The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPepe Escobar Archive
The Living Dead Pax Americana
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Pax Americana was always a minor character in a zombie apocalypse flick.

Pax Americana is actually The Eternal Return of the Living Dead. “Pax” was never in order; War Inc. rules. The end of WWII led directly to the Cold War. The unipolar moment was an arc from the First Gulf War to the bombing of Yugoslavia. 9/11 launched the Global War on Terror (GWOT), renamed Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) by Team Obama. We are now entering Cold War 2.0 against China.

What former CIA analyst Ray McGovern memorably describes as the MICIMATT (military-industrial-congressional-intelligence-media-academia-think tank complex) never did “Pax”. They do War, in unison, like The Knights Who Say “Ni!” – minus the comic flair.

Take this Knight for the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the heart of the establishment matrix. CFR specializes in Kissingerian Divide and Rule. Now that applies, in spades, to the Russia-China strategic partnership.

Knights overwhelmingly state the obvious: “Chinese power must be contained”. They sell the current, serial imperial debacle as “grand strategic moves”, in a quirky, lost in translation mixed salad of Gramsci and Lampedusa: a “new order” (engineered by the Empire) is being born via “everything must change so everything may remain the same” – privileging the Empire.

Other Knights even propose the ludicrous notion that the current POTUS, an actual zombie remote-controlled by a teleprompter, is capable of conceiving a “foreign policy for the middle class” , as if the MICIMATT would ever approve a scheme to “advance prosperity in the free world as a whole”. The “free world” has just been stunned by the “prosperity” offered to Afghanistan during 20 “bombing to democracy” years.

And then there are British Knights, who at least should have known their Monty Python by heart, carping about illiberalism and the “regimes created by Xi and Putin” , which will “crumble” and be succeeded by “anarchy and new despotisms.” Same old Anglo haughtiness mixed with piercing ignorance. Oh, those Asiatic “tyrannies” threatening the White Man’s civilizational drive.

We all live in an Aussie submarine

Now it’s all about AUKUS – actually U SUK A. Until recently, only the P5 – the five permanent UNSC members – possessed nuclear-powered submarines. India joined the club, and later rather than sooner, Australia.

Every major player knows the next American war will not be about remote Pacific islands. Taiwan, though, is a completely different ball game. U SUK A is mostly about Taiwan.

U SUK A was finalized at the G7 summit in Carbis Bay last June. That was an Anglo Boys Club affair, discussed exclusively by the Biden-BoJo-Morrison troika – and duly excluding Japan, even as Tokyo all but drew a samurai sword yelling its intent of supporting Taiwan.

The problem is there have been no leaks of the fine print contained in U SUK A. Only spin. Yet it’s already clear that U SUK A goes way beyond building Aussie nuclear subs. Canberra will also have access to Tomahawks, Hornets and even become part of American hypersonic missile research.

But then, in a slip, Australian Defense Minister Peter Dutton gave away the game: U SUK A will allow the upgrading of “the infrastructure in Perth, that will be necessary for the operation of these submarines. I expect we will see…lease arrangements or greater joint operations between our navies in the future.”

Translation: Perth will be a forward base for nuclear-powered and nuclear weapon-carrying American subs.

Why U SUK A now? Let’s go back to WWII – and the same old cartoonish geopolitics of benign Anglo maritime island powers pitted against the “evil” Eurasian heartland.

WWII was the solution to simultaneously prevent Germany from dominating the Atlantic and Japan from dominating the Asia-Pacific (by the way, that’s the correct terminology: “Indo-Pacific” is Empire-speak).

Germany-Japan was all about an alliance that would be predominant across the Eurasian heartland. Now, the Empire of Chaos is being slowly but surely expelled from the Eurasian heartland – this time by the Russia-China strategic partnership.

Those with technical knowledge across the Beltway – not, not the Knights – are aware the US is not a match for hypersonic Russia. Yet the Americans believe they can make life unbearable for Beijing. The US establishment will allow China to control the Western Pacific over their dead bodies. Enter the instrumentalization of Australia.

A big question is what will be the new role of the Five Eyes. With U SUK A, the Anglo Club has already stepped beyond mere intel sharing and spying on communications. This is a military pact between Three Eyes.

Depending on the composition of its new government, Germany could become a Sixth Eye – yet in a subordinate role. With U SUK A, NATO as a whole, fresh from its spectacular Afghan debacle, becomes little else than a semi-relevant vassal. This is all about maritime power.

U SUK A in effect is a Quad Plus, with India and Japan, the Fifth Columnist Asians, only allowed to play the role of, once again, mere vassals.

War before 2040

Not surprisingly, the first, concise technical and strategic assessment of U SUK A is Russian, written by Alexander Timokhin and published in Vzglyad, closely linked to GRU intelligence. Here, provided by John Helmer, is an essential English translation.

The key points:

  • The extra subs will create a serious, additional threat; “the problem of combating enemy submarine forces will become quite acute for China.”
  • Geographically, “Australia can completely block the connection between China and the Indian Ocean.”
  • Australia will meet the deadlines only if it lays “more submarines a year than the Americans.”
  • It is “possible to quickly make Australia a country with a submarine fleet.” These “gigantic investments and sharp political turns are not carried out just like that. The hegemony of the Anglo-Saxons in the world is seriously shaken.”

And that brings us to the inevitable conclusion: “It is worth recognizing that the world is on the verge of war.”

Even before the Vzglyad strategic assessment, I had submitted the ravings of yet another Beltway Knight – widely praised as a sage – to an old school, dissident Deep State intel analyst. His assessment was merciless.

He wrote me, “the geopolitical logic is that the China-Russia alliance was determined to be against US interests, much as the Mao-Stalin alliance. SEATO and NATO are being replicated. The treaty between England, Australia and the US is part of the Pacific rebalancing, or a new SEATO. NATO is part of the offset against Russia-China in Europe.”

ORDER IT NOW

On what might lie ahead, he noted that “the coup against the US, Australia, England and NATO would be a French-Russian alliance to break up NATO and isolate Germany. Russia has unsuccessfully approached Germany, and now may approach France. The loss of France would effectively end NATO.”

He sees U SUK A all dressed up with nowhere to go: “As it stands now, China is in command of the Pacific and Australia and Britain mean nothing. Russia can overrun NATO in two weeks, our adversaries’ hypersonic missiles can destroy all NATO airfields within five to ten minutes and the battle for Europe would be over.”

He’s adamant that “the US cannot project power into the Pacific. Chinese submarine missiles would finish off the US fleet in short order. The Australian submarine issue is really irrelevant; if the CIA had an organization that was worth anything they would know that our adversaries already can spot and destroy our nuclear submarines without the slightest difficulty. The entire US Navy is obsolete and defenseless against Russian missiles.”

And it gets worse – at least for the cheerleading Knights: “The F-35 is obsolete. The Air Force is largely worthless, as Russian and Chinese missiles can finish off their airfields or aircraft carriers in short order. The woke US Army is more worthless than the French Army with their Maginot Line. The Joint Chiefs of Staff are paid less than 200k a year, and are second or third rate talent. The US is a sinking ship.”

Assuming that’s really the case, the – nuclear – war against China in the Western Pacific, projected in the Beltway to happen in the second half of the 2030s, would be over even before it started. Taiwan may even be part of China by then – an offshoot of Beijing always proposing economic exchanges to all, while Washington always “proposes” war.

One thing though will never change: The Knights Who Say “Ni!” singin’ the praise of Pax Americana to the utter indifference of the unruly plebs.

(Republished from Strategic Culture Foundation by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 36 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Diesel subs are quieter and far less expensive than nuclear subs. We are told that Australia needs nuclear subs because only they have the range to operate far away in the south China sea, to defend Australia! This is not about defending Australia, but a desperate attempt to help defend a dying empire known as the USA. Moreover, the “threat” from China is not military, but its economic and technological success.

  2. Franz says:

    Russia has unsuccessfully approached Germany, and now may approach France. The loss of France would effectively end NATO

    No that train left the station years ago.

    During Cold War I Charles dc Gaulle successfully pulled France out of the military section of NATO and without that there IS no NATO.

    But if half the allies called it quits tomorrow I don’t think it would matter. Same is poor whites and blacks in the States butcher each other year after year without even mentioning the obvious solution — racial separation — NATO will keep puttering along, wasting our money and racking up both crimes against humanity and attacks against soft targets for more money.

    And no nation owns NATO, it belongs to the bankers. My guess is as the US collapse continues, Fleet Street will find a way to move operations to Tasmania. There are suddenly some massive investments going in that direction, none at all going to Chicago or Detroit.

  3. Molip says:

    “The US is a sinking ship” to which Australian leaders have tied their entire population.

    It’s also interesting that the Australian government has now managed to piss off 3 out of the 5 permanent UNSC members to the point where the aggrieved will now not even talk to them over the phone.

    • Replies: @animalogic
  4. I wonder IF this is an accurate assessment of globo-homos’ military might.

    It’s always the Russians will crush Europe,the Chinese will sink the
    U.S.Navy,or the “airforce is largely useless”…I’m not so sure.

    If…this articles’ assertion is that “the west” is weak and sure to lose,
    then why has it not happened yet?Wrong,maybe you are?

    It’s never the Americans will unleash an unholy hell at 100 targets in an hour.
    In under a day,the loses and destruction could top any estimation ever estimated.

    But…publish what you will,or believe or wish,it’s still a free country.CYA…Prai\$e

  5. Pharaoh says: • Website

    Asia-Pacific…that’s the correct terminology: “Indo-Pacific” is Empire-speak).

    Wrong. Indo-Pacific is correct. Both the Indian and the Pacific Oceans are battlegrounds in this Anglo vs Han rivalry. Your article itself highlights this:

    Australian Defense Minister Peter Dutton gave away the game: U SUK A will allow the upgrading of “the infrastructure in Perth, that will be necessary for the operation of these submarines.”

    Translation: Perth [on the Indian Ocean side of Australia] will be a forward base for nuclear-powered and nuclear weapon-carrying American subs.

    Geographically, “Australia can completely block the connection between China and the Indian Ocean.” [Alexander Timokhin]

    The US doesn’t need Australian or Indian help in the Pacific Theater. It needs them both in the Indian Ocean where China has been building ports all over the place implementing its ‘String of Pearls’ strategy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_of_Pearls_(Indian_Ocean)#Facilities_and_relationships

    • Replies: @animalogic
    , @showmethereal
  6. Andreas says:

    We all live in an Aussie submarine…

    Singing Helter Skelter, Helter Skelter…

    • LOL: Realist
    • Replies: @Brad Anbro
  7. U SUK A is simply about ensuring the rich dual citizens running Washington DC steal even more taxpayer and printed funds ever faster before the whole thing collapses. They will have bought huge tracts of the West before that collapse comes and they hope to have a police state in place soon enough to prevent the public taking their ill gotten gains back and hanging them. Looks to me like they have already lost.

  8. Rahan says:

    Welp, it’s supposed to be a Lamb With Seven Eyes, and a Beast With Seven Horns.

    So at the every least the Five Eyes need to become the Seven Eyes.

    I wonder what the Seven Horns are? Ballistic capability?

  9. @Molip

    ““The US is a sinking ship” to which Australian leaders have tied their entire population.”
    Yes, indeed, it’s difficult to imagine a worse foreign policy for Australia — tho I’m sure that that fantastic Mediocrity, Morrison, can find a way to make things even worse….
    (To recall, that Whitlam led the way in the West in opening relations with China back in the 70’s & then to think of today…. well …. it’s sad beyond comprehension)

  10. @Pharaoh

    The Indian Ocean — the Chinese ports are commercial. If you want to speculate about future military uses — well all may have an opinion.
    Of course, the 800 odd US military bases around the world are a little more factual….

  11. Andreas says:

    “USUKA, USUKA, me no luv U long time”, said the resentful, aging whore.

    It all reeks of desperation.

    Effective strategic policy is not built on a foundation of a handful of submarines that will take years to build and become fully operational. If that is the thinking, then time is not on the side of USUKA. China will have that much time to prepare.

    I think the subs are most likely just a way to keep money flowing into the MIC.

    Since the Afghanistan debacle, there are no longer any “little guys” for the US to pick on. Therefore, the US had to openly and brazenly dump and humiliate an historic ally, i.e. France, in order to keep this money flowing.

    There is also an undercurrent to these events that suggest the US is no longer capable of projecting influence in both Europe and Asia.

    Bye, bye Miss American Pie.

    • Agree: Jim H
  12. Russia could turn off the energy spigots in the middle of winter to persuade Europe not to support US gunboat diplomacy against it’s trading partner China.

    Any interruption of the container ships bringing goods to America will have immediate impact on the US consumer economy, as well as the US military which relies on Chinese-made components.

    There is no way America can win a war of attrition against the strong hand of the Eurasian Alliance. It would backfire and hasten the coming implosion of imperial USA.

  13. Notsofast says:

    the aussie neocons see this as their big chance to take off their angus young school boy pants and put on nuclear big boy pants, just like daddy. they must figure that they are being sold off piecemeal to the chinese, so why not just sell out lock stock and barrel and turn the whole island into a u.s. naval base. no end to that money and they don’t have to worry about the economy or learning foreign languages ever again.

  14. Pharaoh says: • Website

    Pepe wrote:

    I had submitted the ravings of yet another Beltway Knight – widely praised as a sage – to an old school, dissident Deep State intel analyst. His assessment was merciless.

    Assuming he is for real, that ‘old school, dissident Deep State intel analyst’ you quote so wishfully is a complete whack job. You have discredited yourself. He is laughably out of touch with reality. Examples:

    the coup against the US, Australia, England and NATO would be a French-Russian alliance to break up NATO.

    Russia can overrun NATO in two weeks, our adversaries’ hypersonic missiles can destroy all NATO airfields within five to ten minutes and the battle for Europe would be over.

    The entire US Navy is obsolete and defenseless against Russian missiles.

    the US cannot project power into the Pacific.

    As it stands now, China is in command of the Pacific.

    The Air Force is largely worthless, as Russian and Chinese missiles can finish off their airfields or aircraft carriers in short order.

    You are not a serious analyst. You are just a fantasist clinging to a pan-Eurasian pipe dream.

  15. Andreas says:

    There is no way America can win a war of attrition against the strong hand of the Eurasian Alliance. It would backfire and hasten the coming implosion of imperial USA.

    Completely agree. It would require reinstatement of the draft. I just can’t imagine the zero-risk social media crowd volunteering in any significant numbers to be slaughtered and dismembered in such a campaign.

    If there was a war, it might be nuclear and triggered by some kind of false flag. The Chinese are way too smart and savvy to initiate a war themselves.

    The US is now officially run by lunatics and anything could happen. I’m speculating that these sociopaths would not hesitate to sacrifice an aircraft carrier along with its entire 5000 member crew and blame it on the Chinese. Alternatively, they might even release chemical or biological agents into US cities to get people whipped up into an anti-China frenzy in order to legitimize nuking them.

    One things is for sure and that is things are only going to get more insane in this Great Unraveling that we are witnessing.

  16. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:

    One point of The AUKUS deal is that it upgrades Australia’s nuclear capabilities. With nuclear subs, Australia will start operating reactors with highly enriched uranium, which can be used to make nuclear weapons. Nuclear submarines may be worrisome for China, but an Aussie nuclear deterrent would pose a much greater threat.

    Australia has ample nuclear expertise, so much so that they’re sometimes called a “de facto nuclear power.” With half the world’s uranium reserves, they could quickly build an American-sized nuclear arsenal. Beijing must be pondering this carefully.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @showmethereal
  17. Speaking as one of the unruly, ignorant plebs, I am not indifferent. I am horrified.

    Why does the United States need war with anyone? Why do we need an empire? What does the empire do for the American people beyond providing employment for a few tens of thousands of overeducated young men whose talents would be employed better almost anywhere else?

    Let China, Russia & Germany divide Europe and Asia between them. Between the Japanese, the Indians, the Vietnamese, the French, etc., etc., etc., they will have plenty on their plates. The Atlantic & Pacific oceans remain impervious barriers to any military action beyond lobbing nuclear missiles. Nuclear missiles accomplish very little beyond slaughtering civilians, and the missiles fire both ways.

    The United States needs nothing beyond a devastating second strike capability and a modest army for home defense. The world has had nonstop war since 1914. It is time for this insanity to stop.

    • Agree: RoatanBill
    • Replies: @Hillbob
    , @Realist
  18. WWIII will be against Russia. They can’t war with China. China has all their money.

  19. This all feels like Cold War 1.0 when the US was coaxing Canada to obtain nuclear subs to challenge Russia in the Barents Sea.

    https://archive.macleans.ca/article/1987/6/15/a-defence-plan-for-canada

    Looks like they’ve dusted off the 1987 strategy without making any major changes. Canada would have acquired 10 -12 nuclear subs. A windfall for American defense contractors, but a strain on Canada’s meagre budget.

    Australia should give its head a shake and think about what its getting into.

  20. Jim H says:

    ‘The problem is there have been no leaks of the fine print contained in U SUK A.’ — Pepe Escobar

    Submit a treaty to the Senate for ratification? Like declaring war, that’s so mid-20th century.

    Now treaties are cooked up in secret and announced through the PR megaphone, while 535 useless Kongress Klowns write blank checks despite not being permitted to read the agreement.

    ‘Rule of law’ … HA HA HA HA. We’re so over that. Just ask Caudillo Joe (during a moment of lucidity).

  21. The bombing of Belgrade, the ancient Christian capitol city on the Danube River by the U.S. was utterly abominable. The Serbs had supported the U.S. during WW2and after and did not deserve this.

  22. Right_On says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Diesel subs are quieter and far less expensive than nuclear subs.

    Had the same thought when I heard about Australia rejecting French conventional subs.

    The German Type 212 has air-independent propulsion. The U-boat can stay submerged for up to three weeks without snorkeling and is said to be virtually undetectable.

    I want one for Christmas!

    I’d strip out the torpedo tubes and make a Captain Nemo-style, Victorian cabin.

  23. Realist says:
    @HorriblyDepressed

    The United States needs nothing beyond a devastating second strike capability and a modest army for home defense. The world has had nonstop war since 1914. It is time for this insanity to stop.

    All excellent points. This country is a plutocratic oligarchy…totally for the wealthy and powerful.

  24. Anon[269] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    All China has to do should it wish to bring Australia to its knees is to stop buying Australian exports and stop selling to Australia Chinese made goods. Australia manufactures next to nothing and even imports its gasoline. Exports are mainly unimproved raw materials while the domestic economy is mostly real estate related (with funny money) and services. In all, it’s weaker than an American cup of tea.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  25. Souza says:

    Great article by the Author as always.

    Nuclear War in, let’s say, 10 to 15 years? Very scary prognostic.

    Those alive will see.

  26. Even better, China’s spectacular scientific/technological advances will render the USUKA Anglo thugs’ trillions in military investment not just lost, but ludicrous. Still the MIC corporates will wax even fatter than their cane toadies at ASPI or the Murdoch sewer. It is truly obscene, yet amusing, to live in a country that has lost its mind, as well as its soul, in a mere fifty years since the aborted Whitlam dawn.

  27. @Anon

    Austfailia fell under the control of neo-liberals under Hawke and Keating, so-called ‘Labor’ politicians. Both retired as millionaires, as the country’s manufacturing was euthanised, to destroy organised unionism, every profitable public corporation was privatised at bargain basement prices, our gold reserves sold at the very bottom of the market, and the indigenous continued to be imprisoned at the world’s highest rate, their children removed at ever higher rates than ever before, and we joined in every US aggression going around. And so very much more, nearly all wicked and stupid. To end up dwelling in one of the most evil States on Earth, run by utter vermin-what luck!

  28. @Andreas

    “She’s coming down fast…”

  29. @Carlton Meyer

    Thank you for making sense. As noted – for coastal defense diesel electrics are better than nuclear subs because they are quieter. This is all about Australia spending billions to join the world’s police. It has nothing to do with defense.

  30. @Pharaoh

    Why do people think everything in Wikipedia is correct??? String of Pearls is projection… It’s not China’s strategy. China tried to include India in it’s regional development but India rebuffed China. India has to blame itself. It’s not China’s fault that Sri Lanka – Maldives – Bangladesh – Myanmar and of course Pakistan and now Iran see the benefit of letting China be involved in port projects.

  31. @Anonymous

    Every country that is not a US vassal is concerned about a potential nuclear armed Australia. Nearby Indonesia and Malaysia have openly come out against it. It would be no deterrent. How do people propose Australia build a large enough arsenal??? All it will do is make Iran make a bomb and North korea build more. It’s a stupid idea for Aukus.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  32. Anonymous[240] • Disclaimer says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Diesel subs are quieter and far less expensive than nuclear subs. We are told that Australia needs nuclear subs because only they have the range to operate far away in the south China sea, to defend Australia!

    Agreed completely; this is well known in naval circles. But since they lack range (comparatively slow underwater, though operationally, diesel subs can operate quite far from bases), nuclear submarines are better for open ocean warfare.

    In other words, if you want to strangle a rival’s maritime trade, and control the oceans FAR from that rival, then you go with nuke boats. Diesels are for defense, Nukes are for, essentially, offense.

    Which already clearly signals the intent of Australia and its backers, the U.S. and Britain. The tried and true maritime strategy of “isolate-surround-besiege-destroy”.

    Worked with Napoleonic France, Imperial/Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, the old Soviet Union – why not use the same play with China? (Okay, that’s actually exaggerated; it took far more than mere naval might to defeat these states, with the exception of Japan).

    Here’s the core logic: Since they see, projecting very far out into the future, that the “Anglo” cultures simply cannot keep up economically and industrially with China, the only tools left are their navies. This is playing to the Three Eyes’ strengths.

    Which means something absolutely damning: The Three Eyes, under a pretext, or False Flag, will initiate aggression towards China. Yes, we are looking to attack first.

    “Can’t win in peace-time economic competition, so let’s start a HUGE war”.

    That’s the genius plan by the usual suspects. And what’s galling is they expect to get away with it.

  33. Should be pointed out that AUKUS have chosen their point of pressure to exploit the one remaining weakness of China’s navy – nuclear submarines or SSN in milspeak.

    Recently, the Chinese have stopped using foreign engines (bought from ally Russia) for their aircraft, switching instead to Chinese ones.

    Analysts have noted that China seems to have mastered fighter engine technology, a glaring weakness previously. They are confident enough to build their front line fighters with them.

    How long will China take to build quiet nuclear submarines? Their diesel boats are already plenty quiet. Between now and the time China is on the verge of building their own effective SSNs, that is the window of attack of AUKUS.

    • Agree: showmethereal
    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  34. @CosmicMythos

    USUKA is ALL about destroying China, once and for good, in order to ensure the Thousand Year White Man’s Reich, of Full Spectrum Dominance over all the lesser breeds, or whoever the White Masters deign to allow to continue to exist as subservients. The Anglo Gods Upon the Earth, and their Judaic buddies, will NEVER, EVER, allow any ‘chinks’, ‘gooks’ ‘slopes’, ‘Yellow Devils’ etc, to rise to global eminence and equality. They will destroy humanity before allowing that. You only need to be living in Austfailia and see the ever increasing hysteria of race hatred being directed at China to understand where this is, inevitably, headed.

  35. @showmethereal

    The nuclear subs will NEVER be built in Austfailia. That’s a scam to cover the real agenda-turning Austfailia into an armed US camp, with US, not Austfailian, nuke subs stationed here for the inevitable attack on China. Also, tens or hundreds of billions will be sent to the US as Imperial tribute, in arms spending, allowing the Lib regime to slash social spending and privatise everything not yet pillaged by US interests.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pepe Escobar Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Hidden Information in Our Government Archives
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
How America was neoconned into World War IV
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.