We were waiting for the end of the world
Waiting for the end of the world Waiting for the end of the world
Dear Lord, I sincerely hope that you will come
Because you really started something.
Elvis Costello, Waiting for the End of the World, 1977
We cannot even begin to imagine the uninterrupted cascading effects of the geopolitical earthquake of 2023 that shook the world: Putin and Xi, in Moscow, effectively signalling the beginning of the end of the Pax Americana.
By Pepe Escobar
This has been the ultimate anathema to rarefied Anglo-American hegemonic elites for more than a century: a comprehensive strategic partnership, sealed and signed between two equal competitors, weaving together a huge manufacturing base and pre-eminence in natural resource supply, including world-class weaponry, diplomatic expertise and state-of-the-art Russian value-added experience.
From the point of view of these elites, whose Plan A has always been a debased version of the Roman Empire’s “Divide and Rule”, this was never supposed to happen. In fact, blinded by arrogance, they never saw it coming. Historically, this does not even qualify as a remix of Tournament of Shadows; it is more like a “vulgar Empire left in the shadows”, “foaming at the mouth” (copyright Maria Zakharova).
Xi and Putin, with a movement ala Sun Tzu, have targeted Orientalism, Eurocentrism, exceptionalism and, last but not least, neo-colonialism. No wonder the Global South was fascinated by what happened in Moscow.
To make matters worse, China is by far the world’s largest economy when measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), as well as the world’s largest exporter. And then there is Russia, an economy that by PPP is equivalent to or even larger than Germany’s, with the added advantage of being the world’s largest energy exporter and not having been forced to deindustrialise.
fotospublicas.com – Kremlin
Together, in sync, they are focused on creating the conditions necessary to circumvent the US dollar.
Enjoy one of President Putin’s crucial phrases: “We are in favour of using the Chinese yuan for agreements between Russia and countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America”.
A fundamental consequence of this carefully crafted geopolitical and geo-economic alliance over the past few years is already in play: the emergence of a potential triad in terms of global trade relations and, in many ways, a Global Trade War.
Eurasia is being led, and organised to a large extent, by the Russia-China partnership. China will also play a key role throughout the Global South, but India could also become quite influential, merging what would be a Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) on steroids. And then there is the former ‘indispensable nation’ that governs the EU and Anglosphere vassals gathered in the Five Eyes.
What the Chinese really want
The Hegemon, under its self-proclaimed “rules-based international order”, has essentially never done diplomacy. Divide and rule, by definition, excludes diplomacy. Now, its version of “diplomacy” has further degenerated into crude insults from a host of intellectually challenged and frankly imbecilic American, European and British officials.
No wonder a true gentleman, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, was forced to admit: “Russia is no longer a partner of the EU… The European Union has ‘lost’ Russia. But the Union itself is to blame. After all, the EU member states … openly declare that Russia should suffer a strategic defeat. That is why we consider the EU to be an enemy organisation.
And yet Russia’s new foreign policy concept, announced by Putin on 31 March, makes it very clear: Russia does not consider itself an ‘enemy of the West’ and does not seek isolation.
The problem is that there are virtually no adults to talk to on the other side, just a pack of hyenas. This prompted Lavrov to emphasise once again that “symmetrical and asymmetrical” measures can be used against those involved in “hostile” actions against Moscow.
When it comes to Exceptionalistan [the US-led Western Collective – translator’s note], one thing is clear: Moscow designates the US as the main anti-Russian instigator, and the general policy of the Western Collective is described as “a new kind of Hybrid War”.
What really matters to Moscow, however, are the positive aspects in the future: the seamless integration of Eurasia; closer ties with the “friendly global centres” China and India; increased aid to Africa; more strategic cooperation with Latin America and the Caribbean, the lands of Islam (Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt) and ASEAN.
And that brings us to something essential that was predictably ignored en masse by the Western media: the Boao Forum for Asia, which took place almost simultaneously with the announcement of Russia’s new foreign policy concept.
Launched in early 2001, still in the pre-9/11 era, the Boao Forum was inspired by Davos, but is Top China through and through, with the secretariat based in Beijing. Boao is located in Hainan province, one of the islands in the Gulf of Tonkin and today a tourist paradise.
One of the main sessions at this year’s forum was on development and security, chaired by former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who currently chairs Boao.
There were some references to Xi’s Global Development Initiative, as well as the Global Security Initiative, which, incidentally, was launched in Boao in 2022.
fotospublicas.com – Valter Campanato/Agência Brasil
The problem is that these two initiatives are directly linked to the UN’s concept of peace and security and to the dubious 2030 Agenda on ‘sustainable development’ – which is not exactly about development, let alone ‘sustainable’: it is a super-corporate Davos mash-up. The UN, for its part, is basically hostage to Washington’s whims. Beijing, for now, plays along.
Premier Li Qiang was more specific. Emphasising the “trademark” concept of “community of humanity’s shared future” as the basis for peace and development, he linked non-violent coexistence with the “Spirit of Bandung” – in direct continuity with the emergence of NAM in 1955: this should be the “Asian way” of mutual respect and consensus-building, as opposed to the “indiscriminate use of unilateral sanctions and far-reaching jurisdiction” and the rejection of “a new Cold War”.
And this led Li Qiang to emphasise China’s effort to deepen the East Asia RCEP trade agreement and also to advance negotiations on the China-ASEAN free trade agreement. And all of this is embedded in the further expansion of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), in contrast to trade protectionism.
Thus, for the Chinese, what matters, interspersed with business, are cultural interactions; inclusiveness; mutual trust; and a stern rejection of the ‘clash of civilisations’ and ideological confrontation.
As much as Moscow readily subscribes to all of the above, and indeed practices it with diplomatic subtlety, Washington is terrified of how attractive this Chinese narrative is to the entire Global South. After all, the Exceptionalist’s only offer in the marketplace of ideas is unilateral domination; divide and rule; and ‘you are either with us or against us’. And in the latter case you will be condemned, harassed, bombed and/or subjected to regime change.
Is it 1848 all over again?
Meanwhile, in the vassal territories, the possibility of a revival of 1848 arises, when a great revolutionary wave sweeps across Europe.
In 1848 these were liberal revolutions; today we have essentially popular illiberal (and anti-war) revolutions, from farmers in Holland and Belgium to unreconstructed populists in Italy and combined left-right populists in France.
It may be too early to call this a European spring. However, what is certain in various latitudes is that the average European citizen is increasingly inclined to throw off the yoke of Neoliberal Technocracy and its dictatorship of Capital and Surveillance. Not to mention NATO’s warmongering.
As practically all European media are controlled by technocrats, people will not see this discussion about the MSM. However, there is a feeling in the air that this could be heralding the no end of a Chinese-style dynasty.
In the Chinese calendar this is always the case: their social-historical clock always runs with periods between 200 and 400 years per dynasty.
Indeed, there are indications that Europe may be witnessing a renaissance.
The period of upheaval will be long and arduous, due to the hordes of anarcho-liberals who are useful idiots for the Western oligarchy, or it may all come to a head in a single day. The goal is quite clear: the death of Neoliberal Technocracy.
This is how Xi-Putin’s vision can make its way into the collective West: to show that this surrogate of “modernity” (embodying the rabid culture of cancellation) [decadent, hyper-liquid late modernity – translator’s note] is essentially null and void compared to traditional and deeply rooted cultural values, be it Confucianism, Taoism or Eastern Orthodoxy. The Chinese and Russian concepts of a state of civilisation are far more attractive than they appear.
Wikimedia commons
Well, the (cultural) revolution will not be televised; but it can work its charms through countless Telegram channels. France, passionate about rebellion throughout its history, may well leap to the front, again.
However, nothing will change if the global financial casino is not subverted. Russia taught the world a lesson: it was quietly preparing for a long all-out war. So much so that its calibrated counterpunch turned the financial war on its head, completely destabilising the casino. Meanwhile, China is rebalancing and is well on its way to preparing for All Out War too, hybrid or otherwise.
The invaluable Michael Hudson, fresh from his latest book, The Collapse of Antiquity, where he ably analyses the role of debt in Greece and Rome, the roots of Western civilisation, succinctly explains our current state:
“America has made a colour revolution at the top, in Germany, Holland, England and France, essentially, where Europe’s foreign policy is not representing its own economic interests (…) war of (what they call) democracy (by which they mean oligarchy, including Ukrainian Nazism) against autocracy (…).
Thus, the “creditor oligarchy” can in fact be explained as the toxic intersection between globalist wet dreams of total control and full-spectrum militarised domination.
The difference now is that Russia and China are showing the Global South that what US strategists had in store for them (they will be “frozen in the dark” if they deviate from what we say) no longer applies. Most of the Global South is now in open geo-economic revolt.
Neoliberal globalist totalitarianism will certainly not disappear under a sandstorm. At least not yet. There is still a whirlwind of toxicity ahead: suspension of constitutional rights; Orwellian propaganda; henchmen squads; censorship; cancelling culture; ideological conformity; unreasonable restrictions on freedom of movement; hatred and even persecution of – Slavuntermenschen [subhuman Slavs, as the Nazis love to say – translator’s note] ; segregation; criminalisation of dissent; book burnings, show trials; bogus ICC kangaroo warrants; ISIS-style Terror.
But the most important vector is that both China and Russia, each with their own complex particularities (both dismissed by the West as unassimilable), invest heavily in building viable economic models that are not connected, to a greater or lesser degree, to the casino system. and/or their supply chain networks. And that is what is making the Exceptionalists even angrier than they already are.
Pepe Escobar is a freelance author and geopolitical analyst in Eurasia. His latest book is Raging Twenties (Nimble Books, 2021). Follow him on Telegram at @rocknrollgeopolitics.
Sources:
Russian: https://www.vedomosti.ru/opinion/columns/2023/04/10/970144-konets-sveta-dlya-gegemona
Spanish: https://vk.com/@pepeasia-esperando-el-fin-del-mundo
