sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

History teaches us that it’s the waning superpowers, edged-off the geopolitical stage by more dynamic rivals, that the world’s small and vulnerable states have most reason to fear, writes Chris Trotter

Public Policy / opinion
History teaches us that it’s the waning superpowers, edged-off the geopolitical stage by more dynamic rivals, that the world’s small and vulnerable states have most reason to fear, writes Chris Trotter
xi-putin

By Chris Trotter*

"Time is speeding up," says Wigram Capital’s Rodney Jones. His reference is to the speed at which the geopolitical situation is being transformed by the actions of Russia and China. Specifically, Jones is alluding to the presence of the Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, in the capitals of the South Pacific and the prospect of at least 10 of the region’s micro-states being drawn into a “China-Pacific Island Countries Common Development Vision” by Beijing. As Jones forcefully reminds us, the “generally benign strategic environment” in which Prime Minister Helen Clark blithely located New Zealand more than 20 years ago, is long gone.

The Chinese Government, sensing a measure of disarray in US foreign policy, has not lost any time taking advantage of the global confusion and alarm caused by the Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine. Looking past the ardent demonstrations of support for the Ukrainian Government’s resolute defence of its territory, Beijing has calculated that this enthusiasm will fade as the economic consequences of the war begin to be felt by the peoples of Europe and North America – not to mention Australians and New Zealanders.

It is all very well for President Joe Biden to pledge his country’s military intervention should China invade Taiwan, the real trick is making Beijing believe him. Why would they, when Washington has been so careful to ensure that its own forces, and those of other Nato members, do not come into contact with Russian military units. After all, China’s nuclear arsenal is no less apocalyptic in its potential than Russia’s. Biden’s monosyllabic tough-talk could only have been a bluff, and the White House’s immediate walking-back of his bellicose pledge into the relative diplomatic safety of “strategic ambiguity” proved it.

Not only that, but Biden’s resort to bluff can only serve to deepen Beijing’s conviction that the United States no longer feels confident that its military strength is equal to the challenge of the emerging Eurasian duumvirate. In this regard, the meeting in Tokyo of “The Quad” (USA, Japan, Australia, India) may not have delivered the geostrategic warning to Beijing that the Americans intended.

Anthony Albanese is not Scott Morrison, and the stance adopted by the new Labor Government of Australia seems likely to be considerably less belligerent than its predecessor. If the global economy continues to weaken, it is also quite likely that the folly of equipping Australia with eight nuclear-powered submarines will be postponed indefinitely.

The announcement of the trilateral AUKUS (Australia, United Kingdom, United States) Pact in September 2021 is unlikely to have impressed China’s military leadership, most particularly since the US’s most powerful Quad allies, Japan and India, were not persuaded to join. To the Communist Party of China, the Anglophone AUKUS will have all the appearance of an absurd imperial anachronism. Once again, the impression conveyed is of a flailing and failing United States.

Of much more interest to the Chinese will be the reaction of the Indian Government to the Russo-Ukrainian War. India’s ties to Russia are strong, making it a less than vehement supporter of the West’s ruinous sanctions regime. Nor can New Delhi be insensible to the potential strategic challenges arising out of the Sino-Russian “entente” of 4 February 2022.

The Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, will be observing with keen interest President Vladimir Putin’s ability to withstand the economic warfare unleashed upon his country by the West. Should the Russian Federation’s military forces begin to gain the upper-hand in Ukraine, and if China’s financial support renders the sanctions regime bearable, then Modi and India’s political class will have some serious thinking to do.

Does it make sense for a non-European nation like India to be perceived as some sort of Western lap-dog? Especially when it could, instead, become a crucial part of the Eurasian superpower fast emerging as the nemesis of the imperialist West?

If India goes, can the oil-rich nations of the Middle East be far behind?

All too aware of the energy vulnerability of the United States – not to mention the acute sensitivity of the American electorate to ‘rising gasoline prices at the pump’ – some US legislators are already attempting to throw their weight around on the question of how much oil the member states of OPEC should be sucking out of the ground. Threats of passing legislation allowing the United States Government to seize the American-based assets of “uncooperative” OPEC states are unlikely to impress the Saudis or their Arab allies. The defection of key oil producers to “Eurasia”, and the end of the US dollar as a fiat currency, would also spell the end of American/Western hegemony.

Even if Eurasia fails to materialise as the new global hegemon, the continued global dominance of the United States still cannot be taken for granted. Beijing will be paying as much attention as Moscow to the outcome of the 2022 mid-term congressional elections. Most political scientists agree that the chances of the Democratic Party retaining control of the House of Representatives and the Senate are close to zero. But, if the Republicans come surging back, then the potential for serious internal disorder breaking out in the United States is very high. Not only can a house divided against itself not hope to stand, but it also cannot possibly bend the rest of the world to its will.

With all of the above potentialities for Western disaster in play, it is not difficult to understand why, all over the world, the Chinese are actively probing for points of weakness. The South Pacific has clearly been identified by the geopoliticians in Beijing as an area ripe for the insertion of Chinese money and influence.

There will be those in the New Zealand foreign affairs community who respond to this probing with all the flatulent bombast of the pith-helmeted imperialists of yesteryear. These are the armchair warriors who are currently urging the Labour Government to tell the Chinese to “Clear orf out of ‘our’ backyard!” As if, like the Russians, we regard nearby, supposedly independent, nation states as falling within our sphere of influence.

Fortunately, however, there are also foreign affairs and trade specialists who understand that ‘national security’ is not simply about military force and the ability to project it aggressively. No nation can call itself secure if its economy is falling apart, and it people falling into poverty. As this country’s largest trading partner and key export market, China is not a country New Zealand should be in any hurry to infuriate and/or alienate. And, there are plenty of Australian politicians and businesspeople who feel the same way.

New Zealand’s “generally benign strategic environment” has not been undermined by the Pacific’s rising superpower. History teaches us that it’s the waning superpowers, edged-off the geopolitical stage by more dynamic rivals, that the world’s small and vulnerable states have most reason to fear.


*Chris Trotter has been writing and commenting professionally about New Zealand politics for more than 30 years. He writes a weekly column for interest.co.nz. His work may also be found at http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

107 Comments

The economic threat of business from every democratic society withdrawing from China instantly is greater than anything Biden can say.

You invade Taiwan then we will leave you to trade with India and Russia, all the best. 

Up
7

And in that event, reciprocally & concurrently leave India & Russia to trade only with China/each other.

Up
2

seems almost a suicidal approach, we are now reliant on China.

Everything is made in China, and that is the reason we havnt had inflation over the last 20 years. If we were to try and get everything we need elsewhere we are going to be exposed to crippling inflationary pressures.  

Up
10

That won't outweigh a consumer backlash.

Up
0

We are no more reliant on China than we were reliant on UK before they joined the EEC. Funnily enough, they both sold/sell us MGs to help pay for their imports from us!

Up
0

Re shoring manufacturing back home will gather pace as the Russians likely lose the Ukrainian war and this will give China a headache dealing with the consequential unemployment and highly restricted access to advanced technology. Yes China does have advanced technology some stolen from the west some homegrown but judging by the exodus form Hong Kong and China and the CCP's brutal treatment of Jack Ma and others will not be lost on others who may follow. China has still not been able to replicate Russian or US Jet engines and reverse engineering Russian technology in violation may not go down well with Russia post Putin and the growing global food shortage will impact China's food production which only supplies 70% of requirements so China's Manufacturing trade and food import needs should temper the appetite to follow Russia as a global pariah. There are serious questions over the stability of the 3 Gorges and other dams on the Yangtse and the monsoon season is due, already started in India and the dam levels already way above historical averages and yes the levels can be reduced quickly if the sluice gates are not damaged and can be opened causing downstream flooding - checkout Wuhan - pop 11 Million and a major industrial and agricultural region and consider the effects of major floods in the area and pray the dam holds. China may well find very shortly it needs real friends - Russia is stuffed, Iran - really and N Korea OMG. Chris do more detailed homework before you write off the US or Europe and ask yourself why so few from the west become refugees and flee to China/Russia/Iran/N Korea and why the flow in the other direction is significant?

Up
0

lol loosing are they...rofl

Up
0

In the same way everyone has withdrawn from buying gas & oil from Russia?

Up
4

Ikr?!

The global majority are totally unaware just how connected the world now HAS to be to supply all the wide array of raw material commodities to sustain 8 Billion, let alone the west in all its luxuries. Food and energy are essentials that not every country can supply itself with.  Wait until the global south start suffering mass starvation abiding by western sanctions under American duress...it's gonna get real.

Up
0

I see in Russia a failed state with a delusional nutter in charge trying to leave a legacy . The Russian army has surprised everyone with it's incompetence,  it's only the constant threat of nuclear weapons that prevents NATO from cleaning it up in a weekend. The only thing Putin has got right is that NATO is stronger and considerably so . As for China and its constant threats it should be taking note of Russias failings because its battle untested army probably would have a similar result to Russia , if it took on Taiwan. Their meddling in the Pacific is only taking advantage of the opportunity afforded by small nations requiring leverage they surely cannot be stupid enough to think that China will not be enslaving them or taking advantage of their resources. The constant ravings of the likes of trotter wishing the west harm and exaggerating faults becomes tiresome,  yes there are faults and weaknesses but I wish he would go live in Russia or, and ,china for a while preferably forever and they may appreciate his adulation for awhile until they to tire of it and find him appropriate lodgings .

Up
18

The problem with these smaller countries is they are often full of corruption and greed by those in power. China will take full advantage of this. You just hope they look at a place like Sri Lanka.

Up
6

Problem is they won't look at Sri Lanka. Too busy lining their own pockets.

Up
2

Like the Solomon Islands. Follow the money lent to the Solomon Islands  people, and grabbed by their politicians. As in Sri Lanka.

Up
0

Their meddling in the Pacific is only taking advantage of the opportunity afforded by small nations requiring leverage they surely cannot be stupid enough to think that China will not be enslaving them or taking advantage of their resources.

You would do well to acknowledge the foreign factions exporting their NZ derived profits which contribute to this debacle - Considering the full 2021, New Zealand recorded a current account cap of 20.2 billion, totaling 5.8 percent of its GDP - the shareholders of Australian owned banks operating in NZ are a good place to start.

Up
6

I see you have been overexposed to the MSM. Russia has cheap gas, excess food and a leader who has popular support. They have brought the EU to its knees begging Russia to allow them to end the sanctions. It turns out for majority of the world by population does not agree with Western MSM morality on this and given the option to pay more for oil to virtue signal and appease the US, they passed on it (how does this look any different to Western aggression, if your outside the West). Russia won the moment enough of OPEC refused to increase production. NATO can't join the war because the EU economy would collapse. In less important news the Ukrainian army has started routing after potentially lasting longer than the Russian expected.

Up
11

> EU [...] begging Russia to allow them to end the sanctions.

to what begging do you refer?

Up
5

The European leaders also urged Putin to engage in serious and direct negotiations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to end the fighting, the spokesperson said.

A Kremlin readout of the three-way call said the Russian leader affirmed “the openness of the Russian side to the resumption of dialogue”, without mentioning the possibility of direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. Link

Read urged as begged. Darghi, Macron and Scholz all calling Putin with no leverage asking for peace and getting rebuffed is a humiliation. Ukraine and Russia are not currently not able to agree on terms and everyone knows it. I think this is wishful thinking from EU leaders hoping Russia will show mercy because the US and Ukraine have said no.

Up
7

So it is your interpretation. I would argue that Putin is running out of modern weapons - large numbers to T62 / T64's are being sent to the front instead of T72's and T80's because they have older technology which is not reliant on components from the West (this is a clusterf**k in itself - who relies on components for essential military hardware from your potential enemy). Have you ever considered that the West is using Ukraine to bleed Russia before invading (after all according to Putin -  NATO was going to invade - as if NATO had any intention of actually invading) . 

Do I trust the US - no - they have the looney left and the rabid right - but I trust them more than Russia and / or China. If one thing is clear - the West overestimated Russia and it's military capabilities. Is China just a paper tiger as well?  I'm not saying that the Western military is omnipotent - just that nutters in power lead to bad outcomes. 

 

Up
7

Lol, T90s and soon T14s are the modern MBTs. I don't know what source this is from (Ukrainian social media)?  You will have to ask the Russians why they are not using the new stuff, they don't appear to need it but it might have saved some soldiers. This war appears to be mostly about the artillery and missiles anyway. You should be more interested in, is if Russia are going to be forced to use up all its Kinzhal on Ukraine? those are far more scary.

You don't have to trust anyone but you wont get any points from me for blindly believing in US imperialism (nations are going to have to start to look out for the themselves).

Up
8

 I seem to have struck a nerve. With reference to the T62's being deployed 

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-old-tanks-soviet-t62-vulberable-attack-…

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/05/25/the-russian-army-is-ru…

According to this article Russia only has @ 750-1000 T90's (all variants)

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t90.htm

and T14's - Russia may have 100. Russia simply can't afford more. 

Since that start of the war in Ukraine -  Russia has lost over 4000 vehicles - over 700 of which are tanks.  Russia will take years to rebuild it's army. 

As a historical note the USSR reported in 1990 to the UN that they had 60 thousand tanks. 

China is considering buying the KA52 - the domestic attack helicopter couldn't take off with a full load of anti-tank missiles.   Currently 14 have been shot down in Ukraine. China may be reconsidering . Russia had @ 100 KA52's - the USA has 800 AH-64 Apache helicopters. 

 

In the end it doesn't really matter about numbers - what matters is the humans that operate the equipment - morale, purpose etc. As you note Putin doesn't care about Russian military personnel - they are just cannon fodder. 

Up
3

This is very off topic for a CT article but lets continue. First, you were right T72 and T80s are still being modernised but MBT don't appear to the most relevant type of weapon in this conflict (any NATO involvement will be in the same area). Russia have been testing Terminators and TOS-2s. Artillery usage with drone spotting is how most battles are being fought according to the war press. NATO troops on the ground is very hypothetical anyway, I don't think "we" have the stomach for a long range missile slugging match all most cities in (eastern) Europe will have military targets that can be hit inside the first week. Stop worrying about tanks Russia have better missiles, ballistic and SAM, than the West.

Britsh Intelligence has also been saying this as well. The English speaking Russians think this weapons attrition is a big joke.

Up
2

The link you provided strongly hints that Putin may be dead ( and this is the Mirror - a bastion of truth). While Russia may have "better" ballistic missiles and SAM's  ( assuming this isn't just Russian military propaganda - which most likely it is) - Russia lacks any Wild Weasel / Growler / Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses capabilities - something the US has been developing for decades. Russia has always relied on artillery of various sorts - this relies however on a relatively static enemy.

Joke time - which is the largest air force in the world - the US Air Force. Which is the second largest air force in the world - the US Navy. 

The thing is the only thing Russia has left is it's nukes. Even if Russia "won"  a nuclear war - the northern hemisphere would the toast. The radiation would slowly encircle the northern hemisphere  giving new meaning to the saying " the living will envy the dead ". 

In the end the whole thing is pointless - hopefully nation states , companies and individuals will realize that machinations are just waste time. 

 

 

Up
0

The point was you can't just uncritically accept things just because an intelligence service said so, especially in war time. We don't know Russian tank losses or why they have their T62s in Ukraine.

Russia have anti-radiation (radar) missiles (KH-31). The Kinzhal has been used in the war and I don't think anyone doubts their other missiles can achieve hyper-sonic speeds. The point in question is do MBT numbers really matter?

Up
2

We don't know Russian tank losses or why they have their T62s in Ukraine.

To maintain a policeman type role in liberated districts.

Up
2

liberated? well yes, historically not inaccurate. after all large numbers of Ukrainians greeted the German Barbarossa forces as liberators. Not for long though. But it did go so far as the formation of a Free Ukrainian Army to fight alongside the Germans. Not many lived much past 1946 unfortunately for them.

Up
0

Are you talking about the OUN-Banderas? or the SS Division? This Nazi Ideology enabled Maidan and the continuation of the war today.

Up
3

I am rusty admittedly. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Suspect the ultimate baddies in your book.  Not an undeserved moniker, for sure. All about fighting fire with fire undoubtedly. Even Vlasov wanted them at arms distance.

Up
0

The OUN-B were ethno-nationalists wanting an ethno-state and they were carrying out massacres to achieve it. There might be a victim story here but you would also have to rationalize the Nazis at the same time.

Mind you even NZer have chanted "Slava Ukraini" with a UPA (blood and soil) flag outside parliament not knowing it's significance (the flag is in the video at the top).

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/wellington/128248825/a-tale-…

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/127918388/slava-ukraini-prime…

 

Up
2

Personally don’t think any NZr, me included, would have even a minuscule  inkling of the widespread  savagery, misery, confusion and death that prevailed in the time of that conflict and which was inflicted on innocents by ALL the various sides of warring participants. Wasn’t unique either was it. For instance Yugoslavia, The Balkans equal to the utter carnage and barbarity. Not even 100 years distant. The thing is though, over there in those particular little theatres, it is very recent history when put in context with the centuries of turmoil, uprisings and vendettas. 

Up
0

What's your source? (Is there someone covering this in English) I was pretty sure they were going to the "KPR" (Kherson) but I did not have non-Twitter/Telegram source to back it up.

Up
1

Several good English sources for non western narrative on YouTube are The Dreizin Report and The New Atlas (for excellent detailed military info and progress reports), The Duran, Richard Medhurst, Redacted, Multipolarista, Eva K Bartlett, The Greyzone etc

Up
0

Please do not ever quote Newsweek as your source of reliable information. This is the same Newsweek that called Hillary Clinton as president after she was beaten by Trumpie.

Up
1

Tim the real question is that when Putin runs out of weapons and bodies will he escalate to nukes? He has created so much animosity towards Russia that Ukraine is already resorting to small unit high mobility tactics, which will bleed Russia dry.  He is literally looking at a protracted guerilla war where high tech weapons for him will serve little use. The Animosity will last for generations due to the crimes Russian soldiers committed against Ukrainians.

Up
1

To me that's those narratives don't make any scene but they do to you. The war just has too much propaganda, sourcing everything is just too hard.

I know I did not provide any sources or justification but it would really help if you provide a source for that this is likely. I have seen photos of superposed weapon stashes around Mariupol but no reportable Insurgency has occurred. The Russian specking population probably don't the Russian to leave either (it's not a recognised language in Ukraine) e.g Kherson.

Up
3

Kherson?  I wouldn't trust anything i read about the population in occupied Ukraine these days.  But early on before the Russian spooks were in charge this is what the people of Kherson thought about the Russians.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2022/mar/20/go-home-ukrainian-p…

I think it's a mistake to assume all people that speak Russian want to be ruled by Putin.

Up
0

The mistake is to assume those who speak Russian are actually ethnic Russians - Ukraine is far more diverse than that. 

Up
0

yes, a Venn diagram of these 4 groups would be useful.

those that speak Russian

those that consider themselves Russian

those that want to be part of Russia

those that want to be ruled by Putin

Up
0

Try these sources...

English sources for non western narrative on YouTube are The Dreizin Report and The New Atlas (for excellent detailed military info and progress reports), The Duran, Richard Medhurst, Redacted, Multipolarista, Eva K Bartlett, The Greyzone etc

Up
0

You summarise that as 'EU [...] begging Russia to allow them to end the sanctions', and yet it's me you accused of poor reading comprehension the other day.

Up
0

That statement was obviously figurative hyperbolic opinion. It would be no small effort to step you though a justification from scratch, (look at the EU news for the past 3 months). Do you want to offer an alternative characterisation of the leaders behaviour to being desperate to end their sanctions that they are held hostage to?

Up
0

Is it really that hard?  The leaders want war to stop but without Putin being so emboldened as to try to reclaim the rest of the Russian empire that was lost with the fall of the USSR.

Up
1

And if you want a more accurate hyperbolic summary of your linked article (which does not mention sanctions at all), how about "Putin begs France and Germany to stop sending weapons to Ukraine".

Up
1

"I see in Russia a failed state with a delusional nutter in charge trying to leave a legacy. The Russian army has surprised everyone with it's incompetence"

Congratulations, the propaganda machine has another victim

Up
13

Exactly, it shouldn't surprise anyone that Russia's military is underfunded and clapped out.

Up
6

lol sad.

Up
0

Fairlyfrank,

I suggest you take a chill pill and go and rest in a dark room for a while to calm you down. I see nothing in the article to suggest that he is a supporter of either Russia or China, but simply trying to read the tea leaves.

I don't know how this will play out any better than you do, but even a cursory knowledge of history would tell you that China is doing what nascent empires have always done; that is extend their influence.  They will try to push America out of the Pacific if they can. We may not like what they are doing in the South China Sea or in the wider Pacific, but it makes some sense.

As for Russia, I think they will succeed in Eastern Ukraine at whatever cost to themselves, but in doing so, have greatly weakened themselves. This forces Europe to be more self-sufficient, militarily and economically.

I think i will pay more attention to Chris trotter than to you.

Up
2

Exactly. My Chinese friends say that China never thinks in terms of good and bad, or right and wrong. They only think in terms of weak and strong. When China is weak, Taiwan and Tibet are independent. When China is strong, they are part of China. Knowing that explains all their foreign policy. Very simple. Their Sri Lanka, African, and Pacific moves are all part of that. They lend the money, the local politicians steal it, the Chinese government tries to enforce the terms of the loan. The Africans all told them to shove off, and China was too weak to do the enforcing. and have had to write off billions. Sri Lanka is heading the same way, and will be protected from China by other countries who are interested in stopping China from strengthening their grip on such countries.. The same will happen in the Pacific. We sign a mutual defence pact with these countries and a few strong countries as well, and China will be unable to enforce things. Just like Nato works.

Up
0

Here is the thing. The USA sits squarely between Europe and Asia. The USA  is bordered by the Atlantic and the Pacific, vast and difficult barriers.   Naval power consequently is the vital component both strategically and tactically. With satellite surveillance no armada is going to sail undetected. No armada can protect itself from a sophisticated attack by air ex carriers but more expressly, more seriously, submarines. The USA holds all the superior submarine cards in both hands. Therefore any attack on the USA is by intercontinental ballistic missiles. As such retaliation. As such WW3. Who exactly is going to be daft enough to make that first move then. 

Up
1

I see you're an avid consumer of our western narrative makers.  Good luck with that lol

Up
0

I don't quite understand why CT says Biden's response to the press question is a bluff. The White House's walk back from the direct answer is the diplomatic double speak that is common. But it has always been understood on many levels that if China physically moved against Taiwan, it would significantly increase China's threat in the region, and that the US would have to step in to counter them. So I think while it might have been a lapse, it was to blunt honesty, not bluff. 

As to his comment re Helen Clarke (I assume over trashing the upgrading of the strike wing of the Airforce), at the time I felt it to be a significantly short sighted and remarkably arrogant ideological decision, especially when soon after she sent troops to the war in Bosnia, where they would have to rely on other airforces for their support if needed. There is an old saying that the only way to ensure peace was to prepare for war, and that means maintaining a capable military.

The other question is his assumption around our reaction to China's presence in the South Pacific. China has for years maintained an aggressive stance on taking over territories. It is an authoritarian state and despite it's attempts to appear benevolent, it's own history belies that facade. while a trading presence might be welcome, the presence it seems set on building certainly does not feel ultimately benevolent no matter the korowai.

Up
8

While the USA together with the UK & France hold a three to one advantage over Russia & China with nuke subs the balance of power still tilts towards the West. Bearing in mind not all are nuke  armed but can be. Bear in mind also Russian subs are already outmoded and the Ukraine campaign has raised a big question mark re the actual  quality and efficiency of  all of the Russian military arms. Plus the Russian navy is constricted by home ports either far to the Nth Atlantic or hemmed by the Bosphorus. Australia now seems likely to increase its order from the USA and hasten completion of necessary bases. Nuke subs are the dominant factor now, superseding  aircraft carriers as they did battleships. The USA determined this in the 1950s when Eisenhower shifted the USA nuke deterrence from  General Le May’s SAC to the submarine service. 

Up
5
Up
5

Trump and Biden have some blame but not nearly as much as the Afghan prime minister and people who  thought the US and others would fight the war for them. From a book on Vietnam by an eminent war historian. A comment from a South Vietnamese army officer when Saigon was about to fall. If we had known this was going to happen we would have fought harder or words to that effect.  South Vietnam's array of Presidents let the US try and win the war for them while they lined their pockets.

I feel sorry for the state of the Afghanese but by far the biggest fault lies with them.

CIA needed again to drum up some anti-Taliban resistance and give the Taliban some of their own medicine. To use an out of fashion phrase suitably reworded. The only good Taliban is a dead one.

Up
8

The US has often fought for people who didn't want to fight themselves. This is a good indicator as to whether or not things will be successful. 

Up
1

"Everybody's had to fight to be free...you don't have to live like a refugee..." Tom Petty 

Up
2

Yes, they have a storied history of bringing democracy and freedom to the world.

Up
1

Operation Gladio and Operation Paperclip.

An interesting watch https://youtu.be/UPhFCAI4SnQ

Up
0

Have you ever considered it may be true - just saying.

As the saying goes 

"We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the complete works of Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know that is not true."

 

Up
2

I am staggered the Guardian didn't get an LGBQT angle in as well. What a load of obvious, classic, loaded, biased, TDS rubbish.

Up
2

Obviously / sarc mode off. 

Unfortunately the internet is full of pure unadulterated rubbish - hence my quote about simians and the Bard. Much of it seems like fake it till you make it - charlatans with a ready audience who want to believe. 

 

Up
0

The story is so simple.

The US, founded by Anglo-Saxon, would not tolerate other countries founded by other races to be better than it. 

That is pretty much the gist of the story.

Up
4

My gist is an imperfect democracy is much better than perfect authoritarianism. 

Up
15

... my gist is that the Chinese  foreign minister is travelling the island nations north of us with suitcases brim full of bribes  ... only the Australian foreign minister  Penny Wong is busily mounting a counter campaign to stop the spread of Chinese military bases ....

The gist is , our shipping lanes may be blocked in the future  ... China is playing a hardball imperialist game  ... 

Up
9

Unfortunately most of the Pacific leaders will sell their sovereignty and fisheries for villas on the French Riviera, a Ferrari and a couple of million dollars in a Swiss bank account 

 

Up
4

... agreed ... nevertheless , Nanaia Mahuta ought to be out there  , warning them that the friendly Chinese smiles may well turn to snarls & barking orders one day , when their military have established their bases  ... 

Which is the lesser of two evils ... our benign colonial arrogance  , or Chinese authoritarian military might ...

Up
1

They won’t care because they’ll be living on the French Riviera. It’s the people of theses islands who will suffer.

But thankfully we have Nanaia Mahuta who will travel to the islands and talk about the taniwha and the dragon and all will be well. 

Up
6

The PM was doing an act of kindness to the Chinese and NZ public by not sending Mahuta anywhere.

 

Up
5

Never fear, Winston wants to come back and do something about it.

Well, come back, anyway.

Up
0

I hope he doesn't come back and his allegations about Mahout's nepotism is taken up by someone else. I have a feeling Labour know about this  and that's why she's been sidelined in not letting her go off and visit the Pacific islands at risk of falling into China's hands.

Up
0

GBH believe our foreign minister is on record as stating it would be her priority to present,  in said role, a Maori perspective. Are we thus now seeing that taking place? 

Up
2

Closing the refinery might not have been the smartest move knowing what we now know?

Up
5

Get your facts right.

The majority of founding fathers of the United States were from Ireland, Scotland and West Indies. Yes, they were white but not Anglo-Saxon. 

The CCP's authoritarian regime loves to play racism to its advantage. What you said is a perfect example of their racial propaganda. 

Up
0

When is another country going to be better, Xing? Remember that being a bigger bully is not being better.

Up
0

Operation Gladio and Operation Paperclip.

An interesting watch https://youtu.be/UPhFCAI4SnQ

Up
0

Maybe if we had pro natal, pro social and pro production policies as the basis for our states in Western countries, instead of rule by parasites robbing us with rent, we could stand up on the geopolitical stage.

This system delivers nothing to the same young people it expects to fight. The system hates and despises its own peasants and workers, so we should not support it in seeking to fight other powers.

Do they really expect the diversity brigade, where we constantly belittle and attack our own spiritual, historical and mythological base, to fight coherently against the ethnonationalist Chinese, who have cultivated a well governed authoritarian state, in line with what suits them as a people?

I've been a soldier and I can tell you right now, stuff right off.

Up
11

If the global events of the last two years aren't part of a massive socialist pantomime, I'll eat my hat!

 

Up
2

How do you figure that? The two major protagonists are not in any way, shape or form, socialist, other than in name, they do practically nothing that is socialist

Up
1
Up
0

> History teaches us that it’s the waning superpowers, edged-off the geopolitical stage by more dynamic rivals, that the world’s small and vulnerable states have most reason to fear.

I take it the waning superpower here is Russia?

Up
4

Trotter doesnt see his communist mates for what they are - and actually Russia has already waned
He should be referring to China - To see what sort of trouble they are in have a look at who President for life Xi is mates with

Up
1

Neither Russia nor China is communist, you might want to call them that, but they aren't. 

Up
3

They're Communist like a pedo is Catholic. These institutions seem pretty rife being a refuge for scumbags.

Up
2

Any authoritarian institution becomes a haven for psychopaths. Those at the top likely have personality disorders too. all the bully boys come out of the woodwork with a license to paly under such regimes.

Up
1

They do it under capitalism too...we call them the oligarchy, plutocracy, monopolist etc

Up
0

Nope, not communist, Communism shares all resources, they don't. so they aren't

Up
0

hmmm

Up
0
Up
0

I read it as CT referring to the USA, being the waning superpower

Up
1

The best and worst thing about multipolarity is that it forces every country to make realpolitik considerations about where they draw the line on certain behaviour.

What we're seeing in Germany for example, is proof that after the initial flag waving, ultimately any Government's consideration will be the wellbeing of its citizens. Democracy forces this, eventually. And a government that can't provide affordable food or energy to its citizens won't last long. 

Ultimately that will drive the decisions of who to trade with or not. It's also why countries like Turkey who can play both sides, will enjoy a major economic benefit over the coming years.

Up
3

What we're seeing in Germany for example, is proof that after the initial flag waving, ultimately any Government's consideration will be the wellbeing of its citizens. Democracy forces this, eventually. And a government that can't provide affordable food or energy to its citizens won't last long. 

And another:

The United States, as the near unanimous vote to provide nearly $40 billion in aid to Ukraine illustrates, is trapped in the death spiral of unchecked militarism. No high speed trains. No universal health care. No viable Covid relief program. No respite from 8.3 percent inflation. No infrastructure programs to repair decaying roads and bridges, which require $41.8 billion to fix the 43,586 structurally deficient bridges, on average 68 years old. No forgiveness of $1.7 trillion in student debt. No addressing income inequality. No program to feed the 17 million children who go to bed each night hungry. No rational gun control or curbing of the epidemic of nihilistic violence and mass shootings. No help for the 100,000 Americans who die each year of drug overdoses. No minimum wage of $15 an hour to counter 44 years of wage stagnation. No respite from gas prices that are projected to hit $6 a gallon. Link

Up
3

There is going to be some serious anger leading up to the midterms, when the realisation dawns on Americans that they're still suffering at home, and that the $40bn so easily handed over has disappeared down a bottomless pit for no discernable gain (the Russians will still be there).

Up
2

Whats happened to Russia's frozen assets in The US which I assume is held in USD? Are these not be conveniently used for the $40billion in aid for the Ukraine. If just frozen and not requisitioned for other purposes then thee must be some intention to return them. Audaxes can you shed some light on this?

Up
0

The legal mechanism in the US to confiscate them is not that clear. Historically the US has cultivated a good respect for property rights so it's not an easy thing to conjure up.

That said, they confiscated the Afghan central bank reserves by Executive Order, so such a thing is still possible. Presumably the reason they haven't yet is to maintain it as a bargaining chip, and/or they're worried about nationalisation of foreign company assets in Russia as a retaliatory measure.

Up
0

Afghanistan wasn't a big enough global investment fish in the financial system for many to have worried about the loss of their sovereign assets, but Russia is a hidden gem in western finance and touches more global investors money than Afghanistan did.

Up
0

EU has frozen only €23bn worth of assets of the Russian Central Bank as stated by the EU Justice Commission. This figure is way less than previous western projected figures. Link

Up
1

They have to worry about the legal battles ahead from Russia and global Russian debt holders who are being blocked from collecting their payments  from Russia.  They also have to worry about the respect they had from asset holders who thought their investments were safe in western banks no longer wanting to invest in the west if their property is no longer safe.  

They might like to sound tough but moves like this have major ramifications for the western global financial system.  

Up
0

Chris,

there are some facts which make your analysis doubtful:

The US is now the biggest producer of energy in the world and a net exporter. They don't need OPEC. OPEC is a competitor!

Russia is a economic midget with a GDP of just 1.5Tn compared to US 25Tn and China15Tn. Even Japan's GDP is more than three times bigger than Russia's. The restructure of the EU's energy supply away from Russia will result in Russia becoming a vassal of China, totally dependent on selling it's oil and gas to China.

The indisputable rivalry between the US and China and it's likely development is now well researched in several books on the Thucydides's trap. China obviously plays a long game, not being able to challenge the US to a open war as yet. It will be interesting to see which country ends up on the opposing sites.

Up
1

Russia will result in Russia becoming a vassal of China, totally dependent on selling it's oil and gas to China.

Why would Russia only sell oil to China?   The EU is talking about a purchasing embargo on itself, it will not buy Russian oil (assuming they could get it past Orban).  There is no embargo on Russia selling oil, and i don't see the UN Security council creating one. As a pretty fungible commodity there will be plenty of buyers for Russian oil.

 

Up
2

TP,

have you followed European developments?

The German government made a commitment to be independent of Russian energy within two years. Orban's arm needs twisting, but how much longer does he run Hungary?

I'm not talking about tomorrow but wait five years and the existing trade routes for Russian oil and gas are obsolete.

Up
0

Europe can and should wean itself off Russian energy to remove leverage.   Decades of engagement with Russia has failed at this point.

However, oil and to a lesser degree gas, is a fungible commodity.   Trade routes to Europe for oil are drying up already, but Russia is still selling oil, there are plenty of new trade routes that spring up immediately, all you need to open a new trade route is a boat.  Russia will not be beholden to China for oil sales.

Gas takes a bit longer to reroute, but if you are talking multiyear timeframes, China may take more gas from Russa and less via LNG import terminals.  Europe will take less gas from Russia and more from LNG import terminals.  It's all a big merry go round.

Up
1

Europe will buy oil from Russia indirectly at higher prices.  Russian oil is being shipped by Greek shippers to offshore locations, mixed in acceptable quantities with oil from elsewhere and then shipped back to Europe. Once oil is mixed it is no longer 'Russian'.  These neoliberal western governments are sneaky basterds.

Up
0

How much longer does Orban run Hungary?  Do you know something not in the public domain?

Orban just won an election landslide for another 4 years, extended his supermajority allowing him to change the constitution at will,  and then immediately changed the constitution to expand his state of emergency

"With 54.13% of the popular vote, Fidesz received the highest vote share by any party since the fall of communism in 1989."

Up
0

For what its worth have a look at this. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/breaking-fresh-evidence-hungary-vote-r…

I googled "are general elections in hungary rigged"  Above was one i looked at

Up
0

Who funds opendemocracy I wonder?

Up
0

DP

Up
0

Country Comparisons - Real GDP (purchasing power parity)

Country Comparisons - Crude oil – production 

Country Comparisons - Crude oil – exports

More

Up
1