New Eastern Outlook

New Eastern Outlook
Fri, 27 May 2022 08:40:54 +0000

Chronicle of the Taiwan Issue: the Role of the “Glass of Water”


The Taiwan cluster, i.e. one of the most important and dangerous in the current phase of the Great Game, and it's a highly dynamic one. Remarkable events follow one after the other, and at least the most significant ones cannot be overlooked.

The level of "significance", in the author's view, is determined by the extent to which each is consistent with a key element of US strategy in Taiwan issues, driven by the gradual attribution of the island to the "normal" object of international relations, and Washington's relations with Taipei in particular.

One of the main directions in this process is to facilitate Taiwan's attempts to join (as an observer to begin with) international organizations. In recent months, special attention has been paid to the (outwardly politically innocent) World Health Organization.

It was not chosen by chance and for several reasons. First, WHO is a UN-affiliated organization, the latter ogranization Taiwan had to leave at the end of 1971. Second, in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Taiwan was among the most resilient countries in the world. Its experience was seen as very useful for other WHO members and as an alternative to the "zero-tolerance" strategy followed by China on this issue. This Beijing's strategy is coming under increasing criticism from geopolitical opponents, who point to it as one of the reasons for the collapse of the "international economic chains".

In recent months, however, Taiwan (as well as the entire East Asian region) has seen another sharp deterioration in the number of COVID-19 cases. In addition, the PRC has its own counterarguments, including graphic images, to the US criticism of Beijing's chosen strategy to combat the disease.

Finally, a number of events planned for the current year 2022, both at global (May 22-28 in Geneva) and regional levels, served as a suitable occasion to campaign for Taiwan's accession to the WHO. In addition to the activism of the US leadership (including President Joe Biden), all major US allies have also been active on this issue. In mid-May, for the third time this year, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau became "active". On May 19, almost on the eve of the 75th WHO Assembly, a resolution supporting Taiwan's participation in the event was passed by the German Bundestag.

All of this was to no avail, since China, i.e. one of the main members of the UN and a permanent member of the Security Council of this esteemed organization, was against it. This is by no means an indication of Beijing's inherent lack of flexibility in its policy on the Taiwan issue. Such "flexibility" could be clearly observed during the period of the Kuomintang's leadership of the island and the party's president, Ma Ying-jeou, from 2008 to 2016. This now serves as an excuse for Taiwanese political opponents of both to lash out harshly over the same issue of Taiwan's participation in the work of the WHO.

The main opponents are the Democratic Progressive Party and its leader Tsai Ing-wen, who has been president of Taiwan since May 20, 2016. Beijing views Madam Tsai as the initiator of "separatist tendencies" in Taiwan, with all the practical consequences of this assessment, including a backlash against the current Taiwanese leadership's claim to be part of the WHO.

Her sixth anniversary in power, which almost coincided with the start of the 75th WHO Assembly meeting, prompted yet another round of negative comments in the PRC, listing all kinds of "wrongdoings" against the Chinese people.

Meanwhile, public opinion polls on the island itself show that the ratings of the current president and the DPP continue to be at levels that do not yet favor the prospect of their political opponents coming to power in the general elections to be held in a year and a half. Although Tsai Ing-wen herself will no longer be able to run for president. The real state of domestic politics in Taiwan, however, will be judged at the local elections, which are due to take place at the end of this year.

The Taiwanese, incidentally, have also spoken out in favor of the Tsai Ing-wen administration's "live and fight COVID-19" strategy, i.e. against the "zero tolerance" strategy for cases of the disease. It is with its implementation in the PRC that Taiwan attributes problems in its own IT industry, particularly that of the well-known computer manufacturer Acer.

As during the previous US administration, Washington continues to send conflicting signals towards the PRC. On May 5, the (formerly present) statement that the island is part of China and that the US denies Taiwan the right to state autonomy disappeared from the Department of State's webpage on relations with Taiwan, which is updated once a year. Something similar was followed at the same time by the US Department of Defense.

This is undoubtedly an important step by Washington in the creeping process of tackling the task outlined above, and one that the PRC could not fail to react to. All the more so since the subsequent "explanations" on the above matter by Spokesperson for the Department of State Ned Price (in particular, his words that the US "does not subscribe to the PRC's "one China principle") seem only to reinforce Beijing's worst suspicions about US policy on the issue.

However, China reacted immediately and positively to a statement (not the first this year) by Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen on the need to lift ("for the benefit of the US itself") at least part of the tariffs on imported Chinese products. Hardly coincidentally, two days later, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang reiterated his country's unwavering commitment to "openness".

It cannot, however, be ruled out that Washington is in fact playing "two hands" with its main geopolitical rivals, i.e. China and Russia, in order to encourage one of them (in this case China) not to get "too close" to the other. The latter is already almost openly engaged in an armed struggle with the use (so far and mainly) of Ukrainian "cannon fodder".

In general, however, the overall picture around the Taiwan issue continues to look, to put it mildly, less and less optimistic. However, the author does not subscribe to the popular hypothesis that an armed clash between the US and the PRC is inevitable (due to the Thucydides Trap effect) and that this issue could provoke it. Not because such predictions reek of "hopelessness". The hypothesis that the Thucydides Trap is 100% workable completely excludes the role of the human factor in the historical process, which is fundamentally wrong. These or those decisions are ultimately made by people.

A curious incident containing no small amount of symbolism took place in the capital of Japan, which is also increasingly asserting itself in the Taiwan issue. The new US ambassador to that country visited the Taiwan mission (de facto embassy) in Tokyo, where he was treated to a glass of pineapple juice. It should be recalled that in the process of deteriorating relations with Mainland, Taiwanese farmers, who used to send a substantial portion of their pineapples to the PRC, have also suffered. Now Taiwan is trying to divert the marketing of its fruit in general, and pineapples in particular, to Japan. Even a "specialized-Japanese" hybrid pineapple has been bred.

The fact that the US ambassador to Japan was treated to a glass of pineapple juice by some Taiwanese officials in that country may look like nothing compared to regular exercises of the Chinese Navy Group headed by the aircraft carrier Liaoning in the waters around Taiwan and demonstration flights of Chinese bombers and fighters in the airspace adjacent to the island. It should be noted that similarly demonstratively active are the (not at all weak) armed forces of Taiwan, as well as the US forces that de facto support them.

There were, however (according to historical apocryphas), when the "glass of water" played an even greater role than all the brilliant military victories of no less brilliant commanders. And, most importantly, to the more or less mutual satisfaction of recent enemies.

What if, at a critical moment in US-PRC relations (with Russia as an ally), there is such a "glass of water-juice"?

Vladimir Terekhov, expert on the issues of the Asia-Pacific region, exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

New Eastern Outlook
Thu, 26 May 2022 20:59:57 +0000

Urging Europe to War: Applying the Corporate Levers


When the Russians first warned of the potential for armed conflict in Ukraine, the world looked on with pandemic blinded eyes. The public turned an unconcerned head, naturally, to still more "Russia" problems framed with the ever present "Putin" headline. Few suspected a more troubling underpinning. Then Russia marched across the border.

The question of "why" still echoes in the bottomless pit of international detente, media, and monetary policies.

Well, the "Nazi makers" who stand behind this Ukraine proxy war are wielding massive profit levers against the Russians, the Chinese, India, and all nations opposed to their order. For instance, all those who wonder at Poland's renewed lust for killing Russians, news that US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in Warsaw is telling. I'm no economist, but I know there is no such thing as a coincidence. Yellen is in the eastern European country to push forward a new reformative tax regime that would benefit mightily rich nations like France, Germany, and even Poland, perhaps. As I said, I'm not a tax lawyer, but the "OECD Two-Pillar Solution" seems like a sort of bribery to me.

Maybe some of you readers are economists? All analysts like me have to go on corroborative evidence.

Let's see. The Biden Administration needs Europe to go full-mental on Russia over the Ukraine situation. Okay. That means that Warsaw's leadership needs to be willing to accept Russian nuclear missiles at any moment. The Poles' traditional distrust and hatred of Russians must be rekindled, and even old Polish tanks and artillery must be pulled out of mothballs to help Kyiv. The possibility of a new Polish Empire might even be thrown in? At the very least, Poland's right-wing leadership needs to toe the line, especially right now. This passage from a National Interest story, helps my premise here:

"Poland remains a frontline NATO member and an important American partner to challenge Russia's ongoing aggression, reported war crimes, and corruption. However, the Biden administration must focus on Poland not only as a European ally but also as a credible democratic nation. Thus, both the United States and the EU must engage and assist Poland instructively—especially in political, economic, and military realms."

Alright. Now, the US Treasury Secretary (not her EU counterpart?) being across the border from a brewing World War makes sense. It's an offer for guaranteed Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and other US multinationals tax profits for Warsaw and the rest! Or, am I wrong?

Then again, perhaps the Ukraine proxy war is designed to leverage NATO countries to simply comply with anything the Biden administration comes up with? I hope you see my logic. Not knowing the ins and outs of Davos meetings, having skipped through both micro and macroeconomics courses in college, all I can attest to is that wheeling and dealing with these people always leads to something really bad for the rest of us.

After all, Russia is ready to launch "technical solutions" should Washington and Brussels convince Finland and Sweden war is the only path. How about the "levers" there?

Finland may be ready to send its citizens below ground into an underground city capable of housing 900,000 people, or about a third more than the city's entire population. Finland President Sauli Niinisto and Prime Minister Sanna Marin confirmed the other day that their country would seek membership in NATO now. This would break a treaty with the Soviets at the end of World War 2, which essentially allowed Finland to exist even though the country had sided with Hitler's Third Reich. The fact that Finland is also one of the most militarized nations in Europe, has not escaped the Russians, either.

The Kremlin response to Finland's move is one of cool pragmatism, as the Russians say the NATO bid would "definitely" be viewed as a threat. Putin assured the Finns that Russia would be "forced to take reciprocal steps, military-technical and other, to address the resulting threats." Finland as part of NATO extends Russia's Europe borders with NATO friendly nations by 2x. So, it's clear Russia will not back down on this one.

Still, the question of "why" remains for both Sweden and Finland. Why now?

The "levers" here are a bit more complicated than in Poland. But monetary gain and the extension of the existing liberal order are the answers. Finland, the Baltics, and the greater EU have big plans coming up. It all starts with segregating fossil fuel suppliers, then interposing so-called "green alternatives" when gas and oil prices get intolerable.

This story about converting Germany's LNG terminals to hydrogen hubs clues us. Finland is already ahead of the game in setting up the game against Russia and its gas. This story is about floating LNG production connected to the Baltics, but other moves are in the works to shift profit from Russia to the US and other suppliers. Then you can expect "new technologies" to follow on with funding from public sources. But the whole Finland affair is more about cutting off Russian oil and gas exports to the west, than anything else. See the port of Primorsk and exports for more on this.

The western alliance is leveraging Finland the easy way, through the threat of pulling back on imports. Finland's 5.5 million people have been so well off all these decades because 60% of the country's GDP is tied to international trade. And most of this is with the EU, where Finland is the only nordic country using the Euro. I won't get into how Nokia, the country's biggest enterprise, screwed the pooch and let down the Finnish people. As further evidence of "arm twisting" in Helsinki, this European Commission €2 billion euro partnership just announced, stands as further proof of bribery.

By now, the reader is wondering how all this is going to work out. Well, if NATO does not force the Russians to launch a full-scale military response across a wide NATO-Russia front, it will play out something like this. I will summarize making use of a Yahoo! News quote:

"Germany plans to abandon fossil-fueled power by 2035. But instead of shutting down natural gas infrastructure, it's speeding up construction of several new terminals that will allow companies to import the planet-warming fuel by ship for decades to come."

Now, the west-order is planning to first optimize profits from fossil fuels by cordoning off Russia and other energy giants. America and British companies will gain massive profits from partitioning supply, elevated prices, and a new kind of monopoly. Meanwhile, "green alternatives" will be hyped, and ultimately funded by the public to the benefit of western corporations, state owned, and private companies. Russia will benefit in the short term, but ultimately her natural gas and oil will be all but worthless once replacement technologies and infrastructures are in place. Russia, Iran, and Venezuela will eventually be left holding gas stove energy, and lubricants.

At least, this is an ingenious plan, it seems. The plan for Making America Great Again, probably includes the rest of the world dying in mass, and American citizens funding electric car/home development for Elon Musk. At the end of all this, we become the ultimate consumer/batteries of progress. I think, perhaps, the elites of this order anticipate Russians, Chinese, Indian, Vietnamese, Brazilian slave laborers making wonder new appliances, for the superior race living to the north and west. Or, I should say, "continuing" to make.

And It's all done with the smoke of war, economic mirrors, and the clever application of obvious levers.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he's an author of the recent bestseller "Putin's Praetorians" and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

New Eastern Outlook
Thu, 26 May 2022 20:59:11 +0000

China’s Aircraft Industry Puts an End to Western Monopoly


Aircraft manufacturing is one of the strategically important areas of modern industry, providing transport security and generating large revenues. However, aircraft construction requires a high level of scientific and technological development and a huge financial investment. Therefore, not all countries are able to fully supply themselves with aircraft, whether military or civilian.

The largest and most spacious passenger aircraft are manufactured by the world's two largest aircraft manufacturers: the European (mostly French) company Airbus and the US company Boeing. These two giants have almost divided the global market for large passenger aircraft. Airliners from other manufacturers, including European and Canadian ones, are inferior to aircraft from these two companies both in size and prominence. Airbus and Boeing are known around the world, exported to hundreds of countries and have even become somewhat of a symbol of civil aviation. It could be said that Boeing has established a monopoly on the production of large passenger aircraft in America, Airbus in Europe, and the two companies together have established a global duopoly.

In recent decades, however, the US and the EU have gained a new global economic competitor, China. The PRC has become the world's second largest economy, the EU's main trading partner and a major geopolitical rival to the US. The competition between China and the West continues on all fronts, including the aircraft industry.

The PRC began developing its military aircraft industry in the 1950s, and since then has successfully provided its air force with modern and high-quality combat vehicles. The Chinese aircraft manufacturer AVIC was, as of 2020, the world's sixth-largest military-industrial company by gross revenue (the five places above were held by Western companies). However, despite such successes in the military aircraft industry, companies from the PRC do not yet play a very prominent role in the global passenger aircraft industry.

Nevertheless, extensive work has been done in recent decades.

In 2008, the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC), a Chinese state-owned commercial aircraft company, was established. One of the company's stated aims was to reduce China's dependence on foreign monopolies of Airbus and Boeing. As early as November 2008, the first flight of the ARJ21 passenger aircraft developed by COMAC carrying up to 115 passengers took place.

Also in 2008, COMAC began work on a new passenger aircraft, the C919 narrow-body (single-aisle, six seats per row) airliner, which, when completed, is expected to carry 150-168 passengers and compete with the Boeing-737.

In 2011, Irish low-cost carrier Ryanair, which was once the cheapest airline in Europe, joined the C919 project. The company, which had more than a hundred Boeing aircraft in its fleet, decided to support the development of its Chinese counterpart. In 2012, Bombardier Aerospace, a Canadian aircraft manufacturer specializing in small business jets and helicopters, also began providing technical and logistical support for the C919 project. It can be concluded that the duopoly between Airbus and Boeing does not suit everyone, even in the West.

In 2012, the media reported that Airbus and Boeing are alarmed by Chinese activity: if these two companies are major suppliers of passenger planes, then China is one of the main consumers of their products.  Chinese carriers are steadily increasing both domestic and international traffic, and if China manages to saturate even its own market with domestically manufactured aircraft, this would already be a serious blow to the profits of the European and US aviation giants. Recall that reduction of Chinese civil aviation's dependence on foreign suppliers was stated by Beijing as one of the country's main objectives as far back as in 2008. Moreover, it was clear that if COMAC projects were to develop successfully, China would not limit itself to its domestic market. Airbus and Boeing saw an additional risk in the fact that COMAC is a state-owned company, and in case of difficulties in its development it can count on help from the treasury without the fear of going bankrupt, even if at first its operations are loss-making.

In 2017, the test version of the aforementioned C919 narrow-body airliner made its maiden flight.

In 2018, although there was still a long wait for the first commercial deliveries of the C919, there were already more than a thousand preliminary agreements and more than three hundred orders placed for the aircraft, as expected, mostly from Chinese companies.

And in 2019, the media reported that four people had been arrested in the US on charges of industrial espionage in favor of China. As always, when the PRC starts to develop some high-tech field, the West suspects it of stealing its intellectual property. According to the prosecution, Chinese intelligence agencies and hackers stole data from Ametek, Capstone Turbine, GE Aviation and others to use in the C919 project. Two of those arrested are reportedly Chinese nationals. One is an officer in the Chinese Ministry of State Security and the other is a high-level IT specialist. Whether the US suspicions and arrests are justified or not, it is clear that the C919 project is under the scrutiny of the West.

In 2020 the design of the airliner was finally approved and in 2020-2021 a test version of the C919 was flight tested in the cold conditions of China's Inner Mongolia.

In May 2022, the media reported another flight test of the C919, which took place in Shanghai. The test vehicle was already bearing the logo of the Chinese carrier OTT Airlines, which will operate the aircraft after the tests are completed. Thus, 2022 should be the year C919 commercial deliveries commence and mark the near end of the Airbus-Boeing duopoly.

By 2035, COMAC plans to become the third largest operator in China's market for narrow-body aircraft and the fifth largest globally, with its C919. By 2042, the plan is to sell 2,000 C919s. This is an ambitious plan; however, the previous plan, to bring the C919 project to the commercial production phase, was delivered by COMAC on time. It can be assumed that the rest of its plans will also be successfully realized by COMAC, supported by the huge industrial and financial capabilities of the PRC.

Petr Konovalov, a political observer, exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

New Eastern Outlook
Thu, 26 May 2022 20:50:30 +0000

Civilizational Rift: a Small Bump or a Major Hurdle?


Today, it is clear that the beginning of Russia's special military operation on the territory of Ukraine on February 24 this year was a landmark moment in the modern stage of world history.

Regardless of the evaluation of this operation, its objectives and legitimacy, one thing is clear today – it has already become the watershed that separates the old stage of world development from the new, which will apparently mark the beginning of a new era in human history.

Today astrologers and esoterics talk a lot about the arrival of the "Age of Aquarius", the beginning of a new astronomical year, the next precession cycle of the Earth and any other astronomical reason for the change of epochs on our planet. But before talking about heavenly things, it seems important to understand what are the earthly reasons for the unprecedented exacerbation of contradictions between countries, peoples and nations in the second decade of the twenty-first century, and what might be the difference between the outgoing and the incoming phase of world development?

In order to answer this question, one must first assess the outgoing period of development and understand what it was about and why it ended so abruptly?

It is clear that this concluding phase of world development and the brief era of dominance of the unipolar model were born out of the destruction of the USSR. Ideologists of the new world, such as Z. Brzezinski and S. Huntington saw it as the "end of history", a complete victory of liberalism and the corresponding architecture of democracy, which should be universal for the entire planet. However, a priori, the case was presented in such a way that the US was the paragon of democracy and that everyone should follow its example, "city upon a hill", obey its orders and implement the set of "recommendations" to be formulated in Washington and in the international institutions it controls.

On the surface, this political model looked attractive to many, with Washington assuming the role of "world gendarme" and overseer of a "rules-based" peace. But when it came to its implementation, many unpleasant circumstances for its recipients came to light. First, it appeared that the concept of human rights inherent in the basis of this model implies the primacy of individual interests over public and state interests, as well as family, tribal and other ones. That is, it is based on extreme forms of Protestant ethics and morality that are alien to most human communities.

Second, it became clear that even the human person within this individualist model is thought of as a sexless being, a bearer of consciousness, and the choice of sex or, as they now say, gender, must be made by human consciousness. It must also choose the form of its coexistence with others – within the family, outside the family, or in general as it sees fit, without regard for the mores, traditions, customs of certain societies and classes, strata – whatever you want to call them. In other words, all collective rights are placed below the rights of the individual, not even of the individual, but of the individual mind. Any other frames of reference are declared authoritarian or totalitarian (although exceptions have been made for US allies such as the Gulf monarchies).

Third, as the model has been introduced into human society, it has emerged that it still has the character of a multi-headed hydra. One of the heads of liberalism is the LGBT community with its child free slogans, then cognitivism and transhumanism with their utopian and misanthropic ideas of transferring consciousness to "another medium", and finally, as a crowning achievement, Satanism with its Nazi and other perversions.

In other words, under the sweet slogans of liberalism and protection of human rights, a "wolf in sheep's clothing" has been launched into human civilization, professing the cult of death and degeneration.

Not to be accused of following Seyyid Qutb's doctrine and labelling the Western model as Naked Democracy, I should point out that true liberalism, its political scheme of society, going back to the ideas of Aristotle and ancient Greek democracy, has played an enormous role in human development. No one questions the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the rule of law and other principles of democratic society. On the contrary, the true ideals of democracy, such as representativeness of power, its connection to the people, and accountability to them, are more in demand than ever before. It is about using the ideology of liberalism, or more precisely neoliberalism, as a kind of disguise, a cover for the realization of a completely different type of idea, inherently totalitarian and opposed to true liberalism. The second sin of the globalizers from liberalism is that they absolutized the rigid model of liberal society and offered it as the only option. It is as if a sick person is always being prescribed one medicine for all ailments.

Finally, every ideology has an expiry date. As President Vladimir Putin said, "liberalism has exhausted itself." In other words, it has become irrelevant, has perverted its own principles and, in accordance with the laws of dialectics, has become the opposite of itself. And this is recognized in the West as well, even by prominent American figures from the conservative camp, such as Patrick Buchanan and many others.

It is also important to note that the ideas of this outmoded cult of pseudo-democracy, built on the supposed superiority of the West, are anti-human in nature, dating back not only to Protestantism but also to pagan traditions. And the very introduction of these ideas takes place through widespread deception of the people and the violent incorporation of these ideas into the practice of public life. We have had the "good fortune" to observe all this since 2010, when a wave of so-called colored revolutions swept the world. These technologies, tried in the Balkans back in the 1990s, then came to the Middle East and then to Ukraine. We can see the results now. Iraq, Syria, Libya have been destroyed and many other states have lost their inherent stability.

The bearers of this model – the Anglo-Saxons – unleashed a war against Islam after September 11, 2001, which was aimed at destroying the very foundations of traditional societies. And this was done in the most insidious way, as if by the hands of Muslims themselves, whose ranks were infiltrated with the most radical ideas, which led at first to the creation of Al-Qaeda, and then ISIS (both of these terrorist formations are banned in the Russian Federation). Later, these organizations launched a war of extermination against Christians in the Middle East by grossly distorting the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad.

In the economic dimension, however, this model of liberalism has resulted in a constant robbery of non-Western peoples, including Russia, through the mechanisms of the Bretton Woods system, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Washington Consensus and the domination of the dollar.

Today we are witnessing the bloody agony of these anti-human ideas, which Satanic forces have tried to establish all over the planet. It is already clear that the plan to introduce these anti-values has met with strong resistance from both the peoples of Russia and the entire Islamic world. Where it is implemented, namely in Western societies, we are witnessing their moral and intellectual degradation, ingeniously predicted a hundred years ago by O. Spengler.

So what do globalists and transhumanists want to do now that the political, economic and social model of this unipolar world has begun to collapse?

Today, the proponents of a new global project on the wreckage of the former model of globalism are no longer hiding behind the ideas of liberalism and democracy – they have been discarded as unnecessary. Through the efforts of the World Economic Forum and its irreplaceable leader Klaus Schwab, a new, as it were, post-capitalist system is being introduced, openly totalitarian, based on the displacement of man from the productive sphere through robotics and the introduction of total control over the individual through digital technology, the creation of a "digital twin" of man, which will then, in the best traditions of transhumanism, abolish man himself.

What can be set against this and who can lead the transition to a new stage of world development? What does Russia, with its two largest faiths, Orthodoxy and Islam, have to offer here? If we do not want to become victims of Satanists, the way out is to build our own civilization project within a new, multipolar world, based on the values of the Abrahamic religions, but first and foremost the most influential of them.

Finally, here we come to the main point, we have all the historical prerequisites for forming our own center of power, based on our original model of development. Thanks to Orthodoxy, Russia is equipped spiritually to preserve its identity and armed intellectually to form its own global vision of the future world on the basis of the ideas of its great ancestors. The Russian treasury includes L.N. Tolstoy, A.S. Pushkin, F.M. Dostoevsky, the much underrated N.S. Leskov, V.I. Vernadsky, L.N. Gumilev, N.Ya. Danilevsky, K.E. Tsiolkovsky, N.F. Fedorov, N.O. Lossky, N.A. Berdyaev and dozens of other original thinkers, writers, artists and poets. We are completely self-sufficient philosophically and intellectually and are ready to offer the world dozens and hundreds of new ideas. For example, L.N. Gumilev's theory of passionarity and super-ethnoses is completely unknown in the West. And there are many other things they are unaware of.

Most importantly, there is the Russian spirit, not pretending to be God-chosen, with its universal responsiveness of the Russian soul, its plasticity, its willingness to help those in need even against its own national interests, its keen sense of justice and belief in the triumph of the good.

However, leadership is not only impossible without its own model of development, but also without putting forward its own image of the future. Its formation, in turn, implies a rejection of alien, externally imposed logic and a transition to the ideology of self-reliance, above all in terms of developing our own, based on our civilization matrix and culture, response to the challenges of time.

What is needed, in other words, is primarily a mental decolonization; spiritual sphere and culture should abandon thoughtless copying of samples of mass Western culture and the use of English terminology to describe Russian life. Without a development based on its own history and culture (archetypes and patterns) (Russia as a unique Eurasian civilization) there will be no take-off.

What this image of the future is, based on the above, is clear. It is important for us to admit and say to ourselves that Russia is a self-valuable civilization with a Eurasian character. This Eurasianism can be saturated with different images and meanings, constructed in different ways.

The idea that Russia is called upon to bring harmony to the world can be placed in Eurasianism. This in no way contradicts the idea of the katechon, a force that keeps the world from falling into the abyss. These ideological constructs complement each other and do not contradict V. Vernadsky's ideas about the noosphere and N. Fedorov's insights about immortal humanity. We can speak of Russia as an "alternative Europe" and as Noah's ark for European civilization, saving its cultural and spiritual (Christian) heritage from the invasion of new barbarians, but being an independent civilization and a center of military, economic and spiritual power based on Orthodoxy and ideas of social justice.

Russia can and must remain a "retort" in which, as a result of complex cultural reactions and the intertwining of pagan, Hellenic and Christian traditions, the acquired values of other civilizations are melted down and saturated with new colors and overtones. This was the case with ballet, painting, literature and music. All of these meanings can become elements of the supporting structure of the image of the future.

And generally speaking, leadership does not mean isolation. On the contrary, it assumes that everything new and advanced is taken on board, including from the West, such as management, the ability to promote its products and technologies, the skill to become integrators in the production of complex systems, and to encourage invention and innovation. This should not be done mechanically, but through rethinking it within our cultural and civilizational discourse.

We, on the other hand, can now offer the world carbon-free nuclear technology and much more in terms of innovation. Finally, we have a pool of Russian scientists working around the world who will come to us themselves if they see the national will to revive and transform the country, concrete steps to implement the plans already announced.

How will our choice to build our own civilization, or rather to return to this work of creating and in some ways recreating it, affect foreign policy? The foundations of this new course have already been laid and are reflected in Russia's Foreign Policy Concept, which sets out a fairly broad framework for protecting our national interests. Russia can form its own center of power on the basis of this Concept, and it is already doing so. It consists of three rings: the EAEU, SCO and BRICS countries.

It is clear, however, that the transition to a multipolar world, as envisaged in Russia's current Concept, is only a phase that is limited in time. Most likely, given the current trends of increasing confrontation between the West and China, the world will evolve towards a bipolar scheme and a return to the classic land-sea confrontation, but through "locking" and multilateral alliances. Obviously, the geopolitical reality itself will push us, while remaining independent and sovereign in every sense, to move towards a deeper alliance with China, perhaps even a military alliance with it, should circumstances and Western policy compel it.

In relation to other states that do not belong to the old or emerging centers of power, Russia can act as a provider, or a supplier of sovereignty, as in the case of Syria. The most preferable option is not the provision of direct military assistance, but rather the provision of technologies and methods, including not only military and security, to other states that will help them to withstand the dictates of the West and stop the trend towards the weakening and disintegration of nation states and the erosion of their sovereignty under the onslaught of liberal financial elites.

But the special military operation in Ukraine provided a powerful new platform for the unity of the Russian peoples: the unity of the Orthodox and Muslims, as well as all the peoples of Russia, in the struggle against Nazism, based on the occult and Satanism. In practice, this resulted in the active participation of Chechens, Dagestanis, Tatars, Bashkirs, Buryats, Tuvans, Laks and representatives of other peoples in this operation. We saw, in an almost pure form, a confrontation between good and evil. The new phase of world development and the civilizational rift that accompanies it will therefore inevitably take place under the slogan of the victory of good over evil and the creation of a new, fairer and brighter world.

Pavel Nastin, political observer on Asia and Africa, exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

New Eastern Outlook
Thu, 26 May 2022 08:25:15 +0000

On Washington’s Request, Ukraine has Now Turned against Turkey as Well


As the Russian proverb says: "You can give the wolf the best food, but he would hanker for the wood." This folk wisdom has a disapproving, judgmental connotation. The main allegorical meaning is that the true essence will always reveal itself, despite anyone's best efforts to change it.

This is what is happening today in Turkey's relations with Kiev, despite Ankara's multiple attempts to establish not only business but also political relations with the current Ukrainian regime. In particular, via Ankara's demonstration to Kiev of its opposition to Crimea's accession to Russia, or by jointly playing the Crimean Tatar card against Russia, or even in jointly producing the Bayraktar UAVs.

However, the "neo-Nazi wolf" bristling at Russia wants more and more subjugation from Turkey and has therefore lately been actively playing a very unfriendly tune against the latter on Washington's strings. Here are just a few examples.

The other day, Yuriy Panchenko, a well-known columnist in Ukraine, in an article for the online publication European Pravda, under the White House's prompter, broke into accusations that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was allegedly "blackmailing" NATO into lifting sanctions for buying Russian S-400 in exchange for a change of position on Finland and Sweden's membership in the alliance. At the same time, Panchenko drew comparisons between Turkey's position and Hungary's demarche, which threatens to veto the EU's sixth package of sanctions against Russia, primarily over the oil embargo. To sting the Turkish president more, he also expressed the view, clearly dictated from the US, that "Ankara is also trying to capitalize on the sanctions by planning to increase the flow of Russian tourists."

Earning Washington's pieces of silver, another Ukrainian politician, Rada MP Maxim Buzhansky, came up with another anti-Turkish version on May 19, according to which, by blocking Sweden and Finland from joining NATO, Turkey is allegedly trying to achieve EU membership and intends to exchange EU membership for NATO enlargement.

The Ukrainian president himself stepped in to fuel the anti-Turkish hysteria, blatantly condemning Turkey in an interview with Greek ERT in early May for welcoming Russian tourists. At the same time, Zelensky not only gave Ankara an ultimatum, but also openly called on this and other tourist countries to sponsor the Ukrainian economy, which even the Turkish newspaper dikGAZETE has written about.

Readers of the Turkish newspaper En Son Haber were angered by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's ultimatum and his words about Russian tourists. They called on Turkish businessmen to stop selling drones to the Ukrainian leader. The attitude of the people of Turkey towards the Ukrainian president and his policies is clearly illustrated by the discussion in the pages of this publication. Reader Rick, for example, expressed his indignation as follows: "What an ungrateful little man. Should Turkey ask you what to do next?" Another reader continues: "We have a saying: if you coddle a donkey too much, it imagines itself to be a racehorse. The world has surrounded Zelensky with a little too much attention and he now takes it for granted. It's as simple as that." "Who do you think you are? You don't know how to run a state and thousands of people have died because of it. Their blood is on your hands," stressed Altan Khalil Yilmaz.

On May 2, a former Turkish MP of the ruling Justice and Development Party, Shamil Tayyar, sharply retorted to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's remarks about Russian tourists in Turkey.  "Stupid comedian!" the ex-parliamentarian summed up on his Twitter.

In addition to Kiev's blatantly anti-Turkish information campaign, it should also not be forgotten that Ukraine has blocked 21 Turkish vessels in the port of Odessa to use them as living shields, the media reported. In particular, the Turkish Aydınlık told its readers: "According to information we have received, 21 of the ships that were not allowed to leave the port of Odessa belong to Turkey. Ukraine does not want these ships to leave, citing the "danger" of mines left at sea. Russia has opened a security corridor, but Ukraine is still not letting them through. But the main objective is different. If the foreign ships leave, the Ukrainians will be an obvious target – and Odessa will soon fall. For this reason Ukrainians do not allow foreign ships to leave, including 21 Turkish ships." The newspaper reveals another reason why Ukrainians are not letting the Turkish ships out: they hope they will come under attack if the Russian military launches an operation in Odessa, which could cause tensions in Turkish-Russian relations.

The Ukrainian president's statements and policies have irritated even Turkish nationalists. "When he (Volodymyr Zelensky) takes into account the attitudes and positions of the countries of the world in the Ukrainian-Russian war, Zelensky should use a very respectful tone towards the Turkish people, the Turkish state and the government of the Republic of Turkey," Nationalist Movement Party leader Devlet Bahçeli said, as reported by NTV on May 12. The head of the organization, which includes the Grey Wolves, noted that Turkey is the only country that wants to resolve the situation peacefully — through the Istanbul Peace Project.

The understanding of the neo-Nazi basis of Kiev's policy has become increasingly entrenched in Turkish society. Turkish historian Mehmet Perinçek, who has personally spoken to people in liberated Ukrainian cities, in contrast to the West's informational support for Kiev, told RT that Russian-speaking Ukrainians had lived under a "neo-Nazi dictatorship" for eight years. "I have spoken to various people from the liberated cities. They have really been living under a neo-Nazi dictatorship for these eight years," he said. Ukrainians told the Turkish historian that they were prevented from celebrating Victory Day and speaking their own language, and that children in schools were forced to hate their neighbors. "I have heard this personally from ordinary people in Melitopol, Berdyansk, Mariupol. During this dictatorship, people disappeared, went missing — this was all before the Russian special operation," he said.

As well as verbally attacking Turkey, Kiev is not averse to using financial accusations in its relations with Ankara, to which it has just spoken of its boundless sympathy, and on February 3 it even signed 8 bilateral agreements on various aspects of politics and economics. For example, in late April, Volodymyr Krakovetsky, director of public relations at the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs, appealed to the Ankara police, accusing the Turkish defense company of allegedly embezzling US $5 million from the Ukrainian state budget, the media reported. According to Cumhuriyet, it was a deal between the Ukrainian authorities and the firm Aka Arms Defense to buy 5,000 helmets and body armor kits (each costing $1,050). Kiev paid for the purchase with 11 different transfers, including in cryptocurrency. However, Kiev's accusations have not been confirmed.

Valery Kulikov, political expert, exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

New Eastern Outlook
Wed, 25 May 2022 20:59:53 +0000

West Decries Philippine’s New Government – US-backed Protests Begin


Recent general elections in The Philippines appear to signal the island nation's continued but gradual move out from under US subordination and its rise with the rest of Asia as China emerges as both a regional and global superpower.

With Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. set to become the next president along with his running mate, Sara Duterte, daughter of the outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte, the Western media appears convinced that it signals the continued building of relations between The Philippines and China and the gradual diminishing of American influence over both The Philippines and the rest of the region.

The Southeast Asian nation of The Philippines has been of strategic importance to the US pursuit of primacy over Asia for decades. From 1898 to 1946 The Philippines was actually a colony of the United States and since the nation gained its independence at the end of World War 2, the US has sought to maintain a military presence on the island nation, as well as political control over it.

In recent years Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has seriously challenged attempts by the US to derail the nation's ties with China. China represents not only The Philippines' largest trade partner, but also an increasingly important infrastructure partner. When the US in 2016 organized an "arbitration" at the Hague rejecting China's claims over the South China Sea under the nine-dash line, President Duterte refused to leverage it and instead worked with China bilaterally.

According to The Sydney Morning Herald in an article titled, "There is a new Marcos in Manila and he wants a maritime deal with China," the incoming president, Marcos will likely continue pursuing bilateral solutions rather than seek a confrontation underwritten by Washington.

The article notes:

Philippines is one of several nations that have territorial disputes with Beijing in the South China Sea. But Marcos has foreshadowed an intention to pursue a maritime deal with Xi Jinping's regime and set aside an international tribunal ruling in The Hague that rejected China's sweeping claims to most of the contested waterway under its so-called nine-dash line.

"That arbitration is no longer an arbitration if there's only one party. So, it's no longer available to us," he said in January, adding that war is not an option and "bilateral agreement is what we are left with". 

The article also noted that Marcos has insisted he would not turn to the US in regards to his nation's relations with China.

Policy analysts cited in the article would claim that regardless of the incoming Philippine government's stated policies, the US and its partners, most notably Australia, would "have to make sure the Marcos regime will not lean too much into the Chinese orbit of influence."

Benar News, admittedly funded by the US government through an annual grant from the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM), in its article, "Marcos seen as pro-China; Robredo will likely test Beijing ties," would make it much clearer:

China would likely enjoy friendly ties with the Philippines if Ferdinand Marcos Jr. wins next week's presidential election, while his main challenger, Vice President Leni Robredo, has vowed to seek help in protecting Philippine waters in the South China Sea, American analysts said.

This "insight" was garnered from Benar News' interview with the likewise US government-funded Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) whose analyst Greg Poling claimed:

Marcos is the most pro-Beijing of all candidates. He is the most pro-Chinese in a system where most people are anti-Chinese. He avoids the press and debates, and what we have are these off-the-cuff remarks that are pro-Chinese. He is a friend of the Chinese embassy.

Marcos' opponent during the election was Leni Robredo. She served as vice president with President Duterte (The Philippines vote for president and vice president separately allowing opposing politicians to serve side-by-side).

The Benar News article would claim regarding her position regarding China and the US:

Poling said Robredo may not be ideologically pro-American or a "cheerleader for the alliance," but she appears to be a nationalist who could tap allies for help in the territorial row that has dragged on for years. 

"She is pragmatic about the South China Sea. [She believes] China is a threat and violates the rule of law in the South China Sea," Poling said, adding that there was reason to believe that her victory could strengthen the Philippine-US alliance.

Manila is Washington's biggest ally in Southeast Asia, where an increasingly assertive China is encroaching on other claimant nations' exclusive economic zones in the disputed South China Sea.

Benar News' article attempts to suggest Robredo is not excessively "pro-American." But her track record tells a different story.

Robredo was Washington's Candidate of Choice

Robredo has previously worked for a legal organization funded through foreign governments and foundations including the US government via USAID. Rouge in an article titled, "The Evolution of Leni Robredo: How the VP Underdog Became the Race's Strongest Contender," would note:

Robredo landed a gig with SALIGAN (Sentro ng Alternatibong Lingap Pangligal), an alternative legal support group, begun in Ateneo de Manila University and based in Bicol. "We were like community organizers," she says of their work. The team would trek to far-flung communities with little to no access to legal aid, and provide paralegal help.

She would spend a decade at SALIGAN, an organization that has for years directly and as part of a wider legal network received funding from and has worked with the US government in shaping and interfering in Philippine sovereign institutions.

In a 2008 USAID document, it would explain:

One ALG, Saligan, reportedly trained almost 500 paralegals to guide farmers' land reform applications through Department of Agrarian Reform administrative processes. The organization also played a key role in getting the Naga City Government to institutionalize a People's Council—a permanent official advisory channel for NGO input into the functioning of municipal services. 

With "NGOs" serving as one of the US' major vectors for interfering in the internal political affairs of targeted nations, SALIGAN's role in creating councils as "advisory channels for NGO input" means giving US-sponsored organizations the ability to directly influence political decisions.

In 2018 as vice president, Robreto would participate in a US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) program – the Young Leaders for Good Governance (YLGG) Fellowship.

The US government-funded program is meant to not only influence who takes leadership roles in the Philippine government, but also what sort of policies they create – essentially building pro-American political cadres in the heart of the Philippine government.

In an International Republican Institute (IRI) article titled, "Why is it Important to Have Local Level Citizen-Centered Governance in the Philippines?," it would note Robreto's role in meeting with participants:

The fellows were particularly honored that Vice President of the Philippines, Leni Robredo spoke at the graduation ceremony. Vice President Robredo addressed the importance of fostering good governance and the crucial role these fellows play in the future of the Philippines, in which they should "innovate and search for better ways to solve problems, change mindsets, take risks and be successful politicians without sacrificing their values."

While the US accuses China of attempting to influence nations around the globe in contradiction to US interests simply through trade and infrastructure investments, one only has to imagine the reaction from Washington if it was China organizing "leadership programs" to train and install into power its own political cadres.

The Urgency of US-Philippine Military "Cooperation"

A recently published RAND Corporation paper titled, "Ground-Based Intermediate-Range Missiles in the Indo-Pacific – Assessing the Positions of U.S. Allies," focuses on the necessity for the US to place intermediate-range missiles within striking distance of China. These missiles along with other military assets are prerequisites for any conventional war waged by the US against China – conventional war the US sees as absolutely necessary between now and as early as 2025 to prevent China from irreversibly surpassing the US economically and militarily.

The paper mentions the Philippines specifically, claiming:

The US alliance with the Philippines is in a state of flux. While the Philippine public and elites generally support the United States and the alliance itself, current President Rodrigo Duterte has pursued policies that negatively affect ties. Specifically, since his election in May 2016, Duterte has advocated closer ties with Beijing while concurrently pursuing policies that weaken core pillars of the US-Philippine alliance. Although Duterte has backtracked somewhat on these approaches, leading to some improvement in US-Philippine ties, as long as future Philippine leaders continue similar policies, including opposition to a permanent US military presence, the Philippines is extremely unlikely to accept the deployment of US GBIRMs

Because US strategy in regards to encircling, containing, and potentially waging conventional war against China depends heavily on prepositioning these missiles and other military assets along China's periphery – especially in regards to Taiwan – securing a sufficient US military presence in the Philippines is crucial. But because such a presence meant solely to threaten China would endanger Chinese-Philippine relations including significant economic ties, no rational government would allow it.

The formation of Marcos' administration will go far in telling just how Philippine policy toward both China and the US will unfold, but it is safe to say that should the new government attempt build closer ties with China and refuse attempts by the US to recruit it into a regional front against Beijing, the US will employ all the familiar tools used to coerce or even overthrow the government in due time.

If the US is convinced already that the Marcos administration will not pivot toward anti-China policies, it may begin destabilizing efforts through extensive media, NGO, and political networks funded through the NED even before his late-June inauguration. Such efforts would start with youth-led protests citing baseless claims of "voter fraud." Such protests are already underway.

The New York Times in its article, "Marcos Win Prompts Protests in the Philippines," claims:

Young voters who had rallied around Leni Robredo during the presidential race gathered to voice their frustration with preliminary results showing her overwhelming defeat. 

The article also claims:

Multiple election observers said they had received thousands of reports of election-related anomalies since the vote on Monday. Malfunctioning voting machines were one of the biggest concerns, with VoteReportPH, an election watchdog, saying the breakdowns had "severely impaired this electoral process."

VoteReportPH is a conglomeration of US, Western, and allied-funded organizations. "UP Internet Freedom Network," for example, admits on its website to being funded by the Taiwan government-funded DoubleThink Lab as well as the Western government-funded "Civicus" network. It is only one of many US-funded networks eagerly supporting the current protests.

It is clear Washington sought a different electoral outcome and will use the now familiar tools of US-sponsored "color revolution" to coerce the incoming government to sabotage its ties with China and militarize itself as yet another US proxy. Failing that, the US would seek to overthrow and replace this government with one more to Washington's liking.

Only time will tell how long these recent protests last and whether or not The Philippines can manage this balancing act with grace, securing socio-economic stability and exploiting the many opportunities offered by China's regional and global rise, or if through US interference, the Marcos administration is tripped up, landing The Philippines into internal chaos and at the very least, denying the nation as a partner for China.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

Text to Speech by: ResponsiveVoice-NonCommercial licensed under 95x15
website no use cookies, no spying, no tracking
to use the website, we check:
country: US · city: · ip:
device: computer · browser: CCBot 2 · platform:
counter: 1 · online:
created and powered by:
RobiYogi.com - Professional Responsive Websites
 please wait loading data...