A policy of expediency comes with costs attached, even if it seems that final payment can be postponed indefinitely. It's also a policy that can only be practiced to its fullest extent by the big dogs – everyone else has their limits, the point at which they have to fall in line and dance to somebody else's tune. But expediency is, by definition, amoral; one does whatever it takes to achieve the desired end. The only limits on the scope of action are those that are self-imposed, because there is nobody out there capable of punishing excesses.
And so, the inevitable happens - excess piles upon excess, resentful enemies are made but nobody is a true friend because they know that, if circumstances change, they too could be jettisoned if necessary. Expediency only really works when one is in the ascendancy, but history is littered with time-limited empires which eventually discovered that abusing the privilege of power is not a fault that others are inclined to forgive and forget when the natural order is reshuffled.
It is tempting to view the slow-motion societal car crash that we are currently enduring in those terms, with the West (the US to the fore) losing its unipolar hegemony. But it's more complicated than that – this may be the first time that an empire seems to be deliberately self-detonating, but the emphasis is on the 'seems'. It's more complicated because the entities referred to as 'the West' and 'the US' should be decoupled from the entities to be found at the top of the totem pole (or, in truth, the bottom, as eye level was the prime location). The globalist elites represent their own interests, not those of a country or region.
The elites' interests are, on occasion, aligned with those of the people they rule over, but more often than not they aren't, simply because their overriding priorities are centered on fleecing the masses and controlling outcomes. It's a zero sum game, not one that's mutually beneficial and so developments that, on the surface, seem damaging to 'the West' are not necessarily problematic for the globalists who set them in motion. That's not to say that there aren't missteps, just that they may be harder to identify.
The second blaring klaxon, that BRICS and the Global South can hear but which we seemingly cannot, is the clear intent to self sabotage. They can see that the globalists mean what they say, perhaps because they are more easily able to access information that we (in the West) have to expend considerable energy in locating, or maybe because distance lends them a perspective that we lack. They can see that the managed decline of the West is well underway, while we are inclined to put our current sorrows down to the incompetence and venality with which we believe we are well acquainted. But the likes of Putin and MbS can see the grand project unfolding on an expedited schedule.
They can see that Western globalists are destroying their own societies, both culturally and economically. They know that relying on individuals who are working to their own agenda, who are dedicated to their respective countries' collapse and who can only be expected to be reliable in their unreliability, would be foolhardy in the extreme.
They know that the globalists view the Five Eyes countries and Europe as their personal fiefdom and that they've always had designs on the Middle East - but, increasingly, US influence in that theater is on the wane. The Saudis no longer bother to hide their contempt for Biden's crew, the Iranians no longer seem to fear them (although that might still prove to be a mistake) and the Gulf States are largely autonomous.
The current imbroglio in the Red Sea is a case in point. The Houthis, Shia Muslims and clients of Iran, are engaged in a proxy war with a Saudi-led military intervention in Yemen, which the 'US' has been supporting since 2015. The Houthis hold the Western third of the country which gives them access to most of the Red Sea shoreline. In the wake of Hamas' October 7th attack on Israel, they started lobbing missiles at the Jewish state, participating in attacks on the American military in Syria and Iraq and attacking cargo ships with both drones and surface craft, seizing some. They claim that these attacks are in support of Sunni Hamas in Gaza and that their aim is to impede the Israeli military effort.
From the beginning, it was apparent that Biden and co were reluctant to act. Ostensibly, they are allied with the Saudis – which one would expect to put them at odds with the Houthis – but they, and Obama before them, have been cosying up to Iran since 2009. Expediency, you see. For reasons best known to themselves (but at least partly to do with an antipathy towards Israel and what she stands for), the progressives have long sought a 'realignment' in the Middle East and have jumped into bed with Islamist organisations that would wipe both Israel and the US off the map, given the chance.
So now, they're in a tight spot. Their obvious aversion to intervention emboldened the Houthis, who continued to attack commercial ships and then escalated the situation by hijacking two vessels. Still no US response. Gradually, US warships stationed in the Red Sea have become more willing to intercept home-made Houthi drones with multi-million dollar rockets, but they've wasted no time in moaning about the disparity in the cost of these engagements.
While Biden dithered, the major shipping lines – unsure whether the Houthis would stick to their assurances that only Israeli-connected shipping would be attacked – started diverting shipping around the Cape of Good Hope, adding many extra days and much cost to the journeys. Now, Tehran chose to drop the mask and cut out the middle man, directly threatening 'them' (presumably Israel):
"They shall soon await the closure of the Mediterranean Sea, (the Strait of) Gibraltar and other waterways. Yesterday, the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz became a nightmare for them, and today they are trapped... in the Red Sea.”(1)
Chaos, added expense and a scarcity of goods for the West has, of course, been an integral part of the globalists' de-industrialisation strategy for the past three years, which is why 60% of Americans are now living pay-check to pay-check (2) and tens of millions also now rely on food-banks.(3)
“...analysts have said more than 400 cargo ships have been rerouted on the 6,000-nautical-mile detour, effectively reducing the capacity of Asia-to-Europe trade by a quarter. This drives up shipping costs at a time when global central banks have aggressively raised interest rates to curb inflation.”(4)
So, a deleterious response in the Red Sea served other purposes too, including making life less comfortable for the Israelis, which has been the goal of at least one faction within the administration since the get-go.
Figure 1
Eventually, well over two months into the Houthi maritime campaign, the Biden administration appeared to bestir itself. Operation Prosperity Guardian, a Red Sea security coalition, was announced to much fanfare; at least ten countries were name-checked with perhaps another ten keen to participate, according to the US Defense Department, but there were warning bells sounding from the beginning. Egypt wasn't a part of the alleged coalition, even though her revenue stream from the Suez Canal is wholly dependent on Red Sea maritime traffic. Bahrain was the only participating Arab state.
And, sure enough, within a week the operation was toast. This despite the fact that there's already the Combined Maritime Forces (made up of 39 nations) whose task it is to provide security in the area and Operation Prosperity Guardian would have fallen under its purview.(5) It seems that US led operations are no longer seen as desirable and even NATO allies such as Spain, Italy and France couldn't bring themselves to submit to the Pentagon's authority. I also suspect they want Biden to own whatever duplicitous and contradictory actions US forces take, rather than providing him with a fig leaf of respectability and solidarity.
Figure 2
That's what happens when you abandon Bagram airbase like a thief in the night without informing your allies, because political expediency dictates that the Afghan government are to be cut loose before the 20th anniversary of the Afghanistan war; and then further demonstrate such a complete lack of care for your citizens and Green Card holders that you leave as many as 9,000 behind to fend for themselves while the Taliban overran the country and seized billions of dollars of American military equipment.(6) Not to mention the 78,000 Afghans that had worked for the US, had applied for visas and who were now left to endure the Taliban's tender mercies.(7)
It's what happens when your actions in the Middle East are hopelessly compromised by ill-selected alliances. It's what happens when an amoral elite demonstrate their flakiness. It's not that the putative coalition members are chary of committing resources:
“France, Spain, and Italy aren’t withdrawing because they don’t want to escalate the conflict. On the contrary, they’re withdrawing because they don’t believe the operation coordinated by Biden regime will protect their vessels.”(8)
There is also a divergence of policy over the issue of Iran. The broad tent approach that is necessary when accommodating the views of 27 member states hasn't prevented the EU from adopting a somewhat cooler approach to détente than that employed by American progressives. Little is being made of the snub in mainstream media, naturally, but it may well be what commentators are fond of calling an 'inflexion point'. The US administration has been obliged to go it alone and that is proving to be resource intensive.
Figure 3
A foreign policy predicated on clear aims that aren't spoken out of the side of one's mouth would have resulted in much different outcomes. 'US' interests aren't served by roiling Middle Eastern waters by playing both sides against the middle, in removing the (Trump imposed) financial shackles from Iran for ideological reasons and abandoning thousands of American citizens in a suddenly hostile environment. 'US' interests aren't served by an appearance of weakness, incompetence and hesitancy, which then leads to further instability. But, if the Cloward-Piven strategy is the play-book the elites are using (and it clearly is), then forcing political change through orchestrated crises is the name of the game.
It wasn't until December 30th that the Americans did anything more than shoot down missiles. However, Houthis rebels in four small boats then attempted to board another container, Maersk Hangzhou, US attack helicopters responded to a distress call, the Houthis had the temerity to fire on them and three of the four boats (and ten rebels) were eliminated.(9) The Houthi spokesman was suitably unimpressed, noting that the US “bears the consequences” and that
“...military movements in the Red Sea to protect Israeli ships will not prevent Yemen (Houthi militia) from performing its humanitarian duty in support of Palestine and Gaza."(10)
What the Biden administration could have done, from the beginning, was treat the source of the pain; they could have attacked the drone launch sites in Yemen and destroyed any suspect craft taking to sea, but they didn't and they still haven't. Just as with Iraq (the second time around), Afghanistan and, arguably, Vietnam, the objective is to keep the pot boiling, rather than effect a decisive outcome; a course of action that accords with a policy of encouraging instability which, once again, does nothing for the US voting public. Plus, it seems that other players are no longer shy about making their own reservations about US intentions a public matter.
The military capacity of the US, along with its financial muscle which has allowed it to control the world financial system for decades, are the two main pillars that have made 'the US' a superpower. However, both are being systemically destroyed from within. Consider the nuclear 'deterrent':
“Not a single ICBM with a live warhead has ever been tested. The ICBM is, substantially, a hoax. Scientifically unproven, a semi-imaginary technology....Warheads have been tested and ICBMs with warheads removed have been tested but never together...On 6 May 1962, USS Ethan Allen successfully launched a Polaris A-1....this was the only test the United States ever conducted of any nuclear ballistic missile from launch to detonation....[but] the differences between Polaris and an ICBM are extreme in every area: flight ceiling, maximum speed, range, computation, mass, etc.”(11)
In November 2023, the military had another go at testing an ICBM – this time a Minuteman-3. It blew up immediately after launch,(12) which was also what happened in a previous test.(13) The sea-based Trident-2 hasn't given the Americans any issues as of yet, but the Brits have had problems and they draw from a shared pool.(14) Not encouraging, but perhaps the Russians are in a similar boat, even though theirs are newer.
They do have an-ace-in-the-hole, though; the Yars ICBM (aka the Doomsday missile), a Mach 30 projectile that has recently been moved to a military base in the west of Russia, some 2,400 kilometers from London, a distance it can cover in under five minutes. It can carry 10 independently targeted warheads of 150 kilotons each. Contrastingly, the speed of the world's fastest anti-ballistic missile is estimated to be Mach 16 to Mach 20.(15) Even less encouraging.
However, it's not the only area of concern. Heavy weapons have been thrown at Ukraine for two full years; the 1,700 Stinger air-defense systems that were ordered in May 2022 won't be available until 2026. The 7,000 Javelin missiles needed to replenish stocks will also take two years to arrive.(16) Artillery shells and other war materiel will take even longer, because the production capacity simply doesn't exist and while the military hold a strategic stockpile of the rare minerals that would be needed in the event of war, China has the US military supply chain “by the balls... 95% of rare earth metals come from, or are processed, in China.”(17)
The US doesn't currently have the ability to fight a major theater war,(18) certainly not against China nor any of her allies. Neither does the UK.(19) The Abrams tanks and M2 Bradley fighting vehicles sent to Ukraine have been decimated by Russian fire-power. The American-planned and much heralded counter-offensive was the dampest of squibs, an outcome that should have been obvious, given Russian multi-layered defenses, suffocating integrated weapons systems and absolute control of the air. I imagine that the Ukraine fiasco was, at least in part, a misstep, but there was another crucial outcome that was served. More on that slightly later in the piece.
Then there is the mind-virus that infects rankers at the Pentagon, who are obsessed with procuring weapons that aren't required, while doing their best to overlook systems that are needed. The Navy seems stuck in the past, somehow deluded into believing that the answer to every problem is more hulls at sea. However, large surface ships are now increasingly vulnerable to missile attack from hundreds of miles away. And what exactly is their purpose?
One might think that the starting point for a discussion of what is required might address what it is that the navy is supposed to accomplish. Fighting Houthi irregulars in small boats is one thing, but taking on the Russians or the Chinese is another altogether. And what would they hope to achieve? An invasion, with a logistical tail stretching thousands of miles? Unlikely in the extreme. And, alarmingly, the carrier groups in the Eastern Mediterranean are considered vulnerable enough to be deployed on the leeward side of Cyprus, because they are likely to be vulnerable to missiles from Yemen, Syria and any hostiles at sea.
One might also think that power can be better projected via deterrence and a submarine fleet would accomplish that task with minimal risk and maximum efficiency, but 40% of the navy's fast attack submarines are routinely out of service at any one time, against a target of 20% - last hit in 2015.(20) The minimum requirement is 66 submarines; they currently have 49 and only 1.2 are being built each year. Presently, the US Navy is also supposed to comprise 355 battle force ships, but it only has 291 – down from 792 in 1970.(21)
Recent US adventurism has been a major cause of the conflagration in Ukraine and the conflict in Gaza; ships and personnel are having deployments extended, sometimes for months, with eight carrier groups at sea in contrast to the three or four that would normally be active. Crews deplete through a combination of injury, illness and suicide and are usually substantially under-crewed upon their return to base.
And recruitment is another disaster area. There was a shortfall in both 2022 and 2023, the latter by over 7,000 souls. Less want to serve and, in any event, the current generation are the least capable of any to date.(22) The Coast Guard is also lacking 10% of its workforce; “the 3,500-person shortfall would result in ten cutters going out of service, five tugs being transferred to seasonal activation, and 29 boat stations closing.”(23) Not that the Navy can be trusted to get ships to sea, nor operate them safely and effectively when they do:
“Notable institutional leadership failures in multiple major program areas and multiple high profile operational failures are now far too common. Examples include well documented cases such as the LCS and Zumwalt ship classes, the USS Ford class’s cost overruns, lateness, and multiple of its ship systems not being fully operational....even years after being in commission. An egregious example of a mammoth leadership failure was the loss of the USS Bonhomme Richard, a multi-billion-dollar capital ship that due to negligence was allowed to burn at the side of a pier, a $3B loss with no replacement....The grounding of the USS Connecticut with this vital attack submarine being out of commission for years for repairs. The USS Gettysburg has been out of commission for over 8 years undergoing modernization. Four of the seven cruisers selected for modernization will instead be de-commissioned after the Navy has spent billions on upgrades. The collisions of the USS McCain and USS Fitzgerald with commercial shipping were failures of leadership that led to the deaths of 17 sailors.”(24)
The LCS (Littoral Combat Ships) are fubar; aluminium ships that, amongst many other faults, develop hull cracks at half speed or in turbulent waters.(25) There were supposed to be 32 brand spanking new Zumwalt 'stealth' destroyers in service – there are three. And the muddled thinking that produced the design is symptomatic of the geniuses in the command ranks. A ship that gives off the radar signal of a small fishing boat and an acoustic signal of a submarine, but whose role was slated to be a fire support boat against land-based targets where its stealth tech is irrelevant as ships are tracked visually.(26) You couldn't make it up and it's all information that Putin or Xi can find with a simple, open-source Google search.
Figure 4 LCS
Figure 5 Zumwalt
So, not an enviable report card. But the US Air Force has to be the worst examplar of corruption and treachery. The top brass have wanted to divest themselves of the A-10 Warthog since they took delivery of the first batch in the 1970s, latterly in favor of the disastrous F-35. The Warthog is an effective close air support aircraft; the F-35 isn't. The Warthog costs $18.8 million a pop – the F-35 between $178 million and $337 million per unit. The Warthog can fly in any and all conditions; the F-35 can't fly within 25 miles of lightning as the fuel tanks might explode.(27) The Warthog is more robust and survivable against enemy fire, because most of the aircraft is titanium. It can carry a much larger payload and, as it travels more slowly, it is superior at ground support missions.
The F-35 is supposed to be competent at all missions, but it's not outstanding at any. The final cost of the programme to build it was projected to be $1.4 trillion seven years ago, but budget overruns in the military are so egregious that it is likely to cost much more. However, the Air Force generals are fully invested in this shiny new toy, despite the fact that even minimal damage could render the aircraft inoperable. In contrast, the A10 can fly on a single engine if the other is damaged and has even been known to stay airborne with one wing missing.(28)
Phasing out the Warthog will put ground troops in greater danger; that assessment is undeniable. But nothing can persuade the generals, who even attempted to gerrymander the official trials in favor of the F-35. One might think that if one is obliged to cheat in testing – and, even then, fail to achieve parity – one is not doing one's job properly.(29) This, on top of the shenanigans that they had already been pulling for years:
“The War Zone has detailed the many known instances in the past of the Air Force deliberately hamstringing the A-10 fleet and manipulating data to present it in an especially poor light. It is also known the service buries a set of requirements it had drafted regarding a dedicated A-10 replacement.
It is no secret that the Air Force did not want to conduct the flyoff at all, with then-Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh publicly describing it as a“silly exercise”The Congressional mandate for comparative testing had come after a scandal in which another Air Force general had suggested to his subordinates that defending the A-10 to members of legislators was tantamount to treason. Before that, the Air Force had also suppressed a short official documentary that presented a very positive picture of the A-10.”(30)
But, it is expedient to cleave to the need for change (and, no doubt, enjoy future sinecures at the likes of Raytheon and Lockheed) at all costs and to repeat the orthodoxy in the face of all evidence to the contrary, so first the trials report was buried and then heavily redacted and released years later. Congress actively resisted efforts to retire the fleet of Warthogs for many moons, but the current administration seems to be finally ready to pull the plug. America's enemies will take note; they will recognize yet another decision that weakens US military might.
The personnel situation, across all services, is also suddenly dire. Obama purged the high command of the military of some 200 senior officers, often using the catch all, subjective, often evidence-free grounds of a 'loss of confidence in command ability'.(31) Those that were sacked were usually independent-minded or, at least very least, suspected of not 'getting with the programme'. A retired general believed there was a further explanation, too:
“He's intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged."(32)
Biden has accelerated the overall decline of all branches of the US military. It only took his Defense Secretary a month to stand down the entire apparatus, so that all the services could tackle the 'extremism' that allegedly saturated the ranks; not Islamic extremism or support for Marxist BLM, mind, but the lesser-spotted right wing variety,(33) whose existence even the Pentagon now acknowledges to be a hoax.(34)
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programmes then became ubiquitous, not because those ultimately in charge (the background actors of the Deep State) hold any profound conviction that 'social justice' is a priority for the military, but because they had sacked anyone of character who would have resisted woke nonsense and made it crystal clear to the moral defectives who remained that undermining military readiness was the route to further promotion. So, drag shows, transgender soldiers and racial quotas at all ranks are now de rigeur.(35) But DEI can only ever 'work' in a non-competitive environment, as the progressive addiction to 'equity' of outcome, rather than equality of opportunity, will always force square pegs into round holes, thus weakening the overall enterprise.
The fitness test, previously gender and age neutral (and failed by 44% of women, compared to 7% of men) was summarily dispatched, replaced by gender-specific tests.(36) In other, completely unconnected news, 58% of US service members are either overweight or obese, the latter category standing at 21.6% - up from 10.4% in 2012.(37) That statistic may be disturbing enough, but the wider population is even less healthy.
Figure 6
One in three 17-24 year olds is too heavy to serve, 77% of them are unfit to serve for a whole panoply of reasons, including mental health issues and drug use.(38) This contributes to huge recruiting shortfalls; the army alone will lose 10% of its strength.(39) Not that there is, in any case, much enthusiasm for the military life, at present. Young people in the US seem not to want to die in pointless wars. But, while the Pentagon clutches its pearls and declares itself alarmed, a more cynical interpretation of the crisis has far more utility; if gutting the military is the goal, recruiting more personnel is very much not a priority.
Those that remain are killing themselves in unprecedented numbers; 94 in the first quarter of 2023, up from 75 the year prior.(40) This shouldn't be a surprise, as joining the US military is particularly hazardous to one's mental health – post 9/11, over four times as many active duty personnel and veterans have died by their own hand than have died in war.(41)
Figure 7
The 'vaccine' mandates were another purge – of largely religious service members - masquerading as a necessary medical intervention, and thinned the herd still further. Those who refused to take an unapproved (the shot that was provided was not one that had been genuinely approved – that 'vaccine' was unavailable in the US),(42) untested, unmandateable gene therapy were almost universally discharged from service and those who succumbed to the propaganda and/or bullying suffered the same consequences as the general population. Among navy pilots alone, there have been enormous rises in heart-related ailments:
“The figures show surges in conditions like hypertensive disease (36%), ischemic heart disease (69%), pulmonary heart disease (62%), heart failure (973%), other forms of heart disease (63%), and cardiomyopathy (152%) compared to the five-year average prior to 2022.”(43)
That five year average would clearly include 2021, the year the mandates were rolled out (August). That year saw massive surges in many categories of illness, particularly neurological, cardiovascular, oncological and reproductive health.
Figure 8
The military, caught on the horns of a dilemna, claimed that a glitch had been responsible for skewing the data. They were monitored while they added random back numbers to the years preceding 2021. Then they produced another chart.
Figure 9
That's an average of ten visits per year by every active-duty service member. Perhaps they were picking up diet pills instead? Then there's the problem with partially unexplained surges in deaths. By March 2023, more than 100 personnel at just one location – Fort Bragg – had died since the beginning of 2021. Some were drug overdoses; some weren't.(44) We may be able to hazard a guess or two as to cause. Then there are the problems with discipline.
In outposts such as South Korea, US troops commit hundreds of violent assaults and burglaries every year.(45) In Germany, military police have been forced to patrol clubs and pubs, augmenting the local police who have been repeatedly assaulted by soldiers.(46) At home, bases are cesspits of crime and disorder; Ford Hood averaged 129 violent felonies committed by soldiers between 2015 and 2019, Fort Bragg averaged 90 and Lewis McChord, 109.(47) Gang crime is also rampant.
In short then, the US military is a paper tiger and the impostor in the White House is doing his best to destroy any last pockets of competence. Military preparedness is woeful and troops are fat, ill, ill-disciplined and subject to woke diktats that have destroyed morale. Recruitment is insufficient, equipment is late, over-budget and unfit for purpose. Some of these problems are no doubt exacerbated by incompetence, but Obama and Biden have deliberately undermined national security. None of it has happened in a vacuum; both enemies and allies must increasingly recognize the determined nature of the project. And why? Because, despite all the bullshit;
“Who voluntarily enlists in the military?Largely people from the South and Midwest, particularly sons and daughters of families with military traditions. Even with recruiting crashing, most of those enlisting are patriots, willing to brave the DEI lunacy to serve.”(48)
In other words, kith and kin 'deplorables', who are no friend to the progressive cause and must be thoroughly neutered. Come the revolution, the Deep State isn't going to want those capable of, and inclined towards, resistance to be too numerous in number, nor for them to be able to access equipment that might actually prove effective.
The second pillar of US superpower status is also under relentless attack by the same ruthless actors. The global financial system, reliant on the US dollar as the reserve currency, is in the process of being shredded. Without getting too far into the weeds (as the fine detail is deserving of its own piece), the dollar itself is being destroyed.
The 'US', via the machinations of the uniparty and the Federal Reserve, is continuing to grow the US national debt exponentially, with no indication that they are ever going to rein spending in. It passed $34 trillion just this week; that's up $4 trillion in just the past two years and $11 trillion since the start of the 'pandemic'.(49) Interest payments on the debt have exploded, fueled by the Fed's alleged campaign against inflation.
Figure 10
Yet even these figures don't necessarily portend a disaster in the near future. US debt to GDP is still 'only' 120%; the UK's figure is 122%,(50) Japan's is 260% plus (51) and China's is well over 300%.(52) Simply spending their way into financial Armageddon may take a good while longer; or rather, it would do if government spending was the only variable of note. This headlong rush into eventual insolvency is given pseudo-legitimacy by yet another nonsensical ideology to go alongside all the woke nonsense and climate change; Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), which conveniently holds that governments need not worry about accumulating debt as they can always create new money in order to pay their way.
It acknowledges that there might just be a teensy-weensy problem with inflation at some point, but all a government needs to do then is increase taxes so as to limit the spending capacity of citizens; translated into English, it means that the populace gets shafted from all directions by the government that rules over them – their money loses value and they must then bear the brunt of any recovery that the government instigates by paying more taxes.
Regrettably (for us, but not for 'them'), the theory takes no account of what other nations may believe, which is particularly salient when your currency is the global reserve currency. Confidence in the dollar is, therefore, not a factor that can be ignored if one wishes to maintain the dollar's hegemony; a sudden loss of confidence would almost certainly result in the repatriation of many trillions of dollars, which may well trigger rampant hyperinflation. And while it's true that most of the debt is held by the public (around three quarters of it), with another large chunk held by domestic entities, foreign investors hold the remainder; around $7.3 trillion at the end of 2022.
Figure 11
Fed-prescribed interest rates hikes leading to a rising dollar make the bonds less profitable (as it makes the present value of their future income payments lower) and China has offloaded well over $250 billions worth of US Treasuries in recent years. Nonetheless, after Japan they are still the biggest holder of US debt. And the dollar is a fiat currency; it only has value to others if they are confident that the US will always pay its obligations. The adherence to MMT has undermined that confidence, but it's hardly the only factor. The long-standing habit of weaponizing the dollar to punish perceived enemies (and even potential allies) via the imposition of sanctions is also problematic. This has reached its apogee under Biden.
The war in Ukraine, precipitated by eight years of 'US' financed expansion of the Ukrainian military, served as a pretext for the sanctions regime that was swiftly imposed. At that point, two years ago, Biden hadn't yet squandered the last fragments of America's legacy as a superpower and all the usual suspects were roped in. Those following Biden's lead are the countries colored yellow in this map.
Figure 12
So far, so predictable. However, the intent to weaken Russia, the ostensible desired outcome, may not have been the primary aim. Russia was already a BRICS member, along with two of the world's biggest consumers of energy – China and India. A soft landing was not, therefore, beyond the realm of probabilities, which is exactly what's happened and what was always likely to happen. The two economic powerhouses stepped in when the EU countries pulled away.
Figure 13
The G7 then engaged in Operation Dumbass, in the conviction that we would continue to believe that they are economically illiterate rather than evil. They expressed frustration that Russia was still selling oil – only at higher prices, as the embargo initially drove prices up – and denied Russian tankers insurance, which was yet another failure as the Russians simply didn't bother with any. But had the plot succeeded, the price of oil would have risen for everyone, unless someone had upped production or demand had lessened.(53) Higher energy prices in the West, of course, has been a major policy plank for the globalist elites, as it greatly assists in de-industrialisation, because climate change, or somesuch.
So, Russia undeterred, the West weakened. When the Nordstream pipeline was blown up, another part of the strategy became crystal clear. Russia's influence in the EU was greatly lessened and Europe had to turn to the US for help. And so, despite all the BS about climate change and the need to sharply curtail the use of fossil fuels, the US has ramped up its oil production and is currently producing more than the country ever has – around 13.3 million barrels per day in the fourth quarter of 2023. Incidentally, that's more than any country has ever produced.(54) They're hoping you don't notice.
So, yoke your vassal states to the dollar and increase your control over their energy needs. Next, exclude Russian banks from the SWIFT financial system, thus ensuring that Russia's ongoing trade with India and China takes place on other secure messaging systems instead, further balkanising the global economy but, crucially, erecting a partial barrier between your sphere of influence and that of BRICS. An inevitable consequence will be the dawning realization (by the BRICS nations) that trading in the petrodollar is no longer a requirement, nor is it in their best interests to prop up the dollar by so doing.
“Researchers at the Federal Reserve have calculated that from 1999 to 2019, 96 per cent of trade in the Americas was invoiced in U.S. dollars. So was 74 per cent of trade in Asia. Elsewhere outside of Europe, where the euro dominates, dollars accounted for 79 per cent of trade.”(55)
However, now more than 90% of trade conducted between China and Russia is done using the yuan or the ruble.(56) Russia and Iran have also bilaterally and officially ditched the US dollar for trade.(57) 20% of global oil sales in 2023 were done in currencies other than the dollar. The Russians are even using the yuan to settle trades from third countries, as well. And guess who joined BRICS this past week? Saudi Arabia, along with Egypt, the UAE, Iran and Ethiopia. I wonder how long it will take them to ditch the dollar, too. Freeing oneself from financial retaliation must be a tantalizing prospect.
Because that's the final part of the strategy that has caused severe consternation. The US, EU and allies froze $300 billion of Russian foreign exchange reserves in early 2022, as well as seizing as many oligarchs' superyachts as they could lay their hands on. The G7 is now contemplating circumventing the congressional logjam on continuing to finance Ukraine by actively using those assets against Russia herself:
"A US official said Washington was engaged in active conversations on the use of Russian sovereign assets and believed there was a short timeline to make a decision. They suggested it could be discussed at a possible G7 leaders’ meeting to coincide with the second anniversary in February of Russia’s full invasion of Ukraine."(58)
Every country outside the G7 (and, probably, within) can draw the obvious conclusion:
"If America does this to Russia today… then tomorrow it can do this to anyone. This will destroy the halo of security that surrounds the dollar and will be the first step towards de-dollarization, which many are increasingly confidently leaning toward, from China to developing countries, not to mention Russia itself.”(59)
America's much vaunted 'rules-based international order' is revealed, once again, to be a mirage. Additionally, the 'US', by virtue of the act of circling the wagons against the Russian Bear, has deliberately undermined the dollar's status as the global reserve currency. They have weakened themselves and all their allies with policies that the political opposition can pass off as hubristic, when they are nothing of the sort. They know exactly what they are doing.
Alex Newman, an award-winning journalist and author of The Deep State, endured the recent COP-28 in Dubai on our behalf. He had this to say upon his return:
“The communist Chinese, the Arab dictatorships, the Russians and all the different socialist kleptocracies, they were literally making oil deals at this summit.... The Arabs, communist Chinese and the globalists are laughing all the way to the bank. They are not really working on phasing out oil or phasing out fossil fuels. They are working on phasing out the Western world, which is also known as Christendom or the ‘Free World’ ...They all understand this is a scam. They want to deindustrialize the Western world. They want to shift economic and, ultimately, military power away from the United States and what used to be known as the ‘Free World’ towards the other pole in this multipolar world order that they are building, especially Beijing.”(60)
Price disparities between the yellow zone of the Collective West and Five Eyes and the grey zone that houses BRICS and the Global South are already extreme and growing. A couple of examples:
“If I took $200 into a Russian supermarket, buying only consumable food products, I would end up with about 3 shopping carts full of food. Take that same $200 into the average USA supermarket and you get one shopping cart or less....Starbucks pulled out of Russia. The building still exists, the furniture still there, the equipment still there, just a different name, “Star Coffee” lolol. Starbucks is roughly $6 for whatever, the StarCoffee is $1. Same stuff. A cab/uber ride in USA might be $25, or in EU might be €30, but outside the yellow zone around $6 to $10/max...Now, the price disparity is not in everything, only in the products that do not originate from inside the yellow zone. The increased price of the yellow zone goods transfers into the grey zone when the product is moved. However, if the yellow zone and grey zone both produce an identical product (or service), that’s when you see the massive difference in price.”(61)
De-dollarisation is a feature, not a bug. The other actors on the world stage understand what the plan is and they will presumably cherry pick the parts that benefit them and discard the woke ideology that can only ever undermine, not create. I doubt whether Putin, for example, wants the Moscow Metro to go from this
Figure 14
to this (New York).
Figure 15
Whilst it is far from clear how free the rest of the world will be – of the 208 central banks in the world, at least 119 of them are currently developing their own (interoperable) CBDC (including 19 members of the G20, who are closing in on a launch date) – (62) the yellow zone's leadership, with the exception of Hungary and (perhaps) the Netherlands, are seemingly united in their march towards the edge of the precipice, with the 'US' leading the way. And while CBDCs are a vital part of the upcoming attempt at tyranny, the trouble will really start in countries that are also planning to abolish cash, impose a digital ID and introduce a social credit score system, which may not be all of them. Time will tell.
It is possible that spheres of influence have been agreed and that China will lead the other faction. BRICS may well be the vehicle to be used to accomplish this end. The fact that three Middle Eastern countries are now members – and that two of them, Saudi Arabia and Iran are supposed to be mortal enemies – ought to have been front page news, but has attracted barely any interest or analysis.
Russia's partnership with China is also an Odd Couple alliance; not because it's impossible to see how they might have been driven into each other's arms by American intransigence over Ukraine, but because China and the 'US' are cozy (a subject for another essay) and Russia is supposedly the West's Public Enemy Number One. Having your friend's friend as your implacable enemy is an uncomfortable look that is worthy of suspicion.
It may very well be, therefore, that the 'US' has accepted that the yellow zone is theirs to control, rather than the entire globe or the kabuki theater may be more all-encompassing than I suspect; it's still just about possible to believe that they're all in it together. If the BRICS countries follow through and create their own reserve currency, backed by gold (they've been stockpiling gold like no tomorrow and repatriating it from Western vaults),(63) as has been mooted, or opt for the digital yuan by default, then a separate spheres would be the likely direction of travel. However, as long as there is no viable alternative to the dollar and the proposed CBDCs are all designed to be compatible, the jury is out.
But why try to destroy America in the first place, when it seems so counter-intuitive? Both groups of bad actors arrive at this point for different reason; progressives arrive here on the ideological train and the elites do so because the ideology, if harnessed, will provide them with what they want more than anything – control.
When the evidence of 'what' is overwhelming, the question of 'why' becomes increasingly academic. But, in truth, the specter of Western totalitarianism is hardly a recent phenomenon. The fascists of the thirties, while possibly more inclined towards the exercise of military power in the accumulation of empire, brutalized sections of their citizenry. Spain labored under a dictatorship unless as recently as 1975. Aldous Huxley was warning of a dystopian future in 1932 (with the publication of Brave New World) and was joined by Orwell in 1949.
It may be that we lack the requisite psychological profile to fully understand how these lofty sociopaths think, but I would imagine that the following factors play their part; a lack of a moral framework coupled with an absolute need to control; no concept of natural rights in concert with a mechanistic take on the human condition; and the rise of AI, together with the associated concept of the 'useless eater' and the depopulation agenda. The list is not exhaustive, I'm sure, but I'd be willing to bet that all those elements feature prominently.
“Those who “run” America have had two things in common: (1) a hatred for individual freedoms, and (2) an even deeper hatred for the one country on the planet explicitly founded on their protection.
Leftists are not happy people. They have not figured out any special meaning to life because, to them, life is meaningless. In other words, for too many years, a collection of the most depressed, least curious, morally relativistic, and intellectually homogenous people on the planet have been given pampered positions in exchange for acting as nihilistic and narcotic-dependent sea vessel captains willing to steer America into an iceberg of decline and failure.”(64)
If Leftism is, fundamentally characterized by the authoritarian impulse, then the serried ranks of Leftists that oppose us are all share that same genetic mutation. Indeed, in the modern iteration of the uniparty it is apparent that the Leftists are more fully satiated by control, the 'Right' by money. So doing their own legs, ensuring that the baton is handed to the Chinese and others, wantonly dispensing with control, doesn't match the blueprint.
Not all Leftists are also zealous progressives – some are relatively sensible; still sociopathically controlling, but not incapable of functioning without an excess of emotion. These types are likely to be found in greater concentrations behind the scenes, pulling the strings, as Obama and others likely are now. None of them are straightforward.
It is said that Obama conducted a mea culpe tour in 2009, prostrating himself before assorted potentates and promising that the 'US' will do better. I'm sure that the reports are accurate enough – I'm equally sure that Obama doesn't have a humble bone in his body and that any such sentiments were uttered for reasons that were calculating and self-serving. This is not a man to be trusted.
He's a man who identifies as black (although he is biracial and could equally well have identified as white) and who doesn't believe in systemic racism any more than he believes in climate change – he was voted into office for two presidential terms by the very voters he excoriates and he's the proud owner of a mansion in Martha's Vineyard that sits about two feet higher than the sea at the bottom of his garden.
Figure 16
Another estate under construction in Hawaii (linked to him) will also have a hard time surviving catastrophic rising sea levels. No residences perched on high ground, notably.
Figure 17
Biden's main residence is even more precariously positioned on the banks of a tidal river and his second residence is, inevitably, a beach house. The likes of Obama and Biden are not good faith actors.
Figure 18
Figure 19
As for DEI, the battering ram that has been used to decimate the military's morale – the three biggest investment funds in the world – BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard – are all run by 'cisgender' white men; Larry Fink, Ron O'Hanley and Mortimer Buckley, respectively. As are three of the four biggest Wall Street banks (the odd one out is Citigroup who appointed a white, 'cisgender' woman in 2021, the first female CEO on Wall Street and an alumni of Cambridge and Harvard). As is George Soros, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffet – not a whole lot of diversity on display in those circles.
Once again, while acknowledging what seems to infuse the likes of Obama, the progessives are still the handmaidens of greater powers. The genuine cultists exist, as does the go-along-to-get-along crowd. The upper echelons of control structures, such as the military, are stuffed with careerists who are prepared to do whatever it takes to survive and, if possible, prosper – they are the mirror image of the medical profession, as revealed during the 'pandemic'.
They will worship at the woke shrine, announce their preferred pronouns and plant a Ukrainian flag in their Twitter/X profile, but most have to exist in a state of permanent cognitive dissonance – I refer to it as the Great Pretending and we can aver its existence by their deliberate absence of critical thinking and active avoidance of evidence that will prick their fake balloons. But they aren't the narcissists and sociopaths of the Far Left; they're simply the invertebrates blessed with a non-functioning moral compass, cowed into compliance and collusion.
It is this cohort which lacks the gumption that would have holed the SS Great Reset below the waterline before it had left port. The individuals of fortitude and faith, problem children for would-be tyrants, were no doubt heavily represented in the 200 senior officers purged by Obama and none of them will be found in the Federal Reserve or the current administration.
Turning things around, in both arenas, would take as long as it would take to alter the course of a supertanker with a paddle. And that assumes that there is a desire to do so, which there clearly isn't; it's a race to the bottom, gradual then sudden. The equipment snafus in the military are baked in for years to come and the shrinking pool of talent in the wider population from which to recruit militates against a swift return to proper military preparedness. The damage cuts deep.
The dollar could still be rescued, but neither side of the aisle is willing to make the hard choices that would be necessary if for one, a reduction in the national debt is to be accomplished; nor are they prepared to return to an era of non-weaponisation of the currency. There are enough neocons on the Right to scupper any moderation in that direction.
So, I would expect the more powerful of assertive nations to present an increasingly contemptuous front to the West (and the US in particular) and I don't believe there will be much in the way of pushback except, probably, with Israel. If the plan is to reduce America to a regional power, demonstrations of global reach are actively undermining. Continued de-dollarisation will gradually put more pressure on the currency and the administration, along with the Republicans, have it within their gift to accelerate that decline at a moment of their choosing.
The ongoing saga of the budget, with its diet of Continuing Resolutions and threats of government lock-downs, provides plenty of scope for a debt default. The Democrats can simply continue to bundle together disparate spending requirements, ones that they know the Republicans will not vote for, rather than separating them out into different bills. Then it either becomes a genuine game of chicken or a stage-managed disaster – I'm inclined to believe that most of what happens inside the Beltway is not as it seems, so the latter seems much more likely. Or Congress stumbles on and Wall Street and the Fed get the demolition contract, instead. It's then simply a matter of timing; mid-to-late 2024 is likely to be optimal.
Citations
(2) https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/27/60percent-of-americans-are-still-living-paycheck-to-paycheck.html
(3) https://www.feedingamerica.org/about-us/press-room/53-million-received-help-2021
(4) https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/maersk-halts-red-sea-transit-after-container-ship-hit-missile
(7) https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/us-left-78000-afghan-allies-ngo-report-rcna18119
(9) https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/maersk-halts-red-sea-transit-after-container-ship-hit-missile
(11) https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1731173058763800708.html
(13) https://www.noozhawk.com/missile_test_ends_in_explosion_seconds_after_launch_from_vandenberg_sfb/
(14) https://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/23/europe/trident-missile-failure-theresa-may/index.html
(16) https://realclearwire.com/articles/2023/11/23/is_america_short_of_heavy_weapons_994565.html
(17) https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/raytheon-ceo-china-has-us-military-balls
(20) https://dailycaller.com/2023/08/13/taiwan-china-americas-submarine-crisis/
(21) https://www.zerohedge.com/political/navy-dead-water
(22) Ditto
(24) https://www.zerohedge.com/political/navy-dead-water
(28) https://mwi.westpoint.edu/function-form-case-keeping-warthog-instead-costly-f-35/
(29) https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/a-10-vs-f-35-close-air-support-flyoff-report-finally-emerges
(30) Ditto
(31) https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/197-military-officers-purged-by-obama/
(32)Ditto
(35) https://www.zerohedge.com/political/us-military-sanctioned-diversity-initiatives-are-out-control
(36) https://taskandpurpose.com/news/congress-tells-army-increase-fitness-standards/
(37) https://www.zerohedge.com/military/unfit-fight-68-us-service-members-obese-or-overweight
(38) https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/downloads/unfit-to-serve-062322-508.pdf
(41) https://www.zerohedge.com/military/us-military-suicide-crisis
(43) https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/11/u-s-navy-medical-officer-exposes-defense-department/
(46) https://www.stripes.com/branches/army/2023-06-13/nuremberg-train-station-patrols-10421958.html
(47) https://www.stripes.com/branches/army/why-is-fort-hood-the-army-s-most-crime-ridden-post-1.642104
(48) https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/01/will_our_military_fight_for_joe_biden.html
(49) https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/us-debt-hits-record-34001-trillion
(50) https://commodity.com/data/uk/debt-clock/
(51) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_Japan
(52) https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/2023-greatest-hits-most-popular-articles-past-year-and-look-ahead
(53) https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/how-russia-makes-mockery-us-sanctions-one-picture
(55) https://www.globaltrademag.com/how-the-united-states-dollar-dominated-the-global-trade-space/
(57) https://100percentfedup.com/russia-and-iran-ditch-u-s-dollar/
(62) https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/cbdctracker/
Figure 3 Ditto
Figure 6 https://www.zerohedge.com/military/unfit-fight-68-us-service-members-obese-or-overweight
Figure 7 https://www.zerohedge.com/military/us-military-suicide-crisis
Figure 9 Ditto
Figure 10 https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/us-debt-hits-record-34001-trillion
Figure 11 https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/which-countries-hold-most-us-debt
Figure 13 https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/how-russia-makes-mockery-us-sanctions-one-picture
Figure 14 https://revolver.news/2023/12/notice-anything-different-between-this-moscow-subway-and-nyc/
Figure 15 Ditto
Figure 16 https://www.tmz.com/2019/08/22/barack-michelle-obama-buying-mega-mansion-marthas-vinyard/
Figure 18 https://www.velvetropes.com/celebrity-homes/celebrity-house-1647/photos/2