My most recent couple of efforts have been attempts to try and understand how it is that the Leader of the Free World is going to be Literally Hitler once again. As such, I explored some nefarious options that are still in play prior to inauguration and then, more optimistically, what the conversely favourable outcomes might look like. In this third piece, I shall set out some hypotheses that might explain why it was that Trump was allowed to win and I'll also focus more on the Empire that we hear so little about, rather than the more frequently addressed Great Reset. It may well be that string-pullers have switched horses in mid-stream.
Some terminology is ubiquitous in Resistance circles, albeit precise definitions may be a tad squishy. The Deep State, for instance, means different things to different people; for some, it's an entity that encompasses all behind-the-scenes hostile actors, whereas others – such as myself – tend to additionally delineate an Administrative State, as well as the allegedly private sector of NGOs, media, think tanks and the like. Then there are the foot soldiers, the true believers – currently (and usually) at least mildly unhinged – plus the ostensible decision makers, the politicians themselves, who may or may not be influential. Think Obama v Biden – one clearly a man of of power, the other a grifter and an empty vessel, yet both occupants of the White House.
The Deep State in the US and the UK, the epicentres of the supranational Deep State, seem to mostly be the preserve of the intelligence community, ex-office-holders and assorted Masters of the Universe from Big Business, whose interests are prioritised to the exclusion of all others. The surface politicians, historically, appear to have been Republicans for the most part, as they were more reliably belligerent in times past, although Clinton was a protegee of Bush the Elder – think Iran-Contra and the role of Arkansas, where much of the illicit activity took place under the Governor's watchful eye – and LBJ was a likely conspirator in the assassination of JFK (his close associate's palm print was lifted from the sniper's nest on the sixth floor of the TBD).
When Schwab's vision of the future started getting airtime, there did seem to be some tension between the unipolar world that the American elites' had constructed and a world in which “the US won't be the world's leading superpower – a handful of countries will dominate” -(1) unless they were simply selling us a pup and instead intended to ease us into a future under a global government dominated by the existing elites. Nonetheless, it's a pronouncement that's difficult to reconcile with Karl Rove's infamous statement from 2004: "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality."(2) There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of sharing being contemplated there, nor a deference to any other entity that might usurp them. Rove's empire is a much more muscular proposition:
“To people who share Rove's view of power - whether they call themselves Republicans, Democrats or something else - being an empire means one is no longer bound by anything. Not the Constitution, not natural or divine law, not language, and not even physical reality. Everything is just a function of the Nietzschean "will to power". If they want something, they take it, by whatever means are most expedient. They can make excuses afterwards, or in many cases not even bother. As one former UN GenSec wrote, they see "little need for diplomacy; power is enough."”
The WEF's view of the future seems to be a repudiation of the US global empire, rather than being consistent with its continued existence. In a similar vein, many of the domestic policies pursued by the most recent tip of the globalist spear – the progressives who have dominated the political sphere across most of the Western world – serve to weaken, not strengthen. DEI policies, ESG and vaccine mandates for the US military don't appear to be very neocon-friendly, as they tend to undermine the ability to bully other countries into compliance with US/UK dogma. It seems at least possible, therefore, that the enemy may not be of one voice and that Leftist malcontents who are congenitally unable to leave anything well alone have been jettisoned – for now, at any rate. If that is so, it might constitute a changing of the guard and a demotion for the Lightbringer, who had been lurking in the background for the past eight years:
“Presidents leave the capital city after their term in office to demonstrate their respect for one of the fundamental principles of our republic: the transfer of executive authority from one president to another. Obama stayed to underscore the opposite....Obama announced at the start of his second term he wasn’t going away, and spent the first four years of his post-White House tenure to lead the resistance, and the next four as shadow president.”(5)
There were signs of a loosening of his grip over the summer, during the putsch against Biden in the wake of the latter's entirely predictable implosion in the debate with Trump – an engineered crisis that Biden seems to have believed he could weather, only to be sawn off at the knees by Pelosi. Biden then swiftly endorsed Harris and Obama, jarringly, did not. It felt very much like he had been outmanoeuvred and it has subsequently been claimed – by those who ought to know - that he wanted others to put their hats in the ring; also known as an 'anyone but Kamala' strategy.(6) Apparently, Biden's endorsement derailed Obama's train, as he knew it would, because “no-one anticipated the two-fer we got that day.”(7) Biden subsequently seemed happy with his work and even indulged in a little trolling along the way.
Figure 1
Figure 2
But outmanoeuvred by who – or what? Where does the deepest of the Deep State reside? While Obama and the wokerati were attempting to run the US into the ground, were there other forces working to assert their dominance, perhaps overseas? Yes, there were, just as there have been for decades and it is readily apparent that a goodly proportion of foreign policy is conducted by the CIA and its cut-outs, regardless of who is in the Oval Office. The US/UK empire, the means of global domination, seems to be the Agency's baby, not the president's. Has there come a time when domestic chicanery authored by the Left has come to be a hindrance to a deeper power, which has given rise to the necessity to recalibrate and ditch the crazies? Because there's a lot of work to be done if the US/UK axis is to retain its hegemony.
They've already been very busy, in compulsive and egomaniacal fashion. It seems that their will must be done, whenever it is required to be done and, since they've decided that the world is their oyster and there are very few nations capable of resisting that notion, they have played in-your-face fast and loose – because, in Roveian style, they can. And, somehow or other, they've even managed to persuade themselves that they are doing the right thing.
Mike Benz explained it well when interviewed by Rogan recently.(8) The Deep State and its minions have convinced themselves that the term 'democracy' has been misapplied this whole time. Merriam-Webster may still define the term the old-fashioned way, with an emphasis on power being “vested in the people”, such that the system allows “citizens to participate in decision-making processes”,(9) but they simply haven't yet gotten with the programme. In fact, democracy is reliant upon “the consensus of institutions, rather than individuals” -(10) as Benz puts it – and any right-wing, populist anti-authoritarianism is, by this upside-down redefinition, anti-democratic.
The people cannot be allowed to go all ground-up, when the true essence of democracy is clearly top down, with government, science, media, 'the experts' and the NGOs that aren't really NGOs in the ascendancy. However, it is increasingly apparent that this version of 'democracy' needs additional guardrails to protect it from demagogues, because “people voted for Hitler and people voted for Trump”,(11) and so the intelligence communities took it upon themselves to intervene ceaselessly in affairs both foreign and domestic, in defence of the institutions that the Deep State and the Administrative State had constructed, whether the people consented to the creation of those structures or not.
In this way, the denizens of the establishment can not only sleep at night, they can also get up in the morning, full of zest for the day ahead, knowing that they are on the side of the angels – if angels actually existed, which they don't as there is no God. It's a neat trick, if you can pull it off. Objectively, however, on the domestic front is goes something like this:
“"Democracy" works best when corporate oligarchs tell politicians and bureaucrats what to do, while corporate news and corporate-funded "non-profit" groups pretend that everything the government does is all very reasonable. Government power launders prestige to the academics, journalists, and think-tanks; those outside opinion-leaders launder their "objectivity" to the politicians and bureaucrats; the politicians and bureaucrats launder taxpayer dollars to big corporate interests; and the big corporate interests kick some coin back to the politicians, bureaucrats, academics, journalists, and think-tanks...That's the American system of "democracy" — a farcical wonderland where the wealthy and powerful use counterfeit money and counterfeit opinion to generate real policy and wealth while impoverishing and endangering the people in whose name the system is ludicrously said to serve.”(12)
And it's not just the American system of government – it's all Western countries, from the Down-Unders to the members of the EU, Canada and the UK and Ireland as well. We've seen that much more clearly over the past five years, where governments have shed their sheepskins to reveal the wolf beneath. Not just with the gross overreach of the 'pandemic' years, but in their willingness to ignore the growing populism within their borders and keep power in the hands of the old-guard.
Macron's sleight-of-hand, Scholz's drive to ban the AfD, the sidelining of Wilders in the Netherlands, Lopez's gymnastics in Spain, the Fifth Columnist 'conservatives' in Poland and Portugal – the 'far-right', as all the upstart parties are labelled pejoratively, makes vast strides yet they are still not given a voice. This is because one cannot simply disagree with the view of the experts' policy prescriptions; that's far too innocent a view. One must actively support them, because to dissent is to prove oneself stupid or, quite possibly, a Nazi who wants to take down 'democracy'. Or, in all likelihood, both.
But the American Deep State, in league with the Brits who keep their involvement very much on the down-low, is the one to watch; “they war with the old nationalist populations, the true peoples of the world, to deprive them of their rights and reduce them to servility,”(13) and they do so because “the majority of DC elites … see American global leadership as fundamentally moral, even vital and indispensable,”(14) which, in turn, justifies the excesses to which they are prone.
It takes a special kind of narcissist to believe that the world needs you to fill in your blank canvas however you see fit, in the total absence of any indication that the people who make up the world actually want you to do that, but in the presence of numerous indications that would indicate the complete opposite. But when democracy is actually all about preserving institutions, it's not so difficult to understand the self-justification. Hence, when the peons in the UK vote for Brexit – and it becomes apparent that Euroscepticism isn't confined to the Sceptred Isle, but is a widespread contagion – the European globalists do their thing, both for their own reasons and because Big Brother requires them to.
A Frexit and/or a Grexit would be terminal to the EU, which would also decimate NATO which, in turn, would mean that the IMF, World Bank and international creditors would have no enforcement arm. That cannot be allowed to happen. However, some countries don't have the same preponderance of pro-Western authoritarians; some, especially in Eastern Europe, in the former Soviet Republics and in Africa, have elites who are not willing to answer the siren call of the West and would prefer to look East instead. This is generally because that is what the overwhelming majority of their voters want them to do.
But the American/British Deep State has been Russophobic for eighty years. During the Cold War, this was a stance that was shared with the people but, since the dissolution of the USSR and the oft-stated desire by Russian leaders to partake in matters European and reach a rapprochement with the United States, the animus has undergone a metamorphosis – or perhaps the real deep-seated reason for the hostility has simply revealed itself. Whichever, it is painfully apparent that our glorious leaders see the balance of global power as a zero-sum game; it's not enough for them to win – Russia also has to lose.
There will be no parlay, no multipolarity (not for Russia, at any rate). Putin must be screwed over at every opportunity. The Empire, whilst unacknowledged, must be preserved and that Empire doesn't just encompass the Western hemisphere – it's global, which means it's sitting in Russia's back yard as well and when the locals forget who the Big Boss is, they need to be reminded pdq. The sheer volume of interventions is astounding and frenetic, even as it all starts to come apart in slow motion.
And, to the layperson, it's all so unnecessary, but there is seemingly nobody in the 'live and let live camp' west of the Russian border. Our Deep State has chosen to make the Great Game existential when there is no need. The actors proclaim that unless we intervene in some backwater, Russia's influence will grow. To which the response might usefully be “So what?” The Russians don't live on the Death Star and Putin is not the leader of an Evil Empire. He's been around long enough now – 25 years and counting. If he had designs on the West, I think he'd probably have indulged them by now. But our leaders' neuroticism needs to be manifest, even if it's put-on. They need an enemy and it might as well be the Russians, because they refuse to accept their place in the 'rules-based international order', a concept as fluid as the Australian cricket team's legendary 'line'. The only consistent ingredient is American and British hubris.
Those outside the echo-chamber can clearly identify an inflexion point, an end-of-Empire vibe gaining momentum. As has almost infallibly been the case, the last to acknowledge the changing of the guard are those on the inside, whose feel for the zeitgeist is severely compromised by their isolation. Rove's mindset is deeply ingrained and is incompatible with compromise, like the boxer who goes on for too long, failing to read the runes, still believing that victory is inevitable, ignoring the evidence showing that it can only end one way. The real power in the world has a global empire and it cannot countenance a time when it doesn't.
To that end, enforcement of the 'order' has been ruthless – but not always successful, which is not to say that, when jilted, the CIA and MI6 won't have another bite at any cherry they like. Georgia is a case in point. The voting public resolutely refuse to take the hint and the politicians they have elected are not turncoats; with the dishonourable exception of the globalist president, the government have shown themselves to be possessed of a collective backbone. Not only that, but the nation has not yet submitted itself to the straightjacket that is the EU, nor has it made the mistake of joining NATO.
While carrots are not the Deep State's weapon of choice, in this case they have also found themselves lacking an effective stick. The usual 'rule of law violations' BS can still be liberally scattered about, but they can't blackmail the government by withholding funds as there are none to potentially disburse. Even Orbán can occasionally be brought to heel by those means– the Georgia Dream party, not so much. So they turned to the time-honoured street protests by rent-a-mobs, both to protest a new foreign agents law – which would force these foreign-funded, 'civil society' NGOs to reveal who is behind them; not a measure that could plausibly prompt thousands to take to the streets and violently clash with police – and elections which disfavour them.
The latest wheeze is currently being performed by the über-globalist president who is refusing to stand down, despite having been voted out of office, because she has a 'feeling' that the Russians somehow interfered. The incoming president, from Georgia Dream, co-authored the foreign agents law (the US itself has such a law, but democracy or something when other countries follow suit) and is, therefore, politically to the right of Genghis Khan.(16) The latest incidence of independent thinking involved the new government calling a temporary halt to EU accession, as they have come to the conclusion that the status quo suits Georgia just fine.(17)
This outlook, combined with a neutral stance on the war in Ukraine and a traditional, Christian culture – anathema to the US Deep State – is one that reliably gives rise to a fit of the vapours. So far, however, the government has doubled down, rather than quietly capitulating. Rather than continuing to endure the nightly, orchestrated and entirely inorganic street protests, the police arrested some of the protest leaders and raided the offices of selected NGOs. There they seized explosives, gas masks and Molotov cocktails.(18) So far, so good.
Figure 3
But to the US/UK axis there is no such thing as neutrality. If you're not with them, you're against them. If you are also open to dialogue with the Russians – as well as with the West – then you have committed an even more grievous sin, which Romania has just discovered. The Russia! Russia! Russia! card was deployed once again, with the Romanian Supreme Court annulling the presidential election once it became apparent that Călin Georgescu, “a Covid-denying, Russian-sympathising, ultra-nationalist” (19) (according to the online Left) was going to win the second round of the presidential election, the globalist candidate having already been dispatched in the first. This time the Russians supposedly rigged the election by posting on TikTok, a set of circumstances that even some Leftists found suitably risible:
“...the idea that hundreds of thousands of Romanians voted for Georgescu purely on the basis of some foreign social-media postings is absurd on the face of it. It also ignores the fact that his prospective rival in the now-cancelled second round was nearly as much of an outsider as he was. And yet Lasconi also managed to beat out her establishment rivals without any hint of backing from an alleged Kremlin bot farm.”(20)
But we have to go back to pretending again, so that the massive new NATO base that is being constructed – the biggest in Europe and right on the Black Sea – is not mothballed and the ever-tightening pincer movement on Russia may continue unimpeded.(21) The Russian bear must be poked continually and ordinary Romanians, with no say in the matter, will now be on the front line when the Americans cross one red line too many.
In any event, a free marketplace of ideas is an alien concept to the string-pullers in the West. In their world, 'declassified intelligence' is a suitable stand-in for evidence, yet the documents they produced to back their claims of Russian interference proved nothing.(22)(23) Georgescu has to be stopped because he is no fan of the war in Ukraine and he isn't keen to make his country a target in a hot war with Russia, which it would be because it already hosts American missiles. The US weapons pipeline – Pakistan-Romania-Ukraine – would also be at risk. So, “with information provided by the CIA and various intelligence services”,(24) actual democracy was cancelled. One would expect Georgescu to be banned from running next, otherwise they will only have delayed the inevitable.
I suspect that you, the reader, may well have had your ear to the ground and had knowledge of both of these imbroglios. The same may be true of the allegedly 'stunning' collapse of the Syrian regime, whose army melted away. However, “it’s not so stunning when you learn that the American CIA had been planning the offensive for months with the full support of its NATO ally Turkey.”(25) Instead of Russia and Iran running the show, it'll be Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood, not forgetting the 2,000 American troops (not 900 as the Pentagon has been claiming for years) who are occupying the country's oil and gas fields, stealing said oil and transporting it over the border to be sold in Iraq, through Kurdistan – total of $107 billion since 2011, according to Syria, 80% of its total output every day.(26)(27) Coincidentally, twenty one of the twenty eight militias that have been utilised by the Turks have received backing from the CIA and the Pentagon.(28)
The current crop are comprised of fanatical, jihadist Sunnis from ISIS and Al-Qaeda splinter groups who often don't get along. The new Prime Minister, Ahmed al-Sharaa, former deputy to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, is now being rebranded as a moderate who's into 'diversity', despite being on the US terror list with a $10 million bounty on his head.(29) Syria is going to be a hot mess, but that's okay. Apparently, allying oneself with organisations that are on terrorist hot lists is fine if you're administering a black eye to Russia, especially if it means that they will be required to surrender a warm-water naval base at Tartus, in the Med. Which, of course, it does:
“As expected, the West is pressuring the jihadist group under Abu Mohammed al-Jolani to ensure Russia's military is booted from the country. What's more is that European countries are using the question of Syria's continued economic isolation as leverage. And the West is also dangling the terror designation in front of HTS. "Some European nations are considering making the expulsion of Russia’s military from Syria a precondition for lifting restrictions against the Islamist group now in control of most of the country, according to people familiar with the matter...””(30)
It doesn't get much more cynical and amoral than that, especially from those who proclaim themselves champions of 'democracy'. But, let's face it, can we really bring ourselves to care about one fewer brutal dictatorship? Except, like almost everything we are told, that's not really how it all started.
In 2011, the so-called Arab Spring initially failed to ignite in Syria, despite the usual astroturfing by the CIA's Voice of America and calls for “a day of rage” by Syrian opposition groups.(31) This was largely because the overwhelming majority of Syrians had no appetite for regime change for two main reasons; they feared the state punishment that would inevitably ensue and, in any event, al Assad was popular – particularly with younger Syrians:
“He was widely perceived as a reformer who encouraged and protected diversity and inclusion, while overseeing a system that, while far from perfect, delivered comparatively high standards of education, healthcare, and much else besides for average citizens. Moreover, Assad’s refusal to accommodate Israel, unlike many other leaders in the region, was also greatly respected.“(32)
The Syrian leadership counselled restraint on behalf of the security forces, despite the presence of armed opposition groups. False flag events appear to have been executed and propaganda alleging massacres by the government was widespread. A large weapons cache was seized at the border.(33) Targeted killings of security officials and soldiers became commonplace and supporters of the government were routinely kidnapped and murdered in their dozens.(34) It was apparent that a hidden hand was at work, directing events.
Eventually, the Syrian military was formally deployed, but even then, their terms of engagement were notably narrow. The army was to “ensure that no drop of blood is shed when confronting and dispersing peaceful demonstrations”(35) and, further, an order was issued to “prohibit harming any detainee.”(36) I appreciate the fact that we have been told otherwise and that the regime allegedly brutally gassed and executed its citizens, but it seems that there is rather more to the story. And there's one big question which nobody asks; why was Syria in the cross-hairs to begin with? What mortal sin had al Assad committed that provoked ire?
Well, like the Georgians and the Romanians, he was guilty of independent thinking. He wouldn't do as he was told and, once again, the Russians were tangentially the red rag to the Western bull. This time, it was all about a pipeline from Qatar's Northern Dome field – the world's largest oilfield – to the European market, an arrangement that would make it possible to entirely bypass Russia, but which needed the Saudis, Jordan, Turkey and Syria on board.(37) The idea, as ever, was to wean the Europeans off Russian gas and turn the 'gas station masquerading as a country' into a vassal state. Al Assad didn't want to play that game and so, as WikiLeaks made known, the US decided that he had to go, by any means necessary.
Destabilising Syria had been US policy since as far back as 2006 and the “US promoted sectarianism in support of its regime-change policy, thus helping lay the foundation for the sectarian civil war and massive bloodshed that we see in Syria today.”(38) These efforts acquired considerably urgency in the wake of Gaddafi's overthrow and MI6 redirected extremists from Libya into Syria on behalf of the CIA, allowing the Agency to avoid the scrutiny of Congress in doing so.(39) Thus, the two intelligence agencies oversaw the creation of ISIS and enabled it to strengthen. But that was okay:
“In the ideology of the national security elite—especially its Democratic wing—regional alliances are essential building blocks of what is styled as the U.S.-sponsored global “rules-based order.” In practice, however, they have served as instruments for the advancement of the power and prestige of the national security bureaucracies themselves.“(40)
Even Obama had been had over by the Deep State, who manipulated him into further adventurism in Syria by falsely alleging a regime sarin attack (it was actually tear gas)(41) and by teeing up the locals to claim that the anti-Assad war was going sideways without a full-blooded, secret commitment. National security officials made it clear that they would blame Obama were the 'heroic' resistance to be defeated:
“The lesson of the entire affair is clear: A malignant alliance between powerful national security bureaucracies and the Middle Eastern allies with whom they enjoy mutually profitable relations are pressuring the White House to approve actions that threaten the real interests of the American people—including strengthening terrorists.”(42)
Within the past couple of weeks, that alliance finally achieved its goal. Now the 'moderate jihadists' can round up the minorities – Christians amongst them – and engage in a spot of ethnic cleansing which will, of course, either come as a huge shock or will be vigorously denied and under-reported. However, it's already happening, with field executions of unarmed men and street lynchings and there will be much more to come from the rival factions.(43)(44) Biden can say that “a fall of the regime is a fundamental act of justice”,(45) but he's just liberally applying lipstick to the pig. And claiming credit for an outcome that was achieved by the Deep State.
These three farragos – Georgia, Romania and Syria – are at least somewhat familiar to most, even if the detail is obscured. The same with the Maidan coup in Ukraine in 2014, when Nuland thought it politic to broadcast the role of the US in overthrowing an elected government,(46) - although she omitted to mention that the snipers who killed 70 protestors were ordered to do so by a former officer and sharp-shooter in the US 101st Airborne Division -(47) all illustrate the lengths that the permanent government in DC will go to in ensuring that their interests are catered to and Russia's are degraded. None of this activity has got anything to do with democracy as we understand it and none of it is conducted in furtherance of any population's best interests. It's just housekeeping – buffing up the Empire, tying off loose threads. Simply the naked exercise of power, dressed up as some kind of rules-based order.
Regular readers will be familiar with further attempts at destabilisation in other nations in Russia's orbit in the very recent past. Belarus (twice),(48)(49)(50) Kazakhstan,(51) Hungary (an itch that is repeatedly scratched, although Orbán has made matters more complicated by cracking down on 'civil society' NGOs)(52)(53) and Kyrgyzstan (54) have all been unsuccessfully targeted in the past few years, usually shortly after elections that haven't delivered the appropriate result.
What may not have made much of an impression – it hadn't on me, at any rate – is the comprehensive subjugation of the Balkans. Some of the activity has played out publicly, but much else has been accomplished sotto voce. The illegal, 78-day bombing campaign against Serbia from late March 1999, followed on from the Western-supported proxy wars in the former Yugoslavia, which were paired with crippling sanctions. President Milošević, no saint to be sure, was finally toppled after elections in September 2000, which he may in fact have won, but which were protested in customary fashion with NED, USAID and the CIA to the fore. The so-called Bulldozer Revolution led swiftly to Western-imposed privatisation and the brutalisation of the former Yugoslavia's economy. It seems that the Balkan wars of the 1990's weren't the result of long-suppressed ethnic tensions, after all:
“Rather, the real origins of the breakdown of civil and political order lay in the economic decline caused largely by the debt repayment program imposed by the International Monetary Fund and other international financial institutions... Just as the USSR splintered as the IMF browbeat the Gorbachev government into a ruble devaluation, Yugoslavia broke into pieces as ethnic and religious rivalries were reasserted in an attempt to control the rapidly shrinking pool of resources ... Ordinary people turned into ethnic monsters only after all their options for a normal economic life were destroyed. 'Ethnic cleansing' arrived only after 'shock therapy' had done its work." ”(55)
A shock therapy that had ensured that the standard of living fell 40% between 1982 and 1989.(56) A familiar story, then. But why do it? Because the neo-cons could, because Milošević was close to Moscow, because they were greedy and desirous of extending the Empire into what has previously been the Soviet sphere of influence? On the available evidence, all of the above. And they weren't finished there. The US National Security Decision Directive of 1982 - “which called for "expanded efforts to promote a 'quiet revolution' to overthrow Communist governments and parties" and for the integration of Eastern Europe into a market-oriented economy” -(57) sounds vanilla enough, perhaps even altruistic, but it was anything but. In Yugoslavia, this 'integration' resulted in inflation running at 937% in 1992, then peaking at 1,134% the following year.(58)
By the time of the bombing campaign, which forced the Yugoslav Army to withdraw from Kosovo thus allegedly saving the Albanian population from impending slaughter (yet another fake narrative, as Milošević was instead seeking to neutralise the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), a Nazi-inspired force seeking to create an ethnically pure Greater Albania),(59)(60) the Americans were prepared to put boots on the ground. So they did – and they've never left.(61) But it was the Albanians who were the problem in 1999, not the Serbs. Emboldened by the US campaign, they ran riot – right under NATO's nose:
“Ethnic Albanians, consumed with hatred…initiated a wave of destruction. Anything Serbian was destroyed or vandalized - even abandoned houses and churches. Much of the violence was clearly organized and deliberate. Each day…American soldiers confronted new expressions of hatred…Radical groups of ethnic Albanians were committed to violence in Kosovo, with the ultimate goal of achieving complete independence from Serbia and bringing along as well bits of territory in Serbia and Macedonia dominated by ethnic Albanians…Chaos dominated as Operation Joint Guardian began in earnest.”(62)
Still, better to start as you mean to go on, I guess. The world's only superpower presided over an ethnic cleansing so thorough that the capital Pristina's population of Serbs – originally 40,000 – was reduced to 400 in just five months.(63) Serbs were regularly shot to death in the street and NATO let it happen, unwilling to control the KLA and allowing it to dial up the brutality.(64) If the Serbs were the bad guys (according to Clinton, Blair et al) then the KLA were the good guys. They were even permitted to push into Macedonia. Some of the NATO force were deeply unimpressed:
“The CIA has been allowed to run riot in Kosovo with a private army designed to overthrow Milosevic. Now he’s gone the US State Department seems incapable of reining in its bastard army.”(65)
Kosovo has been a US protectorate ever since. Since unilaterally declaring independence from Serbia in 2008 (apparently, that's okay if it leads to American dominance, but bad if it benefits Russia, hence the condemnation of Crimea and the Donbass), the same bad actors who prosecuted the bombing campaign then sought to benefit from it. Notably, over the 78 days, only 14 Yugoslav tanks were destroyed, whereas 372 industrial facilities were decimated.(66)
This was no accident – the military's targets were selected by US corporations,(67) which then benefitted from the job of repairing the wreckage and the vast swathe of ensuing privatisations. Given the size of the country and its GDP, a genuine attempt at nation-building would have been relatively inexpensive – compared to Iraq and Afghanistan, at any rate – but that was never the intention. Once Big Business had squeezed the pips, any remaining enthusiasm was reserved for the 1,000 acre Camp Bondsteel, a huge US military base that ensures a permanent presence.
Figure 4
Kosovo currently enjoys the highest unemployment and poverty rates in Europe, by a considerable margin. The incumbent Serbian president, Aleksandar Vučić, is busy selling his country down the river whilst pretending he's not, giving ground on Kosovo to the West and talking up the possibility of joining NATO and the EU – despite overwhelming opposition from his subjects.(68) He may feel that his health depends upon it, as the last Serbian leader who failed to get his priorities straight was assassinated in broad daylight.(69)
Serbia and Kosovo are not the only parts of the former Yugoslavia that have been – and are still being – subjugated. Montenegro, whose population harbour significant hostility to NATO,(70) was offered up to the alliance by its craven leadership in 2017, in the aftermath of a false-flag 'coup attempt' blamed on Russia but orchestrated by Western intelligence (the CIA and MI6).(71) (North) Macedonia was also shoe-horned into NATO in 2019:
“How Macedonia reached that point is largely unknown outside the country. It is a sordid tale of election meddling, subverted democracy, brazen swindles, high crimes and misdemeanours, and expansive American and British skullduggery, the full dimensions of which may never publicly surface.”(72)
Just for a change. Bosnia hasn't escaped NATO's gimlet eye, either. The Dayton Agreement which ended Bosnia's civil war in 1995 established a now-permanent EU/NATO military occupation,(73) and the de facto head of state is a neo-colonial foreign proconsul who has the power to veto laws, dismiss elected officials and rule by decree. Russia is supposed to have a say in the implementation of Dayton, but the US has simply excluded her. The result is predictably toxic - the current High Representative, a German, changed the country's electoral system within minutes of the polls closing in the October 2022 general election to ensure that the 'correct' result was achieved.(74)
The Brits thought this was just fine and dandy and subsequently talked up the likelihood of a second front in the Russia/Ukraine conflict opening in Bosnia, which allowed them to thoughtfully flood the country with NATO troops.(75)(76) Just another example of the usual manipulative nonsense, as Russia has made given no indication that a Balkan adventure is in the offing.(77) Nonetheless, the fake neuroticism of the Brits (on this occasion) has consolidated NATO's military control of the Balkans and served to remind us that the shenanigans that were routinely a feature of yesteryear are still very much alive and kicking in the here and now.
Elsewhere, the hated Bibi nearly had his legs taken out from under him when he attempted to do his job properly by reining in the country's self-appointed top dog (the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court)(78)(79) and Bolsonaro was ousted in a bent election overseen by the Director of the CIA.(80)(81) All of these campaigns are reasonably well-documented (just not publicised) for the conspiratorially-minded and all were attempts to install leaders prepared to look West and feast on the scraps from the globalist table and to unseat recalcitrant types who couldn't take a hint, and all involved US-funded NGOs in some fashion, with NED (National Endowment for Democracy) usually to the fore.
NED is a front for the CIA. Even American commentators used to be able to admit that:
"The idea was that the NED would do somewhat overtly what the CIA had been doing covertly for decades, and thus, hopefully, eliminate the stigma associated with CIA covert activities."(82)
The Chinese have a suitable descriptor for NED – they say that it's the US government's “white gloves”, claiming to be supporting democracy abroad but instead “carrying out subversion, infiltration and sabotage across the world.”(83) The same could be said of USAID which, together with NED, is attempting to take down Ortega in Nicaragua, the leader of the Sandinistas and determinedly non-aligned internationally. The Sandinistas toppled the US-backed military dictatorship in 1979. Deep State policy towards Nicaragua, from the mid-eighties onwards, has been to finance neo-liberals when they are in power and to overthrow the elected government via their private army, the Contras, when they're not.(84)
But CIA adventurism in South and Central America is nothing new. Back in the day, they were prolific. President Árbenz of Guatemala had been elected on a manifesto that sought to return land rights to the people. The company that had control of the land, United Fruits Company (a Rockefeller asset), was not enamoured at the prospect. A media blitz which inferred that the president was a Soviet puppet provided a pretext for the CIA who sponsored a mercenary attack involving ground troops, planes and a propagandist radio station; it worked. Arbenz resigned and went into exile. The next man up was much more pliant and United Fruit could rest easy.(85)
In 1981, the newly elected President of Ecuador declared that the profits from its oil sales should go to the people, not to the oil companies. The agency had heard this song before and they had the capability to ensure it ended the way they wanted. So, the president died in a plane crash shortly thereafter.(86) A month later, the Panamanian president also died in a plane crash; he had made the mistake of being vocal in demanding the repayment of debt by the US and the restoration of the ownership of the Panama Canal.(87) In 2002, in Venezuela, there was another attempt at a colour revolution, this time unsuccessful. That president, Chavez, had also been demanding that the sale of oil be used to help the people.(88)
Most of that activity is ancient history, but old habits die hard. Cuba, a long-time nemesis, was the target of a 2010-2012 USAID attempt to propagandise the population via a Cuba-only Twitter-type app called ZunZuneo which was rumbled.(89) It was likely the tip of a worldwide propaganda iceberg. A more kinetic approach has been deemed appropriate in Haiti, where the CIA orchestrated the coup that ousted popular, anti-imperial President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004, the second time that he had been driven into exile by US-backed plotters.(90) This after imposing crippling economic sanctions, while trotting out the usual, tired rhetoric about 'election irregularities', despite opinion polling which backed up the result.(91)
The country then descended into chaos, from which it has not yet emerged and, in 2021, another coup resulted in the assassination of President Moïse by a posse of 28 mercenaries, seven of whom had received US military training and one of whom was a former DEA informant. Moïse had refused to push the Covid 'vaccines' – Haiti was, at that time, the only country in the Western hemisphere that hadn't jabbed a single citizen - which may have been the trigger.(92)
Still, it's not all bad. Haiti is America's first 'partner' under the 2019 Global Fragility Act,(93) which is explicitly a creation designed for preventing “adversaries such as China and Russia to expand their influence.”(94) Having created the instability that followed the assassination, the US solution is to use NED to fund the usual suspects – “Haitian-led civil society groups” and “human rights organisations” -(95) to lobby for and endorse a decade-long intervention that will include “security assistance”, more properly categorized as an invasion. It's classic Deep State strategy – history may not repeat, but it rhymes and the techniques are as discernible overseas as they are domestically, where the 'pandemic' and 'climate change' were deployed as the catalysts for the imposition of the hidden agenda.
The Venezualan crisis is an even starker demonstration of cause and effect, garnished with lashings of mendacity. The narrative is that the socialist regime of President Maduro (and that of his predecessor, Hugo Chávez) has turned the country into a hellscape and caused millions to flee overseas. In addition, there are the usual unsubstantiated accusations of election fraud, both by Chávez and Maduro.
In reality, both presidents attempted to redirect the profits from oil exports to support social programmes, as “people ought not to be starving in dreadful slums in the world's most oil rich state.”(96) Chávez was particularly forthright, stating that “the CIA ought not to control Venezuala” and, when speaking at the UN, declaring that Bush Jnr's speech of the previous day was “The Devil's Recipe”, then twisting the rhetorical knife some more by commenting that “yesterday the devil came here, in this very place, it still smells of sulphur.”(97) For this affront, he received a sharp intake of breath and a smattering of applause from his audience. He went further – a lot further:
“As the mouthpiece of imperialism, he cames to give us his recipes to try to maintain the current scheme of domination, exploitation and looting of the people of the world....In other words, North American imperialism...is in a desperate push to consolidate its hegemonic system of domination. We can't allow this to happen. We can't allow the installation of the world dictatorship.”(98)
If that wasn't throwing down the gauntlet, I don't know what is. But by then he had survived a DC-backed coup (99)(100) and numerous assassination attempts, so he may have judged that he had nothing to lose by calling out the US Deep State. And the more that hypothesis is exposed to sunlight, the more it makes sense.
Chávez was successful and popular and, unquestionably, a properly elected president. His brand of socialism lifted millions out of poverty and he twice won re-election handily until, in 2013, he died at age 58 of an unusually aggressive cancer that defied treatment. Coincidentally, one of his closest aides – a man who brought him food and drink – defected to the United States shortly thereafter and became a protected witness.(101)
Maduro isn't as effective as Chávez and it is likely that socialism's penchant for central planning was bound to come unstuck eventually, especially given the overt hostility of the United States and the sanctions regime that has been implemented against Maduro's government. In the five years to 2019, sanctions alone resulted in a 40% drop in per capita income.(102) Venezuela's domestic oil production has been decimated, as American companies have been banned from doing business with the state oil company.
Maduro has ruled by decree since 2015, through powers granted to him by the ruling party legislature and the political turmoil has been incessant. It is wholly apparent that the opposition is in bed with NED and other entities (103) and that the country is being destroyed – over a period of two-and-a-half decades - because its leaders have refused to assume the position that the US demands. Even Trump – Mr No More Wars – sided with the neocons in sanctioning a CIA covert op to depose Maduro,(104) which may or may not have culminated in a comically-botched invasion attempt by an American private security company in 2019,(105) the same year that Trump's administration recognised a nobody called Juan Guaidó as president.
The latter, whom fewer than one in five Venezualans had even heard of, was a product of a decade's worth of training by the CIA and its minions,(106) an obscure character from “the most violent faction of Venezuela’s most radical opposition party, positioning himself at the forefront of one destabilisation campaign after another. His party has been widely discredited inside Venezuela,”(107) and his party is isolated because the majority of the voting public “does not want war. What they want is a solution.”(108)
Trying to insert such a man was amateurish and, predictably, the scheme fell apart. He is now in exile. The Americans tried again earlier this year, in true Bidenesque fashion - other leading presidential primary candidates were booted from the contest - but despite Blinken's assertion that there was “overwhelming evidence” of his victory in the election,(109) the latest imposter, Edmundo González, is now cooling his heels in Spain, also in exile.
As a direct consequence of all the engineered chaos, Venezuala has been forced into the arms of Russia and China (having previously been non-aligned), which is another outcome that cannot be allowed to stand. But, despite all of the above, why has Venezuala attracted quite so much attention from the Hegemon? Russia and – less problematically – China are undoubtedly part of the issue, but they weren't in the picture when it all kicked off upon the election of Chávez, in 1998. The problem was his disinclination to bend the knee.
Venezuala's vast oil reserves are also a prize that must not be claimed by any other. As well as the Chavez Belt, thought to be home to the largest producible reserves in the world at a whopping 235 billion barrels,(110) there's the small matter of Guayana Esequiba, a territory administered by Guyana but claimed by Venezuala. It is thought that the oil reserves in this region may be even larger and of much better quality.
Figure 5
Whilst the dispute is currently frozen, due to the UN sitting on its hands until circumstances are more favourable, it's not difficult to envision a scenario where another disposable stooge is ushered onto centre stage and Maduro is finally chased into exile, at which point foreign oil interests are given free reign, the state oil company is re-privatised, fragile Guyana is made an offer it can't refuse, et voilà! The Empire wins again, Rosneft (the Russian state oil company) is sent packing and the Empire's sunlit uplands beckon, once again.
The regime change operations and overt meddling in other nations affairs as delineated here do not make for an exhaustive list; MI6 and the CIA are also active in Kenya, training the locals to take down alleged terrorists that the agencies themselves identify.(111) And there are US bases everywhere – around 750 of them in 80 foreign countries and colonies/territories, around 80% of all the world's foreign military bases. The UK is next with 145 but, by way of contrast Russia has a maximum of 36.(112) The claim, of course, is that the US military is there as protector, not occupier, but it isn't a role that other countries assume, not that they would be allowed to if they tried.
Figure 6
If that presence doesn't keep the unruly in line, there's always the aforementioned Sanctions of Mass Destruction. The US wields these like a bludgeon – two-thirds of the world's sanction since the 1990s have been authored by American administrations.(113) A third of all nations have found themselves targeted.(114) Economic warfare has become a knee-jerk reaction whenever the Empire's interests are threatened and sanctions are viewed as “the only thing between diplomacy and war and as such has become the most important foreign policy tool in the U.S. Arsenal.”(115)
But, as is frequently the case, overuse erodes effectiveness and results in widespread resentment, especially amongst low-income countries, 60% of which have been under some form of sanction in 2024.(116) It's the dollar's status as the world's reserve currency that gives rise to the temptation to play economic Whac-A-Mole:
“Today, the dollar buys access to the American economy but also undergirds international trade even when there is no connection to an American bank or business. Commodities like oil are priced globally against the greenback, and countries trading in their own currencies rely on dollars to complete international transactions. That financial supremacy creates a risk for U.S. adversaries and even some allies. To deal in dollars, financial institutions must often borrow, however temporarily, from U.S. counterparts and comply with the rules of the U.S. government. That makes the Treasury Department, which regulates the U.S. financial system, the gatekeeper to the world’s banking operations. And sanctions are the gate.”(117)
However, it's a gate that has grown tarnished by overuse. Members of Congress have pressed for some sanctions simply to squeeze foreign competition to home-state industries. Rather than well targeted jabs, we now have all-in milling, as the string-pullers strive ever harder to keep all the balls in the air while cross-winds freshen. Justifications that are wholly guided by self-interest are now deemed acceptable, by the cabal, at least. But the sanctions against Russia in the wake of Putin's original Special Military Operation turned the volume up to eleven.
Us Treasury officials have no need of accusations and crimes. Nor is proof of wrongdoing a necessity. They can sanction any person, company or government if they “deem them to be a threat to the U.S. economy, foreign policy or national security,”(118) conditions which are so broad as to be effectively meaningless. And such was the visceral reaction to Putin's affront, they threw the kitchen sink at him, seizing assets, impounding luxury yachts owned by random oligarchs and, crucially, removing selected Russian banks from the SWIFT clearing system.(119) With rose-tinted spectacles wedged firmly in place, the authors of the sanctions were convinced of the following:
“Banning Russian banks from the financial messaging system freezes their ability to transact with the rest of the world, imposing high costs.”(120)
But, in the words of Captain Blackadder, “there was a tiny flaw in the plan...”(121) In their hubris, they had overstepped. The power of such sanctions relies in denying access to the dollar in financial markets. If Russia had been a backwater nation which nobody cared about, that denial would have been devastating. But Russia is that “gas station masquerading as a country”,(122) one that is relied upon by America's allies and adversaries alike and Putin adapted and overcame – as he was always likely to.
New markets were developed and, perhaps crucially, trades were settled in other currencies, the ruble and the yuan prominent amongst them. The sanctions had the effect of focussing attention on the dollar and the way in which the US was weaponizing, while also demonstrating that it was possible to use alternative currencies – cautiously.
This escalation was a major miscalculation, caused by an addiction that is proving to be impossible to kick (not just for Leftists – Trump is also a stoner and a fan of tariffs, to boot). Not because it has suddenly resulted in an immediate rush from the dollar, but because it has forced some countries to circumvent the dollar-dominated international financial system, simply to keep the lights on. In early April 2022, China and Brazil reached an agreement to settle trades in each others' currencies.(123)
Brazil and Argentina announced also plans for a common currency for use in bilateral trade.(124) Russia and India have agreed to trade oil for rupees.(125) India and Malaysia are also trading in rupees and France executed a test trade with China for natural gas, settled in yuan.(126) By May 2022, twenty European companies had opened ruble accounts with Gazprombank JSC, with another fourteen applications pending.(127) Even the Saudis were contemplating settling some trades with China in yuan.(128)
The guardians of the Empire either don't care what the world outside the West thinks or are ignorant of it, but the Global South doesn't view the Russians as the villains of the piece. They are far less myopic than the West, probably the result of all that 'misinformation' our lords and masters are so keen to shield us from. And, at present, de-dollarization is not yet a runaway train:
“Few can afford to be massively tariffed by the US, let alone sanctioned, and most aren’t willing to burn their bridges with the US for ideological reasons at the expense of their immediate economic interests.”(129)
Which is not to say that the dollar didn't take a substantial hit in 2022. The pace of the decline in dollar holdings was twice that of the long-term trend.
Figure 7
Notwithstanding the caution, the spell still seems to have been broken and, slowly, central banks are turning away from the dollar and towards gold. It's not news in the West, but it's happening worldwide.
Figure 8
Countries are inevitably realising that dependence on the dollar makes them vulnerable, too. They see US officials freezing and then seizing Russian funds and giving them to Ukraine,(130) and they know that they could be next if they somehow offend the Hegemon. They also see the uncontrolled expansion of the dollar supply, the reckless accumulation of US debt and consequent devaluation of their own dollars and they no doubt recognise that the permanent government in DC is an arrogant and irresponsible steward of the currency. On the other hand, they also know that sticking their head above the parapet will only end one way; since the turn of the century, four countries have threatened to sell their oil in other currencies – Iraq, Iran, Libya and Venezuela – and what else do they all have in common? Exactly.(131)
It is highly likely that they will increasingly hedge their bets, whilst trying not to draw too much attention to themselves. It helps that there is presently no viable contender for the crown and that taking the plunge and escaping the dollar's reach would probably leave a country dependent on China's tender mercies – a choice of frying pan or fire. But the fact that it's even a topic of conversation indicates that the dollar's status is on the slide. And were that slide to quicken, the implications for the Empire would be profound. Now, however, we are on the verge of a changing of the guard. Or are we? Given that the guard has changed repeatedly over the past several decades – including when the 45th and soon to be 47th president – had his first go-around and what really changed over that entire period?
Granted, Trump didn't start any new wars, but the Deep State's covert foreign policy agenda was not suddenly holed below the waterline, there was no wholesale repatriation of US troops, nor dismantling of US overseas bases and it was under his administration that Ukraine “built up a NATO army in all but name.”(132) The CIA and its cut-outs did not endure funding shortfalls and continued to make mischief all over the globe. Trump enjoyed success in the Middle East and neutered Little Rocket Man for a spell. He also maintained cordial relations with Putin. The string-pullers were prepared to frustrate him and wait him out, but now he's back. What can we expect this time around?
Well, does it seem likely that the architects of the Empire, the people who believe in their own wisdom, in the power of the 'democratic' institutions that they have constructed to shield themselves and their power from both the demos and any president with ideas above his station are simply going to roll over? To let the Russians 'win'? To abandon global hegemony, having enjoyed it for over three decades? To genuinely swear their allegiance to Hitler? To undergo a Damascene conversion and commit themselves to serving the masses? We all know the answer to those questions and it's the same to each and every one - a hard no. Which means there's a plan.
As an aside, I do appreciate that my assumption is that Trump's victory was allowed to happen – that it wasn't 'too big to rig'. That's because it was rigged and I made that particular case in A Different Take. Harris lost all five swing states in which there was also a senatorial election – Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, worth a total of 61 Electoral College votes – and yet the Democrats won four of those five Senate races and were on the verge of cheating their way to the fifth when their top brass told them to knock it off.(133) An extra 61 votes would have made Kamala a comfortable winner. So, they could have pulled it off, but they settled for four fraudulently elected senators (and Heaven knows how many House seats), instead. There must be a reason for that, as it's wholly uncharacteristic.
It kept both Houses of Congress tight, which was clearly an objective. In the lower house, Trump's party can only afford two defections out of 220 if they are to win votes, while in the Senate it's 53-47, with any number of RINOs ready to throw sand in the gears. We'll see what happens with his nominations, but it's already possible to see the outline of 47's strategy in terms of running foreign policy.
While a neocon, Marco Rubio, will be Secretary of State, he is going to find himself sidelined in important arenas, as Trump has appointed two Special Envoys, one to Ukraine and Russia and one to the Middle East.(134)(135) In addition, he has appointed what is effectively his personal Emissary and also tapped one of his most trusted allies to head a private intel advisory committee.(136) In effect, he's creating a parallel structure that, hopefully, won't continually lie to him, as was the case last time. This is the usual dynamic:
“The CIA Director will lie to President Trump (they did, remember), the information that comes from within the CIA institution is political and false. The FBI Leadership will lie to President Trump (they did, remember), the information that comes from within the FBI institution is political and false. The AG will lie, same problem. The DNI will lie, same problem. The NSA will lie, and all the deputies therein will lie, same problem, same problem, same problem. Washington DC puts it this way, you probably heard Bill Barr talking about ad-infinitum. The IC leadership is responsible for maintaining the “continuity of government” at all costs. The government is more important than The President. If the continuity of government is maintained by lying to the office of the President, then so be it.“(137)
That's how the permanent government operates, especially if there's a disruptor in the Oval Office. Still, it's possible that Trump will get more of the truth this time. The question is, what's he going to do with it? Whilst he was frustrated in his efforts to extricate US troops from Afghanistan and Syria, he didn't have much to say about all the other foreign bases (with the exception of the German ones), nor on the activities of the CIA, NED and USAID – along with NATO, three main entities charged with the maintenance of the Empire.
He doesn't rage against the concept of 'American exceptionalism' and, although MAGA and America First are predominantly focussed on making the lives of his constituents better, if that was best achieved by punishing nations that he believed were taking the mickey, then he would do so – but economically, not through military might.
Where this thinking was most at odds with Deep State orthodoxy was in his attitude towards NATO. Whether through naivety or otherwise, Trump's view was that the member states (particularly the Europeans) were bleeding the Americans dry and should pay the agreed fee for their protection. It doesn't sound like he viewed NATO nations as vassal states, labouring under the Imperial yoke – it appears that he viewed them as ungrateful allies, instead. This, despite the fact that both Germany and Japan are effectively still occupied nations, garrisoned by 119 US bases each.(138)
But his objections aren't to do with NATO's legitimacy – he just wants all the other nations to pay top dollar to American defence contractors, to fund their own continuing subjugation:
"Number one, they take advantage of us on trade, meaning the European nations—they don't take our cars, they don't take our food product, they don't take anything. It's a disgrace. And, on top of that, we defend them, so it's a double whammy...If they're paying their bills, and if I think they're treating us fairly, absolutely, I would stay with NATO."(139)
This will be music to the ears of the Deep State. Importantly, no-one else in American politics is in favour of exiting NATO and, in 2023, Rubio co-authored legislation requiring a presidential decision to leave NATO to command a two thirds majority in a Senate chock full of war hawks.(140) Trump thinks there's a way around it, but he'd be squandering a huge chunk of political capital were he to try.(141) There is no real public awareness of the true dynamic, no obvious mandate to withdraw. I think it's more about “the art of the deal” than anything else; carrying a big stick to enforce funding compliance.
However, there are two potential flies in the ointment. The EU could do what it's long contemplated and at least partly get out from under by forming its own army and abandoning NATO, although that would, inevitably, take donkey's years and the Germans have never been fans of the idea. Or NATO could come apart at the seams if Trump can't find a way to disengage from the Ukrainian conflict and, as a result, Russia proceeds to humiliate the alliance by pressing on until all Putin's objectives – including “the demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine” -(142) are met. Russia has made it abundantly clear that the trust has gone and that “there must be a genuine, definitive, binding settlement.”(143) There must be no more broken promises.
Ironically, if Trump does manage to secure a compromise in Ukraine – so that he can pivot to confront the countries who he views as the true threat to America, China and Iran – it's likely to fall short of Putin's oft-stated goals and it's extremely likely that the established pattern of Western perfidy will continue in due course. NATO will be able to salvage scraps from the wreckage of its proxy war and live to fight another day - the enforcement arm of the Empire will still be in business. This seems to be the probable outcome, as Putin has shown himself to be cautious and willing to engage in dialogue; in fact, the war would have been over within a month or so had the Istanbul deal of April 2022 not been scuppered by Boris Johnson.
And Trump has given no indication that he is inclined to preside over the decline of the American Empire. Neither have any of his nominations. When he talks about taking on the Deep State, it's in a domestic context, overwhelmingly. He had nothing to say about CIA meddling in the Balkans on his watch and there's no indication that he was even aware of it. As previously noted, the intelligence community lies – even to the President.
It may very well be that the Deep State has calculated that a Trump presidency can be outlasted. That there is no desire to dismantle the Empire. That Trump's foreign policy objectives will not impinge upon their subterranean agendas, even towards Russia. It may even be that they have positioned him to pull their chestnuts from the fire, just so they don't have to be humiliated in doing so themselves. They now know they can't win in Ukraine and Trump is their instrument for making Putin compromise when a longer conflict would remove that requirement.
There may also be a plan to water down the America First agenda via a Tea Party 2.0 strategy. It may be recalled that MAGA is a direct descendant of the Tea Party, not philosophically, but in the role of insurgent against the Republican DC neocon establishment. The Freedom Caucus within the House is officially more closely aligned with Tea Party views on spending and Big Government (although I suspect that this is a false front for some of them, an opportunity to virtue signal whilst engaging in sabotage),(144) but Trump's appeal is mostly non-ideological, centred on rebuilding the American middle class, draining as much of the Beltway Swamp as possible and avoiding foreign entanglements. He's not easy to pigeon-hole, other than as a businessman who doesn't like what the 'system' looks like from the inside, and as someone who has the stones to point out the reality of what the political elites have inflicted upon the people.
That doesn't mean that he can't be distracted, buttered-up or forced – by contrived circumstance – into a position where he can be controlled. In his first administration, the desire to keep him off balance was most concentrated in the Democrats, who did their usual bull-in-a china-shop impression and loaded him up with investigations, impeachments and a 'pandemic'. In the off-season – Biden's administration – they were again given their head and this time ran amuck in the courts. None of it had the desired effect. It may be that somebody, somewhere in the bowels of the Deep State has decided that other, less unstable operatives should have their turn.
The current 'debt ceiling' theatre, during which performance alleged conservatives sought to reimpose a ceiling that they suspended for Biden so that they might impede Trump's proposed tax cuts, is the first Decepticon manoeuvre; the Senate will, no doubt, follow suit when debating his nominations. If it seems like Trump and congressional Republicans represent different parties, it's because they do – MAGA and the establishment GOP, respectively. The latter is a Deep State functionary, the former its mortal enemy.
The GOP managed to see off the Tea Party by infiltrating it and diluting its influence. That approach, which is less confrontational and, therefore, less likely to elicit a combative, Trumpian response, may be what they have settled on. Perhaps all the drama and grief that follows the Democrats around like a bad smell was finally seen to be counter-productive. Perhaps, instead of a culture war that pits the sensible against the woke, what we will now be faced with is a battle between the live-and-let-lives and the neocons - who are, in truth, misnamed, as they populate both parties and, temperamentally, have much more in common with a Leftist mindset that always knows best and is forever keen to ensure that you know it. They just don't disappear up their own backsides if left unsupervised.
There are enough dodgy looking nominations and appointments to give pause already and the fact that Trump is setting up duplicate systems (at least, initially) suggests that he is going to work around the Swamp rather than drain it which would, in any case, be a near-impossible task in a single term. I fear that some erstwhile friends will, once again, turn out to be not-as-advertised and there might be a considerable churn rate. If there is, it'll further gum up the works.
Trump's foreign policy focus will fall upon those who he thinks intend to harm the United States or who are ungrateful about the bounties she provides. Punishment will arrive in the form of tariffs and sanctions, rather than at a point of a gun. He will shore up the dollar, pursue energy independence and create jobs. BRICS will likely continue to fly a holding pattern, waiting to see who is being teed up to be the 48th president.
The colour revolutions and meddling will likely continue unless one of three events occur; if NATO goes belly up or Trump cuts funding to the likes of NED and USAID, then all bets are off. And if the European ruling elites can't hold back the populist tide, regime changes will become increasingly difficult to pull off as the arras is wrenched apart. But, while momentum is clearly working against the American Deep State, there is no sense that they believe that they are on the ropes. American exceptionalism is still a foundational belief (amongst many in Trump's orbit, also) and the institutions that undergird the 'rules-based international order' are not under imminent threat.
We'll know when they're feeling the pressure, because the squealing will be deafening. Perhaps Trump has some power moves to deploy. Perhaps his officials are mostly who they say they are. Perhaps the Deep State has over-estimated its ability to frustrate his agenda, but it's taken that gamble and has to go with it. Time will tell whether it was, in fact, a gamble or a dead cert. If there are knock-down, drag out battles being fought and won, then progress is being made. But if there is minimal bitching and moaning from all the people who should be bitching and moaning, we'll know we've been had again.
And, of course, there are always other options, if there are no rules to bind the bad actors. It's not difficult to see how Trump could become enmeshed, perhaps if the dollar was suddenly at risk and, with it, the economic wellbeing of his constituents. Another 'pandemic' could come barrelling down the pike. A false flag operation – perhaps a dirty bomb or a tactical nuke – could be blamed on the Russians, making it impossible for Trump to even talk to Putin. If all else fails, the Deep State can attempt to remove the obstacle that is Orange Man Bad with extreme prejudice.
I belaboured the regime change details, partly because much of it was unknown to me and partly as a means of demonstrating how vast the Empire actually is. I can think of no circumstance in which it is voluntarily surrendered. If it is to be dispensed with, Trump would have to be integral to that outcome. The front-of-house minions don't seem to be hyperventilating just yet, so we'll have to wait and see.
Citations
(1)
(2) http://grayfalcon.blogspot.com/2012/08/defining-empire-again.html
(3) Ditto
(4) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Boutros_Boutros-Ghali
(5) https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/obama-not-going-anywhere
(6) https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/obama-not-going-anywhere
(7) Ditto
(8)
(9) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy
(10)
(11) Ditto
(12)https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/03/liberating_ourselves_from_dystopia.html
(13) https://amgreatness.com/2023/05/06/american-despotism/
(14) Ditto
(15) https://thegrayzone.com/2023/02/15/trump-empire-they-hated-him/
(16) https://x.com/OlgaBazova/status/1850908384377045184?ref_src=twsrc
(19) https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/12/06/the-cancellation-of-romanian-democracy/
(20) Ditto
(21) https://www.newsweek.com/nato-builds-largest-europe-base-black-sea-romania-1880210
(22) https://rumble.com/v5xqf0q-mike-benz-details-the-cia-sponsored-isis-overthrow-of-assad-in-syria.html
(23) https://www.presidency.ro/ro/media/comunicate-de-presa/comunicat-de-presa1733327193
(25)
(27) https://thecradle.co/article-view/21957
(28) https://thegrayzone.com/2019/10/16/us-backed-crazy-militias-turkeys-invasion-syria/
(29) https://thecradle.co/articles/abu-mohammad-al-julani-putting-lipstick-on-a-pig
(32)
(33) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-iraq-idUSTRE72A3MI20110311/
(34)
(35-36) Ditto
(39) https://greatgameindia.com/operation-timber-sycamore-the-shadow-war-in-syria/
(40) https://www.theamericanconservative.com/how-cia-and-allies-trapped-obama-in-syrian-arms-debacle/
(41-42) Ditto
(44) https://x.com/DelilZilan/status/1866567202293387431/video/1
(45) https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/12/chaos_for_syria.html
(47)
(48) https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-america’s-belarus-strategy-backfired-172938
(49) https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/23/ukraine-belarus-railway-saboteurs-russia/
(50) https://consortiumnews.com/2020/08/20/western-media-misperceptions-about-belarus-lukashenko-putin/
(51) https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/01/mysteries-of-the-failed-rebellion-in-kazakhstan.html
(52) https://www.theamericanconservative.com/samantha-power-color-revolution-in-hungary/
(53) https://thepoliticalinsider.com/george-soros-hungary-kicks-out/
(54) https://asiatimes.com/2020/10/another-color-revolution-fails-in-kyrgyzstan/
(55) https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/04/imf-a17.html
(56) Ditto
(57) Michel Chussodovsky, The Globalisation of Poverty, pg 244.
(58) https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/04/imf-a17.html
(61) https://www.nato.int/kosovo/docu/a990609a.htm
(62)
(63) https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/serbs-murdered-by-the-hundred-since-liberation-1128350.html
(64) https://www.thetimes.com/article/nato-stopped-us-from-controlling-kosovos-gangsters-mtk3nzst35z
(65)https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/mar/11/edvulliamy.peterbeaumont
(66) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/21/kosovo.comment
(67) https://www.novosti.rs/dodatni_sadrzaj/clanci.119.html:279550-Podmukli-udari-s-neba
(69) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Zoran_Đinđić
(71) https://thegrayzone.com/2023/11/22/hostile-natos-annexation-montenegro/
(72)
(74) https://euobserver.com/world/156234
(75) https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/russias-new-front-west-bosnia
(77) https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/280
(78) https://www.theamericanconservative.com/samantha-power-color-revolution-in-hungary/
(82) William Henry Blum, Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, Zed book, 2006.
(83)https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202408/09/WS66b598b5a3104e74fddb9407.html
(84) https://thegrayzone.com/2021/06/01/cia-usaid-nicaragua-right-wing-media/
(85) https://expose-news.com/2022/11/28/economic-hit-men-are-the-first-line-of-defence/
(86-88) Ditto
(89) https://upsidedownworld.org/news-briefs/news-briefs-news-briefs/why-usaids-cuban-twitter-program-was-secret/
(90) https://orinocotribune.com/secret-cable-cia-orchestrated-haitis-2004-coup/
(91) https://ijdh.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/01/Gallup.pdf
(92) https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Jovenel_Moïse/Assassination
(95) Ditto
(96) https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/08/of-venezuela-and-hypocrisy/
(97) https://x.com/DerbyChrisW/status/1092683183261433856
(98)
(99) https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v39/n13/greg-grandin/down-from-the-mountain
(100)https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:The_Strange_Death_of_Hugo_Chavez
(101) https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:The_Death_of_Hugo_Chavez
(102)https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:Sanctions_of_Mass_Destruction:_America’s_War_on_Venezuela
(104) https://www.wired.com/story/trump-cia-venezuela-maduro-regime-change-plot/
(106) https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/venezuela-marigold-revolution
(107)https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:The_Making_of_Juan_Guaidó:_How_the_US_Regime_Change_Laboratory_Created_Venezuela’s_Coup_Leader#cite_note-11
(109) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd1d10453zno
(110) http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/1735/
(111)https://hiiraan.com/news4/2020/Sept/180038/revealed_the_cia_and_mi6_s_secret_war_in_kenya.aspx
(113) Manu Karuka (December 9, 2021). "Hunger Politics: Sanctions as Siege Warfare". Sanctions as War. BRILL. pp. 51–62.
(114) https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2024/us-sanction-countries-work/
(115) https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2024/us-sanction-countries-work/
(116-118) Ditto
(119) https://econofact.org/swift-sanction-on-russia-how-it-works-and-likely-impacts
(120) Ditto
(121)
(122) https://theweek.com/speedreads/456437/john-mccain-russia-gas-station-masquerading-country
(123) https://www.barrons.com/news/china-brazil-strike-deal-to-ditch-dollar-for-trade-8ed4e799
(124) https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/de-dollarization-just-got-real
(125) Ditto
(126) https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/de-dollarization-has-begun
(129)
(130) https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2744
(131)https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:Sanctions_of_Mass_Destruction:_America’s_War_on_Venezuela
(135) https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113472309364700933
(137) Ditto
(139) https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-condition-us-remaining-nato-1997311
(140) https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/08/trump-nato-congress-courts-00188426
(141) Ditto
(143) Ditto
Figure 2 https://www.thelist.com/1662951/real-reason-biden-was-caught-wearing-trump-2024-merch/
Figure 4
Figure 5 https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:Guayana_Esequiba.png
Figure 6 https://www.straturka.com/a_map_of_us_military_bases/