The Temptation of Empire

The War on Russia / War on China crowd constantly engages in psychological projection, insisting that their own dreams of ruling over a global empire is shared by both the Russian and Chinese leaders. But as anyone who has paid any attention to the thoughts of Vladimir Putin and Xi Xinping in this regard knows, both leaders are very well aware of the fatal trap that empire poses to any powerful nation, and both leaders seek to avoid the temptation.

You know what the problem is? I will tell you as a citizen of the former Soviet Union. What is the problem with an empire? They think they are so mighty they can afford minor faults and mistakes. It is okay, we will buy these people and scare other people; we will reach an agreement with still others, give beads to those and threaten others with our warships – problem solved. But problems are piling up, and there comes a time when it is no longer possible to cope with them all. And the United States is firmly and steadily following in the footsteps of the Soviet Union.

Vladimir Putin

Xi Jinping’s thinking is never as transparent or straightforward as the Russian leader’s, being occluded by Communist Party jargon, the customary Chinese ornamentation, and a vast panoply of classical quotes and allusions, but those who are familiar with them don’t have too much trouble interpreting what he’s saying.

“Governing a state with vast territory is a heavy burden; succeeding to the crown is much harder than building an empire.”

Founding a state requires a multitude of talents, while succeeding and strengthening the inheritance of ancestors requires even more. By quoting the sentence, President Xi Jinping indicated that the glorious and resplendent Chinese civilization was founded by large numbers of outstanding people throughout history. Today we are being passed the baton from previous generations and carrying on a great historical mission. Strengthening and rejuvenating the country by cultivating talent has become a priority for the Party and the country. To carry forward Chinese civilization, to build a strong and prosperous country, we must use history as mirror and study and utilize outstanding intellects.

How to Read Confucius and other Chinese Classical Thinkers, Xi Jinping

The point is that neither the Russians nor the Chinese are foolish enough to seek empire because they do not wish to lose control of their national destinies. While both nations have the power required to pursue it, they also have a clear and obvious disinclination to do so, as Hazony recognizes in The Virtue of Nationalism.

The most natural state is, therefore, one nation, an extended family with one national character. This it retains for ages and develops most naturally if the leaders come from the people.… Nothing, therefore, is more manifestly contrary to the purposes of political government than the unnatural enlargement of states, the wild mixing of various races and nationalities under one scepter. A human scepter is far too weak and slender for such incongruous parts to be engrafted upon it. Such states are but patched up contraptions, fragile machines,… and their component parts are connected by mechanical contrivances instead of bonds of sentiment.… It would only be the curse of fate that would condemn to immortality these forced unions, these lifeless monstrosities. But history shows sufficiently that the instruments of human pride are formed of clay, and like all clay, they will dissolve or crumble to pieces.

In this passage, Herder describes the imperial state as nothing other than a “curse” to all involved. According to this point of view, human government is inherently limited in what it can attain, and can be strong and effective only when it relies on the “bonds of sentiment” that unite a single nation in a national state whose leaders are drawn from the people. The “unnatural enlargement of states,” which forces many nations together under a single rule, is not based on such bonds of sentiment. It only increases the burdens and difficulties piled on the state as “incongruous parts” that are not bound together by mutual loyalty are added to it, until eventually it survives only as a “patched up contraption” groaning under the weight of these troubles.

Underlying such an approach is the recognition that the health of a nation is measured not only in terms of its military and economic strength, but also along other dimensions that are no less significant. What Herder describes as a “national character[, which] it retains for ages and develops,” refers to what I have called the internal integrity and cultural inheritance of the nation. And it is these things that tend to be lost as the imperial state expands. This is because conquered nations bring their own aspirations, troubles, and interests into the state. And this growing diversity makes the state more difficult to govern, weakening the mutual loyalties that had held it together, dissipating its attention and resources in the effort to suppress internal conflicts and violence that had previously been unknown to it, and forcing the rulers to adopt oppressive means of maintaining the peace. As this happens, the rulers become absorbed in intrigues and negotiations among distant parties in distant lands. This appeals to their vanity, as it allows them to see themselves as “men of the world.” But in reality, their understanding of the foreign nations they seek to pacify is nearly always limited to externals, to hollowed-out caricatures, so that they tend to do as much harm as good by applying the shallow, supposedly “universal” categories at their disposal to circumstances at the ends of the earth.52 In the meantime, when anyone approaches them with a matter that concerns the health and prosperity of their own nation, they have only scant attention to devote to it, and secretly resent this intrusion of “domestic affairs” when greater things are pressing. In this way, the minds of the rulers turn away, and they become almost as unaware of the concerns of their own people as they are of the interests of the foreign nations they seek to govern.

All of this is regarded with horror by peoples with strong national-state traditions, which tend to scorn the idea that their country’s leaders should lose themselves in efforts for the preservation and government of an empire of foreign nations, rather than strengthening the tribes of their own nation in their own land.

The Virtue of Nationalism, Yoram Hazony

DISCUSS ON SG


Desperate for War

Revenge war with Russia or revenge war with China? It appears the former is preferred, if CDAN is to be believed:

The heads of several cable networks/news organizations from the far left to the far right, all agreed that a war with Russia would be amazing for ratings.

War with either Russia or China – which would mean war with both – would be sheer lunacy, of course, but when has that ever stopped the lunatics before? They’re like gamblers who believe that winning their past bets mean that their next one is a sure thing.

DISCUSS ON SG


Hundreds of Troops

The script writers are getting lazy. Or, as is more likely the case, desperate. When hundreds of police on the Mexican border can’t stop poor and huddled masses of Africans and South Americans yearning to breathe free, are we really supposed to believe that hundreds of British soldiers are even going to slow down the Russian Army? They wouldn’t even qualify as a speed bump.

Hundreds of British special force troops are ready to deploy to the Ukranian border at a moment’s notice, amid rising tensions and fears of a possible Russian invasion in the region, according to reports.

The UK’s Special Air Service and Parachute Regiment are prepared to enter the region with medics, engineers, signalers, and hundred of paratroopers, The Mirror reported.

“The high readiness element of the brigade was told it may need to deploy at very short notice, a source told The Mirror.

“Between 400 and 600 troops are ready. Their equipment is packed and they are ready to fly to Ukraine and either land or parachute in. They have trained for both eventualities.”

The military move comes after the European Union accused Belarus, which borders both the Ukraine and Poland, of manufacturing a humanitarian crisis by urging migrants to illegally cross into the EU via Poland.

The age of carrier diplomacy is over. So is the short-lived era of the color revolution. If the neocons are successful in starting a war on or near the Russian border, it’s not going to be limited to the region. China and Iran will also take action, because they know that one of them will be next. And the new Axis of Nations is more powerful in every way than the Arsenal of Globohomo, with more population, more soldiers, more nukes, and more industrial capacity.

And isn’t it remarkable how Belarus is being accused of manufacturing the very humanitarian crisis that Angela Merkel caused six years ago? On the basis of this justification, the British should be sending troops to the US southern border and threatening Joe Biden for offering $450,000 in incentives for migrants to illegally cross into the USA.

But it proves once more that Martin van Creveld was right: immigration is war.

DISCUSS ON SG


The new power pyramid

I don’t put a lot of credence in Sorcha Faal’s dramatic reports, but this analysis of the transformation from a global monopower to a tripartite system in which China plays the leading role strikes me as highly credible:

American efforts to undermine Russia-China partnership are doomed to fail because Washington doesn’t understand Moscow’s concerns.

The US is increasingly worried that Russia and China are forging a strong new strategic partnership. With Moscow and Beijing aligning their foreign policy stances, the relationship now seems to be an alliance in all but name.

It was initially expected that the Russian-Chinese partnership would run aground over Beijing’s economic ambitions in Central Asia. China is evidently the more powerful economy in the partnership with Russia, and those kinds of asymmetries create certain limitations.

Moscow accepts Chinese leadership but rejects Chinese dominance.

Thus, if China chooses the “first among equals” principle, the partnership will prove to be durable and Moscow can make its peace with playing second fiddle in economic affairs to the world’s most populous nation.

To date, China has not tried to make use of those asymmetries with Russia.

Unlike Washington’s efforts to peel Russia away from its neighbours in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, Beijing has avoided these kinds of schemes and instead worked towards accommodating Russian strategic interests.

Simply put, it is not in China’s interest to abandon its “first among equals” position in favour of unipolar ambitions. Russia is an indispensable partner for China to establish an economic leadership position in the Greater Eurasian region.

In a multipolar world, Moscow can adopt a swing power position and pivot to other centres of power if Beijing starts aspiring to move beyond leadership, in order to try and dominate.

The US domination of Europe is officially over. Despite its best efforts, the US could not convince Europeans to stop the Nord Stream natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. And those who have read Corporate Cancer will understand the significance of the fact that one of the leading sponsors of Euro 2020, whose TV ads are running frequently before the matches, is Alipay.

If Russia is content to play second fiddle to China – and there is every sign that it is, due to the way the USA has waged economic war on Russia over the last decade – the USA will not only lose its premier global position, but soon find itself demoted to the number three world power when it loses its Western European economic force multiplier. This is good news, as it will give actual Americans a better chance to take back control in their own country.

Meanwhile, as China courts Russia, the USA continues to ineffectually try to impose its will:

The ban on purchasing Russia’s sovereign debt by US investors introduced by Washington earlier this year came into force on Monday. In April, US President Joe Biden signed an executive order authorizing the imposition of yet more restrictions. The move signaled a further expansion of Washington’s existing sanctions policy on Moscow, which is aimed at cutting off Russia from the global financial markets.

This idiocy is almost certainly going to boomerang on the neo-liberal world order, as the countries of the world will react to Russia’s financial deplatforming in much the same way that consumers concerned about being deplatformed by Paypal are turning to new alternatives with relief and gratitude.