USA - Russia: Let us in your underbelly
April 13, the Russian agency RIA News circulated a statement about the statement by the US Coast Guard commander, Admiral Paul Zuckunt, according to which the Northern Sea Route, owned by Russia and mastered over many decades, should become a transport corridor open to the entire world community. The US claims for the internationalization of the Northern Sea Route, so timely announced, are the next step in the escalation of threats against the Russian Federation.
Recall that over the past seven days, the next U.S. sanctions against Russia under the CAATSA law came into force, the planned Stand with UK against Russia Violations Act was announced, according to which all operations with the Russian government debt would be banned. Also, several extremely threatening statements were made regarding a possible attack on the military group of the Russian Federation in Syria. We also add that yesterday the candidate for the post of US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, said that a lot of work has to be done on sanctions against Russia, since "Vladimir Putin did not catch the signal."
Although the escalation of pressure in itself for several days seems quite alarming, and recalls the worst times of the most dangerous crises of the Cold War, for example, Berlin, Suez and the Caribbean, in reality the situation is even worse, and is not just a layering of more or less random crises, conflicts, domestic and foreign political escapades, and, in fact, the manifestation of America’s great strategy with a cycle equal to centuries.
The starting point of this great strategy is that the United States considers itself a God-chosen country that is destined to rule the world. One of the working tools of this strategy is the requirement to internationalize everything that falls into Washington’s area of interest.
A classic example of using this tool, for example, is the American policy "Open Doors" in China, held in 1899 - 1949. The essence of this doctrine was that the United States did not recognize the spheres of influence of foreign countries in China, and demanded the free movement of capital and goods (meaning, of course, American capital and goods) throughout Chinese territory. However, the Doctrine of the Open Doors for the Americans ended quite sadly - the Communists Mao Tse Tung defeated in most of the Chinese territory and created the People’s Republic of China, while the US allies retained control over the island of Taiwan and the adjacent small island territories.
Less well-known is the concept of internationalization of the Danube. Beginning in 1944, the United States and Great Britain demanded the establishment of control by an international authority over the shipping regime on the Danube, which should also include “non-Danubian powers,” that is, the United States and Great Britain. The USSR was supposed to be simply excluded from the international shipping management body, taking advantage of certain legal conflicts of the 38th century. The game was worth the candle - according to the then estimates, 25% of the fertile lands of Europe, 50% of coal and brown coal reserves, 30% of bauxite deposits, about 20% of oil production, XNUMX% of potential hydropower were in the Danube territories. Despite the fact that it was not possible to push this idea to the Americans and the British due to the opposition of the Soviet side, the result here turned out to be more successful, since in the end all the Danube countries were part of NATO, excluding only Austria and Serbia.
A particular case of the strategy of internationalization is the famous doctrine of Monroe (1823). Since Washington had less power at that time, he was satisfied only with the Western Hemisphere.
We also note that the United States is extremely sensitive to the creation of weapons systems that cover some regions of the planet for access by the US armed forces. This class includes the Russian dagger hypersonic complex, a Chinese complex that uses ballistic missiles with a conventional warhead, each of which is capable of destroying an aircraft carrier, layered air defense systems existing in Russia and planned to be built in China. The emergence of each such system is perceived by American strategists and military experts as a serious challenge to the ability of the United States to secure the level of “internationalization” that it wants.
Recall that over the past seven days, the next U.S. sanctions against Russia under the CAATSA law came into force, the planned Stand with UK against Russia Violations Act was announced, according to which all operations with the Russian government debt would be banned. Also, several extremely threatening statements were made regarding a possible attack on the military group of the Russian Federation in Syria. We also add that yesterday the candidate for the post of US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, said that a lot of work has to be done on sanctions against Russia, since "Vladimir Putin did not catch the signal."
Although the escalation of pressure in itself for several days seems quite alarming, and recalls the worst times of the most dangerous crises of the Cold War, for example, Berlin, Suez and the Caribbean, in reality the situation is even worse, and is not just a layering of more or less random crises, conflicts, domestic and foreign political escapades, and, in fact, the manifestation of America’s great strategy with a cycle equal to centuries.
The starting point of this great strategy is that the United States considers itself a God-chosen country that is destined to rule the world. One of the working tools of this strategy is the requirement to internationalize everything that falls into Washington’s area of interest.
A classic example of using this tool, for example, is the American policy "Open Doors" in China, held in 1899 - 1949. The essence of this doctrine was that the United States did not recognize the spheres of influence of foreign countries in China, and demanded the free movement of capital and goods (meaning, of course, American capital and goods) throughout Chinese territory. However, the Doctrine of the Open Doors for the Americans ended quite sadly - the Communists Mao Tse Tung defeated in most of the Chinese territory and created the People’s Republic of China, while the US allies retained control over the island of Taiwan and the adjacent small island territories.
Less well-known is the concept of internationalization of the Danube. Beginning in 1944, the United States and Great Britain demanded the establishment of control by an international authority over the shipping regime on the Danube, which should also include “non-Danubian powers,” that is, the United States and Great Britain. The USSR was supposed to be simply excluded from the international shipping management body, taking advantage of certain legal conflicts of the 38th century. The game was worth the candle - according to the then estimates, 25% of the fertile lands of Europe, 50% of coal and brown coal reserves, 30% of bauxite deposits, about 20% of oil production, XNUMX% of potential hydropower were in the Danube territories. Despite the fact that it was not possible to push this idea to the Americans and the British due to the opposition of the Soviet side, the result here turned out to be more successful, since in the end all the Danube countries were part of NATO, excluding only Austria and Serbia.
A particular case of the strategy of internationalization is the famous doctrine of Monroe (1823). Since Washington had less power at that time, he was satisfied only with the Western Hemisphere.
We also note that the United States is extremely sensitive to the creation of weapons systems that cover some regions of the planet for access by the US armed forces. This class includes the Russian dagger hypersonic complex, a Chinese complex that uses ballistic missiles with a conventional warhead, each of which is capable of destroying an aircraft carrier, layered air defense systems existing in Russia and planned to be built in China. The emergence of each such system is perceived by American strategists and military experts as a serious challenge to the ability of the United States to secure the level of “internationalization” that it wants.
Information