The US Indo-Pacific Strategy: Demonization, Militarization and Weaponization | New Eastern Outlook

the-us-indo-pacific-strategy:-demonization,-militarization-and-weaponization-|-new-eastern-outlook

03-06-19 07:34:00,

54645223

While it is not unusual to see various US administrations rationalising their defence strategies on the basis of their competition with their global competitors i.e., Russia and China, the recent emphasis on labelling the competitor countries as ‘revisionist’ and ‘reactionary’ is particularly telling, especially when taken against the backdrop of an increasing Russian and Chinese assertiveness in the global political arena. At the same time, this labelling or potential demonization in terms of ‘revisionism’ shows that the US is deeply concerned by the emphasis these states are putting on reversing the current world order and replacing it with a multi-polar world, thus effectively putting an end to unilateral world order that the US was successful in establishing after the end of the Cold War.

How the trend towards this potential demonization remains an on-going one and how it is deeply linked with the serious challenge that Russia and China are posing to the US is evident from a recently published Pentagon document on the US’ Indo-Pacific strategy. It characterises China as “revisionist power” and paints Russia as a “revitalised Malign actor.” While the language of the report is far from diplomatic (although it is not a diplomatic statement), it does show the extremely negative lenses the US officials continue to wear to look at how the Russians and the Chinese are operating in the world. China, the report thus describes, “under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), undermines the international system from within by exploiting its benefits while simultaneously eroding the values and principles of the rules-based order.”

The US secretary of defence in his opening message in the report goes even further and states that China “seeks to reorder the [Indo-Pacific] region to its advantage by leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce other nations.”

Russia, on the other hand, is seen in the report as a power trying to re-establish its influence in the Indo-Pacific region. “Russia is re-establishing its military presence in the Indo-Pacific by regularly flying bomber and reconnaissance missions in the Sea of Japan and conducting operations as far east as Alaska and the west coast of the continental United States. Russia has also intensified its diplomatic outreach in Southeast Asia, seeking to capitalize on US-China tensions in order to present itself as a neutral “third partner.””

The report confirms that both Russia and China are somehow collaborating to undo the US led world system.

 » Lees verder

In Huge Strategy Shift, Amazon Set To Purge Many Small Suppliers

in-huge-strategy-shift,-amazon-set-to-purge-many-small-suppliers

28-05-19 04:18:00,

Amazon is set to purge many of its small suppliers over the next few months, according to Bloomberg. The purge could shatter the generally favorable relationship between Amazon and many of its long-time vendors, as we first discussed last month when we reported that Amazon was accused of “crushing” its merchants by undercutting products with its own.

The move is supposed to help cut costs and focus wholesale purchasing on large brands like Procter & Gamble, Sony and Lego. Amazon wants to ensure that the company has adequate supplies of “must-have” merchandise that will help it compete with companies like Target and Walmart. As a result, bulk orders for thousands of smaller suppliers may dry up over the next few months.

It also means that many smaller retailers that have relied on Amazon for a steady stream of orders will have to win sales one shopper at a time on the platform’s marketplace. This marks one of the large shifts in Amazon strategy since it opened the site up to independent sellers nearly 2 decades ago.

James Thomson, who organizes the Prosper Show, an annual e-commerce conference focused on Amazon said that “this is the kind of change that will scare the living daylights out of brands selling on Amazon. Amazon usually doesn’t give a lot of lead time and brands will be left scrambling. If they make this change soon, brands will have until the end of the summer to get their acts together or their holiday quarter will be at risk.”

Amazon stated: “We review our selling partner relationships on an individual basis as part of our normal course of business, and any speculation of a large scale reduction of vendors is incorrect.”

Amazon traditionally secures inventory in two ways: it buys items directly from wholesale vendors and resells them, and it allows independent merchants to post their own products on site, similar to a consignment model. About half the goods sold on the site come from independent merchants and the change will push the company’s marketplace share of revenue even higher.

It’s one of the latest moves in Amazon‘s “hands off the wheel” initiative, which is supposed to help it continue expanding product selection without spending more to oversee it.

 » Lees verder

The New Grand Strategy Of The United States

the-new-grand-strategy-of-the-united-states

30-03-19 09:58:00,

Authored by Thierry Meysan via The Voltaire Network,

Many people think that the United States is very active, but does not succeed in much. For example, it is said that its wars in the Greater Middle East are a succession of failures. But for Thierry Meyssan, the USA has a coherent military, commercial and diplomatic strategy. According to its own objectives, it advances patiently, and is crowned with success.

 

It is commonly believed in the United States that the country has no Grand Strategy since the end of the Cold War.

A Grand Strategy is a vision of the world that one seeks to impose, and that all administrations must respect. So, even if you lose in one particular theatre of war, the fight continues in others, and finally ends in triumph. At the end of the Second World War, Washington chose to follow the directives set by ambassador George Keenan in his famous diplomatic telegramme. It proposed describing an alleged Soviet expansionism in order to justify containment of the USSR. Indeed, although the USA had lost the wars in Korea and Vietnam, it finished by prevailing.

It is very rare to be able to rethink a Grand Strategy, even if there were others during that period, in particular, with Charles De Gaulle in France.

Over the last eighteen years, Washington has been able to progressively set new objectives and new tactics with which to attain them.

1991-2001: a period of uncertainty

When the Soviet Union collapsed on 25 December 1991, Father Bush’s USA supposed that they no longer had any rivals. The victorious President by default demobilised 1 million soldiers and imagined a world of peace and prosperity. He liberalised the transfer of capitals so that the capitalists would be able to get richer and, he believed, thus enrich their fellow citizens.

However, capitalism is not a political project, but a means of making money. The major US businesses – not the federal state – therefore allied themselves with the Chinese Communist Party (the reason for Deng Xiaoping’s famous « journey to the South »). They delocalised their businesses with very low added value from the West to China, where the workers were uneducated,

 » Lees verder

The new Grand Strategy of the United States, by Thierry Meyssan

the-new-grand-strategy-of-the-united-states-by-thierry-meyssan

26-03-19 09:21:00,

Many people think that the United States is very active, but does not succeed in much. For example, it is said that its wars in the Greater Middle East are a succession of failures. But for Thierry Meyssan, the USA has a coherent military, commercial and diplomatic strategy. According to its own objectives, it advances patiently, and is crowned with success.

JPEG - 51.8 kb
The designers of the US Grand Strategy – Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his advisor, Admiral Arthur Cebrowski; President Donald Trump and his commercial advisor Peter Navarro; and finally Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his advisor Francis Fannon.

It is commonly believed in the United States that the country has no Grand Strategy since the end of the Cold War.

A Grand Strategy is a vision of the world that one seeks to impose, and that all administrations must respect. So, even if you lose in one particular theatre of war, the fight continues in others, and finally ends in triumph. At the end of the Second World War, Washington chose to follow the directives set by ambassador George Keenan in his famous diplomatic telegramme. It proposed describing an alleged Soviet expansionism in order to justify containment of the USSR. Indeed, although the USA had lost the wars in Korea and Vietnam, it finished by prevailing.

It is very rare to be able to rethink a Grand Strategy, even if there were others during that period, in particular, with Charles De Gaulle in France.

Over the last eighteen years, Washington has been able to progressively set new objectives and new tactics with which to attain them.

1991-2001: a period of uncertainty

When the Soviet Union collapsed on 25 December 1991, Father Bush’s USA supposed that they no longer had any rivals. The victorious President by default demobilised 1 million soldiers and imagined a world of peace and prosperity. He liberalised the transfer of capitals so that the capitalists would be able to get richer and, he believed, thus enrich their fellow citizens.

However, capitalism is not a political project, but a means of making money. The major US businesses – not the federal state – therefore allied themselves with the Chinese Communist Party (the reason for Deng Xiaoping’s famous « journey to the South »).

 » Lees verder

Shock and awe strategy being employed in Venezuela regime change (Video)

shock-and-awe-strategy-being-employed-in-venezuela-regime-change-video

01-02-19 05:46:00,

Authored by Joe Lauria via ConsortiumNews.com:

At the end of October 2017, I wrote an article for Consortium News about the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign paying for unvetted opposition research that became the basis for much of the disputed story about Russia allegedly interfering in the 2016 presidential election on the orders of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The piece showed that the Democrats’ two, paid-for sources that have engendered belief in Russia-gate are at best shaky. First was former British spy Christopher Steele’s largely unverified dossier of second- and third-hand opposition research portraying Donald Trump as something of a Russian Manchurian candidate.

And the second was CrowdStrike, an anti-Putin private company, examining the DNC’s computer server to dubiously claim discovery of a Russian “hack.” In a similar examination using the same software of an alleged hack of a Ukrainian artillery app, CrowdStrike also blamed Russia but its software was exposed as faulty and it was later forced to rewrite it. CrowdStrike was hired after the DNC refused to allow the FBI to look at the server.

My piece also described the dangerous consequences of partisan Democratic faith in Russia-gate: a sharp increase in geopolitical tensions between nuclear-armed Russia and the U.S., and a New McCarthyism that is spreading fear — especially in academia, journalism and civil rights organizations — about questioning the enforced orthodoxy of Russia’s alleged guilt.

After the article appeared at Consortium News, I tried to penetrate the mainstream by then publishing a version of the article on the HuffPost, which was rebranded from the Huffington Post in April this year by new management. As a contributor to the site since February 2006, I was trusted by HuffPost editors to post my stories directly online. However, within 24 hours of publication on Nov. 4, HuffPost editors retracted the article without any explanation.

This behavior breaks with the earlier principles of journalism that the Web site claimed to uphold. For instance, in 2008, Arianna Huffington told radio host Don Debar that, “We welcome all opinions, except conspiracy theories.” She said: “Facts are sacred. That’s part of our philosophy of journalism.”

But Huffington stepped down as editor in August 2016 and has nothing to do with the site now.

 » Lees verder

The Geopolitical Strategy Of The US’ Global Hegemony By A Notorious Russophobe Zbigniew Brzezinski

the-geopolitical-strategy-of-the-us-global-hegemony-by-a-notorious-russophobe-zbigniew-brzezinski

21-11-18 10:35:00,

Authored by Vladislav Sotirovic via Oriental Review:

If we have to use force, it is because we are America.

We are the indispensable nation.

(Madeleine K. Albright, February 1998)[1]

Madam Secretary

As a matter of very fact, regardless to the reality in global politics that the Cold War was over in 1989, Washington continued to drive toward the getting the status of a global hyperpower at any expense for the rest of the world. The Balkans undoubtedly became the first victim in Europe of the old but esthetically repacked American global imperialism. The US’ administration is a key player during the last 25 years of the Balkan crisis caused by the bloody destruction of ex-Yugoslavia[2] in which Washington played a crucial role in three particular historical cases:

  1. Only due to the US’ administration (more precisely due to the last US’ ambassador to Yugoslavia, Warren Zimmermann), a Bosnian-Herzegovinian President Alija Izetbegović (the author of the 1970 Islamic Declaration) rejected already agreed Lisbon Agreement about peaceful resolution of the Bosnian crises which was signed by the official representatives of the Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks in February 1992. Alija Izetbegović was one of those three signatories. The agreement was reached under the auspices of the European Community (the EC, later the European Union) that was represented by the British diplomat Lord Carrington and the Portuguese ambassador José Cutileiro. However, under the US’ protection, a Bosnian-Herzegovinian Bosniak-Croat Government declared independence on March 3rd, 1992 which local Serbs decisively opposed. Therefore, two warmongers, Warren Zimmermann and Alija Izetbegović pushed Bosnia-Herzegovina into the civil war which stopped only in November 21st, 1995 by signing the Dayton Accords in Ohio (Slobodan Milošević, Bill Clinton, Alija Izetbegović and Franjo Tuđman).[3]
  2. It was exactly the US’ administration which crucially blessed the ethnic cleansing of the Serbs from the Republic of Serbian Krayina committed by Croatia’s police and army forces (including and neo-Nazi Ustashi formations) on August 4−5th, 1995. For the realization of this criminal operation (under the secret code Storm/Oluja) Washington gave to Zagreb all logistic, political, diplomatic and military support. As a consequence, around 250,000 Croatia’s Serbs left their homes in two days which were quickly occupied by the Croats.

 » Lees verder

Israel’s Strategy for War on Iran. The “Greater Israel” Project. The Dangers of an All Out Middle East War? – Global Research

israels-strategy-for-war-on-iran-the-8220greater-israel8221-project.-the-dangers-of-an-all-out-middle-east-war-8211-global-research

13-11-18 06:51:00,

Iran is Israel’s main regional rival – yet poses no threat to the Jewish state or any others.

For decades, Israeli regimes urged Washington to wage war on Iran, wanting its main regional rival and all others eliminated.

The infamous 1982 Oded Yinon document titled “A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties” explained Israel’s agenda in clear, unambiguous detail – a regional divide and conquer strategy, needing US involvement to work.

The scheme was likely updated several times, the objective unchanged, including a greater Israel through a redrawn Middle East map.

To survive, the Jewish state believes it must dominate the region and become a world power.

Achieving its objective requires partitioning Arab nations into smaller ones along ethnic and sectarian lines as Israeli satellite client states.

Israel’s 1967 Six Day War, seizing the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Syria’s Golan, and Lebanese territory followed the plan.

So did its aggression on Lebanon in 1978, 1982, 1993, 1996, and 2006, along with occupying the country’s south up to the Litani River, remaining for 18 years until withdrawing in May 2000.

It still illegally holds the Ghajar Lebanese village bordering Golan, along with Sheba Farms, a 14-square mile water-rich area near Syria’s Golan.

The late Israel Shahak said longstanding Israeli plans for regional control follow German “geopolitical ideas (from) 1890 – 1933, which were swallowed whole by Hitler and the Nazi movement, and determined their aims for East Europe.”

Yinon called all Arab states east of Israel “riddled with inner conflicts.” The Saudi and other Gulf states are “built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil.”

Jordan is in reality Palestine, Amman the same as Nablus, other regional Arab states similar, he said.

Since its 1979 revolution, Iran above all other regional states is Israel’s main target for elimination.

A dubious Israeli/Saudi alliance wants the Islamic Republic destroyed, falsely portraying the country as a regional threat.

Netanyahu repeatedly lies about an Iranian nuclear weapons program. None exists. The Jewish state is the only regional armed and dangerous nuclear power, along with maintaining banned chemical,

 » Lees verder

Turkish Strategy In Northern Syria: Erdogan’s Path To Building A Neo-Ottoman Empire

Turkish Strategy In Northern Syria: Erdogan’s Path To Building A Neo-Ottoman Empire

18-09-18 07:23:00,

Via SouthFront.org,


GENERAL ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION

In order to understand Turkey’s approach toward the conflict in Syria, one first needs to explain the military situation there as of September 2018.

There are localized clashes between militant groups led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda) and the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in northern Latakia and southern Idlib. The Syrian Arab Air Force and the Russian Aerospace Forces are carrying out strikes on weapon depots, equipment and UAV workshops and key facilities belonging to militants in southern and southwestern Idlib.

These as well as deployment of additional SAA units at the contact line between the militant-held and government-held areas are described by pro-militant sources as clear sings of the upcoming SAA operation to defeat Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and other al-Qaeda-like factions there.

In Suweida and Rif Dimashq, the SAA is still working to eliminate ISIS cells operating in the desert area. Separate ISIS attacks on the SAA and the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) happen time to time.

In those parts of Raqqa and Deir Ezzor provinces, which are controlled by the Kurdish-dominated SDF, the health care system has been totally destroyed, and no effort is being made to restore major infrastructure. Many of the areas under SDF control suffer from epidemics due to the shortage of clean water, and nearly total absence of medical services. The situation particularly bad, when it comes to restoring normal life and services. Local authorities, who should be involved in these matters, are mainly concerned with their own well-being. Kurdish leaders still view their main task as the creation of an independent enclave and later their own state in these territories. This is why their main concern is to keep the political and military dominance in the Arab-populated area.

Click to see the full-size image

Negotiations between Damascus and the Kurds are continuing at a slow pace. The Kurdish political leadership are seeking to get concessions from Damascus, for example some kind of federation within Syria.

Afrin, controlled by the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) and Ankara proxies, is experiencing low-intensity guerilla war. Cells of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) regularly carry out bombings and run attacks on Turkey-led forces.

 » Lees verder

US Strategy In Syria: “Create Quagmires Until We Get What We Want”

US Strategy In Syria: “Create Quagmires Until We Get What We Want”

02-09-18 07:39:00,

Authored by Jason Ditz via AntiWar.com,

In 2013, top Obama Administration officials described their policy in the Syrian War as one of keeping the war going. The administration wanted a big seat at the table for a political settlement, which officials clarified meant ensuring that the war kept going so that there was never a clear victor.

The Trump Administration seems to be slipping into that same destructive set of priorities in Syria. The Washington Post this week quoted an unnamed Administration official as saying that “right now, our job is to help create quagmires [for Russia and the Syrian regime] until we get what we want.”

As ever, what the US really wants is to have a dominant position in post-war negotiations, so they can dictate the form that post-war Syria takes. This means ensuring that the Syrian government doesn’t win the war outright.

That’s not as realistic as it once was, with the Assad government, backed by Russia, having retaken virtually all of the rebel-held territory except for a far north bastion in Idlib, dominated by al-Qaeda. This means the US now has to save al-Qaeda to keep the war going, which if we’re being honest has been a recurring undercurrent in US policy in Syria for years.

It is this desire that has the US repeatedly threatening Syria and warning them not to attack Idlib. It is this desire that is sparking almost daily US threats to intervene militarily if the Idlib offensive involves chemical weapons. Most importantly, it is this desire that has Russia very much believing media reports that the rebels could “stage” a fake chemical attack just to suck the US into the war, and be fairly confident it would work.

The US is, after all, constantly talking about an imminent chemical attack despite there being no reason to think Syria is poised to launch one. At times, US officials have privately conceded that there is no sign Syria is making any moves to even ready such weapons for the offensive. Yet several times a week, the US issues statements with allegations of a chemical plot featuring prominently,

 » Lees verder