intellectually or criminally) and "we can't let that happen."

The same thesis of the never-ending lunacy and stupidity can be applied to modern economics as well.

How can this happen? I think the answer is as old as humanity: the concentration and abuse of power. The mechanisms that would otherwise have forced an accounting have all become corrupted by the concentration of ownership and control of our politicians and media. So, the strategy is less about a conscious plan to destabilize the world as it is the plan to retard the stabilization of the world for selfish reasons.

I've been wondering if America will soon be the 21st Century Carthage.

Charles Michael

Origin, the author, is at last opening his eyes.
Mine were opened during the very sidelined conflict in Sri Lanka, I have to find time and energy (going in my dusty files) to tell the story. It looks old and past but in my educated opinion it is still an untold case study.
Teaser, you will find your favorites: Hilary Clinton, David Milliband (Blair M of FO) and Bernard (R2P)Kouchner, ex Gauleiter of Kosovo.

I really have to do it, and properly, it involve, 28 years of war on terror, 120.000 deads and self styled internationnal community meddlings.

A. Pols

Sometimes I think in conspiratorial terms about the seeming perversely contradictory aspects of American foreign policy as described in this essay and I think then that all of this is deliberate and part of a fiendish plot. But most of the time I think the policies of both subverting and supporting various actors, to all work at cross purposes, are a reflection of the seriously schizoid character of our national culture. If you look at a range of things being done by govt. both national and regional, you see many examples of policies working at cross purposes. Some of the babble coming from officials, press, and public intellectuals is loaded with cross talk and one realizes that these points of view represent constituencies who all end up "getting their way" to an extent and the result is chaotic. Does this sound muddled? I don't mean it to be.

paulj

"A conspiracy would require too many people with disparate positions but common objectives to come together to make it work and could not be kept secret."

Hardly a secret, there have been books written about it, for example TRAGEDY and HOPE by Carroll Quigley, although that book only covers events up to the 1960's. Great insights into how power gets what it wants.

Anyway, it wouldn't be a conspiracy it would be a plan.

Herodotus

Me? I like to keep things simple and doing such normally screws up Murphy. So while I find this writing intriguing and very well thought out. I rather refer to this strategy as the "Who's On First" strategy. There is a piece of me that really wants to believe that some where in the academic bowels of the NSC lies the Marx Brothers.

MEP

It appears you have given the subject some serious "Ponder Time" Origin. Hope to see you again here soon. I'm glad to see that the connections are being made and that the links are emerging from the smothering insulation blanket of the "Conspiracy Theory" label. The fact that Clarridge is Carson's FP advisor is chilling. Another old operator has recently emerged from deep in the shadows without a peep from the U.S. MSM. So many of these Cold War operators where connected in the past. I do not think it is coincidence that they seem to have 9 lives.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/nugan-hand-bank-mystery-michael-hand-found-living-in-the-united-states-20151107-gkthas.html

I can't help but wonder how many other "assumed dead" are lurking in those same shadows. Always enjoy my "reading time" trips to SST. I'll take bets that any attempt at extradition of Michael Hand will be used as tinder to warm the brandy.

William Fitzgerald

Origin,

I'm afraid that I can't convince you that you're in error because I don't think you are. I can add another item, which didn't seem to make sense at the time, to your de-stabilization list. The proposed basing of missiles in former Warsaw Pact countries under the absurd pretense of protecting Europe from a missile attack by Iran.

Regarding de-stabilization of the areas around The southern and western periphery of Russia, I wonder whether there is a longer range goal of the balkanization of Russia itself. A fragmented Russia, with the natural resources of a very large part of the Asian continent, would be easy pickings and that which is broken asunder will not be put back together.

WPFIII

FND

A root cause of our nation's arrogance today I believe is the never ending narratives that come out of WWII. There are so many conventional wisdoms that everyone, including our politicians believe. One of those is that a mistake was made to not enter WWII earlier, and that the America First movement, a movement to keep us out of the war was a bad thing. Because things turned out so well for the US after WWII, few really try to think it through. What if we had entered the war before Germany attacked the Soviet Union? Would Germany still have attacked the Soviet Union? Would we and Britain have been the sole enemy of Germany? Would we have had to bear the brunt of the German army instead of the Soviets? Would we have taken 10 million military dead instead of 300K? Would the war have not ended until the atom bomb was perfected and used on Germany? Personally, I think we should thank God for the America First movement and the fact that they kept us out of the war until attacked by Japan.

Matthew

A root cause might just be desire for power. See https://lobelog.com/the-mindless-militarism-of-max-boot/

Constantly shifting of support to different Iraqi factions is designed to prevent the emergence of a functioning Iraqi state.

No wonder the Borg is so frightened of Putin.

tim s

Overall this rings true. However, I am curious how you can state that Israel is to be contained by the PNAC plans when a significant number of the PNAC members are Jewish? Do you conclude that the PNAC deems Israel to be a threat?

rjj

"Conspiracy" is a question quencher - like "cynic" or mis- and anti-whatever [the "whatever" varies with place and time].

Chaos/destabilization is as much a part the statecraft toolkit as force. See Arthashastra (ca. 150 BCE) for the how-tos of weakening powerful neighbors and maintaining dependency in clients.

Looking for answers to "WTF?" came across Keynes' chapter "The State of Opinion" [at link]. His language and tone make for a slog but the effort pays off. Snips below link.

https://archive.org/stream/revisionoftreaty00keynuoft#page/n15/mode/2up

[snips]

"It is the method of modern statesmen to talk as much folly as the public demand and to practise no more of it than is compatible with what they have said ...

A preference for truth or for sincerity as a method may be ... inconsistent, in politics, with practical good.

....

...there are, in the present times, two opinions; not, as in former ages, the true and the false, but the outside and the inside; the opinion of the public voiced by the politicians and the newspapers, and the opinion of the politicians, the journalists and the civil servants, upstairs and backstairs and behindstairs, expressed in limited circles. In time of war it became a patriotic duty that the two opinions should be as different as possible; and some seem to think it so still."

[/snip]

EXCEPT THAT statesmen are out of production - the few remaining relics have been unpersoned and replaced with the functional equivalents of political commissars.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

April 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    
Blog powered by Typepad