The Changing World Order

Sumantra Maitra opens his article in The Federalist this way…

Albert Einstein allegedly once said that it is the definition of insanity to do the same thing over and over again, and expect different results. Nothing reflects this more than the foreign policy communities in the two Anglosphere capitals in London and Washington, D.C.

The reactions to the speeches and trip of Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Europe signifies a long overdue change in foreign policy orthodoxy, and the meltdown in commentariat circles has been a sight to behold.

He then discusses a few of those reactions from people like Anne Applebaum, Nicholas Burns, and especially Natalie Nougayrede, all of whose arguments he describes as utter nonsense. He’s correct.

He’s correct because they are positing a situation that hasn’t existed since the early 90s if it ever did. Amongst other things Ms. Nougayrede explicitly tries to equate Europe with the EU, which is not what is to be seen on the ground.

The liberal foreign policy establishment is now so vehemently opposed to Trump that they have forgotten the countries in Europe currently opposed to American isolation were also the very same countries that once opposed American overreaction.

Back in 2003, Germany and France were at the forefront of protests against the United States opposing Iraq, and sided with Russia against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Fast forward a few years, and those same countries are arguing for Russian gas in Europe while moaning about American retrenchment. One might wonder if the only thing that will please Western Europeans is Americans silently continuing to carry the security burden of Europe, while being lectured about morality by their overlords in Brussels. Except that would be unsustainable in the long term, as Bob Gates predicted in 2011.

Many of you know that while I supported the invasion of Iraq, I am troubled. Not that it was not justified, it was, irrespective of WMD. What troubles me more than anything was that once again American (and British) forces were committed to battle with no plans to win the peace that followed their success. Too many instances of this phenomenon is one of the reasons that the American people are less and less willing to commit our troops to these endless wars.

As Professor Michael Desch said, for good or for bad, the United States does not have shared interests with a certain set of countries, or even a set of common values, the way it did 50 years back. Time has changed, geopolitics have changed, and with that, the balance of power is also changing. China is a far bigger threat to the United States than Russia is, and with the terrible cost of nation-building in the Middle East, the relative power of the United States is equilibrated with other powers.

But that’s pure geopolitics. There’s another far more important aspect that is barely mentioned, at least in policy circles. The U.S. grand strategy in Europe has been a continuation of the Anglo-American strategy for the last 500 years: to ensure there’s no unified political union that can be a potential hegemon in Europe, and thus pose any future challenge.

But that was predicated in the idea that nation-states of Europe would be free. The E.U. as an institution was there to help cement peace between Germany and France, but the E.U. as a trade/military hegemon was not part of that American calculation.

Of course, the E.U. military is nowhere comparable to that of the United States, regardless of the Franco-German wish for a European army. But the E.U. is already a trade rival, and E.U. and U.S. interests differ with regard to Russia, Iran, and China. None of those is going to go away anytime soon, and the rift could continue to grow.

I think that rift will continue to grow, and if the UK manages to leave the EU perhaps very quickly. The UK, like the US, and unlike any other European power is primarily a maritime power, known and respected around the world. Part of the reason both of us have always used that Westphalian settlement was to keep from having trouble in the back yard. Philip II of Spain, Napoleon, Hitler, and Stalin were all broken on it.

I think it entirely possible that the Visegrad countries will align with the US/UK, as will Poland, which has deep ties with both of us anyway. I’m no longer sure that defending Poland is any longer a strictly eastward facing matter though.

He ends his article with this paragraph, and I can’t improve on it.

Pence and Pompeo are correct in saying the world has changed and one should look at it as it is instead of how it ought to be. One can only hope the European heads of states, as well as our Anglo-American foreign policy establishment, understand this simple truth––that everything in life consists of a choice which leads to a consequence, and living under an American order or facing China and Russia on one’s own is a perfectly valid scenario.

Selling Out the British

This is quite remarkable, not to mention rather horrifying. What Theresa May’s government is doing in their negotiations is nothing less than selling the UK’s sovereignty to Brussels (and you can easily see Berlin’s hand running the puppet that is the EU.

Britain is, of course, the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world, depending on how you measure, and many believe it is the second most powerful country in the world, second only to the United States, and the only other one able to intervene anywhere around the world.

Amazing, isn’t it? The people voted clearly to leave the EU, and the government has used that as cover to give them a worse deal, a similar influence on how they do things, but without even the (mostly sham) vote. One could call it selling their sovereignty, but one would be wrong – they aren’t getting paid, well probably May and the Civil Service have some golden prospects for their treachery, but we don’t know that yet.

There is, of course, a backstory, of how it got that way. Peter Hitchens lays it out as clearly as I have seen.

Amazing story, isn’t it? I’m pretty much convinced that the overall point is true. I don’t agree with every point, although some of that may be my prejudices speaking, of course. Specifically, I do believe in the special relationship between the US and the UK, although I’m not sure the British really do. Still, overall, he makes an excellent case.

Little Boys Dream of Empire

So, last weekend a severe thunderstorm prevented the President from joining Macron and Merkel to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Great War. OK, if you say so!

Earlier the President of France had said that Europe needs to form a joint army to be able to resist Russia, China or even the US. That’s actually risible, Russia is a declining power, with an economy about the size of Italy, it punches above its weight, mostly because it reminds every one of the Soviet Union. China? Really, China’s halfway around the world, how are you and they gonna get your armies together, M le President? And why? And the US, huh? Ambitious little boy, aren’t you. Does that European Army you’re speaking of include the Luftwaffe’s 4 operational Typhoons? Does it depend on the French infantry that took a month to get to the Baltics?

In other words, it’s basically bullshit. It’s a little boy telling everyone how tough he is, how he can take on the world. France used to be like that, before 1805, since then it has been in decline. Germany too once was like that, When it was Europe had never-ending wars, in 1866, in 1870, in 1914, and in 1940.

Since 1945 there have been no wars in western Europe. Why? Because the United States is in charge. As an outside hegemon the US can keep control without it all flying apart, the day the last US trooper leaves, it’ll all start over again. Nobody at all in Europe wants to follow France, or Germany, perhaps not even Britain.

That of course, was planned, mostly by Britain, who ever since Napoleon had realized that a single European country dominating Europe, couldn’t be controlled from upsetting the world order by the maritime powers (first Britain, then Britain and America, now mostly America). Britain and America are basically free traders, we always have been, what wakes us up is when you start screwing with trade routes.

In fact, Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of NATO is quoted as saying the purpose of NATO is to keep the Germans down, the Russians out and the Americans in.

The Europeans increasing like to play games, especially in the EU, and are indeed trying to transform that trading block into an Empire, and by no means a democratic one either. Worse really than Kaiser Wilhelm’s Second Reich.

They are trying to do it peacefully for a change, probably because the largest army in Europe (by quite a lot) is the US Army. Not only that but it is a highly experienced combat army that would likely take any European force apart in time for lunch. Exception: the British, who while painfully small these days, are the equal, in every way, of American troops. And a partial exception are the Eastern European forces, especially Poland’s who have been out seeing the elephant as well.

So while Macron, Merkel, and Drunker dream dreams of Empire, in the real world, they can perhaps, make some trouble, and get a bunch of people killed, but their dream of being Napoleon. Well, Sir Walter Raleigh said it as well as anyone,

For whosoever commands the sea commands the trade; whosoever commands the trade of the world commands the riches of the world, and consequently the world itself.

From Drake to Trump, that is the reality that Macron doesn’t want to deal with.

There were a couple of quite good Articles on this yesterday at The Federalist, they are:

Macron’s Call For A European Army Is An Obvious Bluff

and

Macron Is Picking A Fight With Trump Out Of Empty Arrogance

Russia, Russia, Russia, and Will Rogers

Bored yet with “Russia, Russia, Russia, and yes, some more Russia”? Yeah, me too. I’m not convinced it even matters much for Europe, let alone America. And that is pretty much what America thinks, too. From Bre Payton at The Federalist.

An overwhelming majority of Americans don’t think the ongoing probe into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russian officials to steal the presidency from Hillary Clinton is that important, according to a new Gallup poll. 

A record-breaking number of Americans (22 percent) think immigration is the most important problem facing the United States, while 19 percent say dissatisfaction with the U.S. government is the biggest problem and 7 percent think racism is the most important issue.

A combined total of 16 percent of Americans list unifying the country, lack of respect for one another, and the economy in general as the most important issues. The other issues that make it to the top of the list are health care (according to 3 percent of Americans), and ethics and morality (according to another 3 percent of those surveyed).

That’s about what I’d expect, sitting out here in flyover country. Nothing we’re hearing on the news (other than immigration, and that is slanted one way or another) really matters a damn to America and Americans. Here are the charts that Bre brought us.

And broken down by party:

 

In other words, not even 1% of us think its important, and yet, that is all the media and politicians (BIRM) have been bleating about for a week.

Well, Will Rogers wrote that

This country has gotten where it is in spite of politics, not by the aid of it. That we have carried as much political bunk as we have and still survived shows we are a super nation.

In any case, a good deal of what we are seeing is that the political, military, industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about, needs an enemy. But it doesn’t want one too big, that it might end up in a real war, you know like China, and Montenegro is obviously too small, but Russia is the Goldilocks of enemies, everybody knows who it is, and it is just the right size, and besides it used to be a fearsome enemy, until we defeated it, and left so many experts without anything to expert about.

Will Rogers was an excellent observer, so why don’t we take a look at a few more of his observations, such as:

[A] comedian can only last till he either takes himself serious or his audience takes him serious

Seems very appropriate these days, doesn’t it?

Or:

No party is as bad as its state and national leaders.

Or even:

Be thankful we’re not getting all the government we’re paying for.

Words to live by, all of those observations.

A Summit, Hysteria, and Bovine Excrement

Well, Putin and Trump had a meeting yesterday in Helsinki. Afterwards, Trump said some things that bothered the left. In other words, it was a day ending in Y. I wasn’t all that fond of them, either, really. But then, I never thought Trump was God and never made mistakes. Hannity is as good as anybody on it.

Frankly, I can’t decide whether the left’s goal is to destroy Trump at any cost whatsoever. Or maybe it is to destroy Russia for throwing the communists out, and the United States for winning the cold war. Or both. Apparently, they think a nuclear war is just the way to do that.

I can’t see any particular reason to trust the US Intelligence Community, all my life they’ve always been wrong, from Vietnam to the cold war (whose end they failed to see coming) to Iraq and Afghanistan. And that doesn’t even mention the crap they got up to in the last few years. Now they seem to be in bed with a faction that is at best committing sedition, coming very close to treason itself. On the other hand, there is absolutely no reason to trust the Russians.

So put your earplugs in, it ain’t gonna get much better. Personally, I think we need more streetlights on Constitution Ave, and a whole lot of ¾ in manila rope, yes, some assembly required. Not that anybody asked me. So take an even strain, the adults are in charge but keep your powder dry in any case.

In the meantime, Scott Adams and Dave Rubin.

And VDH on the FBI, Trump, and Russia.

Hell in a Handcart

Steven Hayward over at PowerLine posted yesterday on how Europe is falling apart.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is hanging on by her fingernails in Germany right now, as the backlash against migrants reached a critical mass in recent weeks. The cabinet minister who confronted Merkel and forced immigration concessions, Horst Seehofer of the “conservative” CSU party based chiefly in Bavaria, has seen his own poll ratings collapse in the aftermath of the political crisis. But this is just as likely to be the result of his not having gone far enough with his attempts to get Merkel to reverse course on her disastrous immigration policy. The supposedly Trumpian “Alternative for Germany” party is now expected to rack up big gains in upcoming regional elections. Merkel’s chances for survival in office don’t look very good at the moment.

Indeed so, and Britain is just as bad, as we spoke of yesterday. The Visegrad countries are in almost open revolt against Brussels, and this:

Meanwhile, this story from The Express in London:

‘Italy has caused a MELTDOWN’ 700,000 migrants waiting to cross into Europe from Libya

A BOTTLENECK of 700,000 migrants is waiting in Libya to cross the Mediterranean to Europe, the National Crime Agency has said. The number – greater than the population of Leicester – highlights the difficulties facing the EU in controlling migrants seeking a new life in Europe.

Senior members of the NCA, dubbed Britain’s FBI, revealed the figures as they detailed the increasingly tough battle they face to stop people smugglers. NCA directors warned of a sharp rise in attempted illegal sea crossings from Africa to Europe this year, with 300 people drowning last week.

Migrants are then crossing Europe and using increasingly devious ways to evade detection, including hiding in “coffin-sized” secret compartments in vehicles. . .

Tom Dowdall, NCA deputy director of organised immigration crime, said the problem was growing. Attempted crossings to Greece and Turkey are up by 47 per cent on last year, with those to Spain and Italy up by 75 per cent. They have not reached the peak levels of 2015, caused after Mrs Merkel made a controversial decision to open Germany’s borders and allow a million refugees in.

And the ‘Deep State’ is still attempting its coup against Donald Trump in the US. And as Steve notes, you’ve read almost nothing of this in this in the papers, which carry more propaganda that than the Völkischer Beobachter would have ever dared to. So what is going on?

Here what it looks like to me. The ‘New World Order’ is real. Oh, it may not be really organized, although parts may be, it’s a group of people with the same aim and methods, working to the same goals.

It’s the Deep State, the fake news media, the Democratic Party, the corporatist big businesses, and probably more in the US. It’s all the center-left parties, including the Tories, in Britain along with their media. The same across Europe.

But I think they’ve already lost. Brexit and Trump defeated them. Not on the battlefield, but because they brought to the fore men and women who will fearlessly tell the truth.

Men like President Trump, whose election forced them to move perhaps a generation early, and the rowdy Americans stifled the movement, with many thanks to the Constitution.

And men like Tommy Robinson, a hero who stands for the indigenous people of Britain, and quite a few others, in all our countries.

Where the Americans lead, others take heart, and follow. And thus, in one state after another, all across Europe, we see nationalists taking heart and defending against this new threat.

Well, it’s not really a new threat, it’s really the old order, one variety of feudalism or another.

Will we win? That remains to be seen. I’m reminded that the main character of Herman Wouk’s World War II romance, War and Remembrance, was at the Army-Navy club for the New Year’s Eve party on 31 December 1942. When asked how the war was going his comment was, “Plenty of hell behind us, and plenty more ahead of us.”

Churchill called the El Alamein, Midway, Guadalcanal, Stalingrad axis of victories The End of the Beginning. He was correct. Before we never won a battle, after these we never lost one. This is like that. What we have done so far is to identify (most of) the enemies of freedom and independence for all of us, now it remains to destroy them for another generation.

If you wondered why Trump commented that of his meetings in Europe this week, Putin may be the easiest, this is why. Putin puts Russia first, not some nebulous group like the EU. He’s a nationalist, as is Trump. That means that rational negotiations are possible. His goals are not our goals, but they are rational. Which is something that cannot be said of most of our opposition.

So, once again, perhaps exceptional America, allied with Britannia, our traditional, stubborn, quiet, Anglo-Saxon partner, may lead Europe to the broad sunlit uplands of freedom. The only promise is that we will give it our best shot. Otherwise, Yeats will be the herald of a new dark age.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, 
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

%d bloggers like this: