Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

America

Why we are seeing a slow motion decline of the US-led world order

Of dominoes and contagion.

Published

on

1,599 Views

In contrast to the US decline, a rising China, particularly in the Asia Pacific and Eurasian regions. The current “America First” US policy contrasting with positions stated at the 19th Party Congress in China (CPC) have demonstrated that regional dynamics are changing.

While the realignment and trade tariff tiffs between DC and Beijing may be headline grabbers, the global financial balancing act is not limited to these two heavyweights in isolation.

CLICK HERE to Support The Duran >>

Washington and Beijing have at the core two differing views on what constitutes geo-economic “order”. The US has based their vision on certain security assurances, US Dollar-friendly economic policies and a distinctly American brand of “values”. Beijing on the other hand has stressed economic development and human inter-relations.

Both positions contrast clearly when in the beltway the budget mantra keeps circling around increasing US military capabilities, against China’s efforts to boost its sphere of influence via the Belt and Road Initiative, and developing closer bilateral ties with Russia, India, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey and quite a few more including many of  the nations within the African continent.

Trade volume between ASEAN member nations and China hit a record high in 2017, as China has become the largest trading partner for almost all member states. Similarly, ASEAN is the main foreign direct investment area and the fourth largest export market for the United States.

That being said, and despite territorial disagreements between ASEAN members and Beijing’s views on the South China Sea, the contrast with the US administration with its trade war with China and it’s on again off again mercurial policies throughout the region does not give confidence within ASEAN that the US will  be a reliable partner in the future.

This being the case, there is a strong effort to diversify away from geo-economic and geopolitical dualities choosing either a US or China umbrella. This diversification opens the door for other regionally significant countries to play constructive roles such as Russia, Japan, India and Australia in shaping regional economic order.

Internationally, China is not the only challenger the US brand of world order is facing. There is also Russia to consider especially in view of the strengthening economic relationship between Moscow and Beijing. Russia has become China’s biggest supplier of crude oil in 2017 and both have secured more oil and gas supplies for the future. This is a distinct break from the petrodollar, which plays no role in this. They are also actively having regular joint military exercises throughout their several regions of influence.

Beijing and Moscow share a multipolar worldview, which simply is not US-centric, and revolves around the concept embracing polycentric spheres-of-influence as the basis for international order. Much therefore is at stake worldwide both economically and politically on whether, when and how the US finally decides to normalize relations and on what multilateral economic and political terms.

For decades the primacy of the US Dollar has underpinned US foreign policy and been supportive of projecting US policies and power on the international stage. The fierce bull elephant in the room is the “real cost” of using the US Dollar, as opposed to relying more on national currencies. This is now quite apparent to a number of sovereign countries, particularly the emerging markets. Weakness vs. the dollar throughout all the Emerging Markets (EM) continues, and it looks to be with us for a while. The list of EM’s affected is growing steadily with South Africa now joining Turkey, Argentina or similar others in showing initial recession signs.

The Central Bank of India has and is conducting several interventions in an attempt to protect their national currency from contagion. The Philippine peso also dropped to lows last seen in 2007. Indonesia too has seen it’s Rupiah severely battered. It looks like the investing world is getting ever jitterier as evidenced by a continued outflow of capital from emerging markets mostly back into US dollar instruments as a default “safe haven”. Yet this safe haven is being increasingly clouded and questioned when viewed from the perspective of the massive US debt.

As I am working out of Moscow, this EM’s outflow is affecting the Russian ruble as well, although reasons for ruble weakness are quite different from most of the EM’s.  The weakness is not due to questionable financial management or past overindulgence at the US Dollar trough – that has been laudable and conservatively solid. Much of the negative impact is due to the various pressures directed against Russia through sanctions and the possibility of enlarging them with yet more pressure from the US.

Weighing on the Russian ruble is also the Syria situation where comments from all sides involved indicate that most countries currently on the ground there will maintain their strategies and military presence ongoing in Syria. This serves to maintain a high international anxiety quotient that weighs down most non-dollar markets, and supports a stronger US dollar.

Investors in Russia will therefore continue to monitor discussions about the package of impending new “Syrian” sanctions against the Russian Federation by the US Congress. Assumptions are that they may affect some of Russia’s largest Russian banks, which may increase risks for foreign partners of the Russian Federation in the event these new sanctions restrict financial settlement processes.

The above, added to the pressure EM’s have been under because of the Fed ratcheting up U.S. interest rates and a stronger dollar have dampened investor interest in the EM’s. The appeal of many of the EM’s are their higher relative yields when compared to the established developed markets. When that differential narrows due to the U.S. Federal Reserve raising borrowing costs, emerging markets in consequence become less attractive.

A cycle feeds on itself, and as some have observed may lead to a domino effect of contagion. That in turn again serves to underscore the need to diversify away from having so many sovereign financial eggs so dependent on a unipolar US Dollar basket. It may also be the spark that could very well form a very real, long sought after serious foundation for other lead currencies or even select cryptocurrencies to play a serious future role on the world stage. That however is another story for a different time.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
5 Comments

5
Leave a Reply

avatar
3 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
John NolanYou can call me ALRobert BertrandTjoeVera Gottlieb Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Vera Gottlieb
Guest
Vera Gottlieb

Is there any way to speed up this slow motion decline? Before all of us end up in this abyss?

Tjoe
Guest
Tjoe

It is speeding up. M3 if it were still kept would scare the poo out of the mommy’s and daddy’s with it’s ever increasing rate of debt growth that is the FED Dollar system we live under. The “money supply” (amount of money in US dollar denomination) follows the simple math curve of compounding interest from 1913 when the FED was made. Graph $1.00 borrowed at 6% interest, with the debt not paid so the interest is capitalized in, and do it for 110 years (to 2023). The end is exponentially growing….that’s a simple model to show why a system… Read more »

Robert Bertrand
Guest

Others need to live their ways. America is not in war any place. Américains are back to work again. It’s not that bad !
Talks and discussions are active between practically all Countries.

You can call me AL
Guest
You can call me AL

“America is not in war any place. ” ?????????. Are you joking ?.

John Nolan
Guest
John Nolan

The banker’s DEBT system, where money is created, out of nothing, by the bankers, not the government, as a debt to the community, is the most criminal rort which has ever been pulled over the eyes of the citizens. Money is a representation of work, it has no intrinsic value of its own, but is simply a means of transaction, by which we can interact with suppliers of products we wish to purchase. ‘The love of money is the root of all evil’1Tim-6:10, The economic system under which we are now trapped is a satanically inspired snare, invented by greedy… Read more »

Latest

This Man’s Incredible Story Proves Why Due Process Matters In The Kavanaugh Case

Accused of rape by a fellow student, Brian Banks accepted a plea deal and went to prison on his 18th birthday. Years later he was exonerated.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by James Miller of The Political Insider:


Somewhere between the creation of the Magna Carta and now, leftists have forgotten why due process matters; and in some cases, such as that of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, they choose to outright ignore the judicial and civil rights put in place by the U.S. Constitution.

In this age of social media justice mobs, the accused are often convicted in the court of (liberal) public opinion long before any substantial evidence emerges to warrant an investigation or trial. This is certainly true for Kavanaugh. His accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, cannot recall the date of the alleged assault and has no supporting witnesses, yet law professors are ready to ruin his entire life and career. Not because they genuinely believe he’s guilty, but because he’s a pro-life Trump nominee for the Supreme Court.

It goes without saying: to “sink Kavanaugh even if” Ford’s allegation is untrue is unethical, unconstitutional, and undemocratic. He has a right to due process, and before liberals sharpen their pitchforks any further they would do well to remember what happened to Brian Banks.

In the summer of 2002, Banks was a highly recruited 16-year-old linebacker at Polytechnic High School in California with plans to play football on a full scholarship to the University of Southern California. However, those plans were destroyed when Banks’s classmate, Wanetta Gibson, claimed that Banks had dragged her into a stairway at their high school and raped her.

Gibson’s claim was false, but it was Banks’s word against hers. Banks had two options: go to trial and risk spending 41 years-to-life in prison, or take a plea deal that included five years in prison, five years probation, and registering as a sex offender. Banks accepted the plea deal under the counsel of his lawyer, who told him that he stood no chance at trial because the all-white jury would “automatically assume” he was guilty because he was a “big, black teenager.”

Gibson and her mother subsequently sued the Long Beach Unified School District and won a $1.5 million settlement. It wasn’t until nearly a decade later, long after Banks’s promising football career had already been tanked, that Gibson admitted she’d fabricated the entire story.

Following Gibson’s confession, Banks was exonerated with the help of the California Innocence Project. Hopeful to get his life back on track, he played for Las Vegas Locomotives of the now-defunct United Football League in 2012 and signed with the Atlanta Falcons in 2013. But while Banks finally received justice, he will never get back the years or the prospective pro football career that Gibson selfishly stole from him.

Banks’ story is timely, and it serves as a powerful warning to anyone too eager to condemn those accused of sexual assault. In fact, a film about Banks’s ordeal, Brian Banks, is set to premiere at the Los Angeles Film Festival next week.

Perhaps all the #MeToo Hollywood elites and their liberal friends should attend the screening – and keep Kavanaugh in their minds as they watch.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Clinton-Yeltsin docs shine a light on why Deep State hates Putin (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 114.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

Bill Clinton and America ruled over Russia and Boris Yeltsin during the 1990s. Yeltsin showed little love for Russia and more interest in keeping power, and pleasing the oligarchs around him.

Then came Vladimir Putin, and everything changed.

Nearly 600 pages of memos and transcripts, documenting personal exchanges and telephone conversations between Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin, were made public by the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Dating from January 1993 to December 1999, the documents provide a historical account of a time when US relations with Russia were at their best, as Russia was at its weakest.

On September 8, 1999, weeks after promoting the head of the Russia’s top intelligence agency to the post of prime minister, Russian President Boris Yeltsin took a phone call from U.S. President Bill Clinton.

The new prime minister was unknown, rising to the top of the Federal Security Service only a year earlier.

Yeltsin wanted to reassure Clinton that Vladimir Putin was a “solid man.”

Yeltsin told Clinton….

“I would like to tell you about him so you will know what kind of man he is.”

“I found out he is a solid man who is kept well abreast of various subjects under his purview. At the same time, he is thorough and strong, very sociable. And he can easily have good relations and contact with people who are his partners. I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the nearly 600 pages of transcripts documenting the calls and personal conversations between then U.S. President Bill Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin, released last month. A strong Clinton and a very weak Yeltsin underscore a warm and friendly relationship between the U.S. and Russia.

Then Vladimir Putin came along and decided to lift Russia out of the abyss, and things changed.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel

Here are five must-read Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges from with the 600 pages released by the Clinton Library.

Via RT

Clinton sends ‘his people’ to get Yeltsin elected

Amid unceasing allegations of nefarious Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, the Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges reveal how the US government threw its full weight behind Boris – in Russian parliamentary elections as well as for the 1996 reelection campaign, which he approached with 1-digit ratings.

For example, a transcript from 1993 details how Clinton offered to help Yeltsin in upcoming parliamentary elections by selectively using US foreign aid to shore up support for the Russian leader’s political allies.

“What is the prevailing attitude among the regional leaders? Can we do something through our aid package to send support out to the regions?” a concerned Clinton asked.

Yeltsin liked the idea, replying that “this kind of regional support would be very useful.” Clinton then promised to have “his people” follow up on the plan.

In another exchange, Yeltsin asks his US counterpart for a bit of financial help ahead of the 1996 presidential election: “Bill, for my election campaign, I urgently need for Russia a loan of $2.5 billion,” he said. Yeltsin added that he needed the money in order to pay pensions and government wages – obligations which, if left unfulfilled, would have likely led to his political ruin. Yeltsin also asks Clinton if he could “use his influence” to increase the size of an IMF loan to assist him during his re-election campaign.

Yeltsin questions NATO expansion

The future of NATO was still an open question in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, and conversations between Clinton and Yeltsin provide an illuminating backdrop to the current state of the curiously offensive ‘defensive alliance’ (spoiler alert: it expanded right up to Russia’s border).

In 1995, Yeltsin told Clinton that NATO expansion would lead to “humiliation” for Russia, noting that many Russians were fearful of the possibility that the alliance could encircle their country.

“It’s a new form of encirclement if the one surviving Cold War bloc expands right up to the borders of Russia. Many Russians have a sense of fear. What do you want to achieve with this if Russia is your partner? They ask. I ask it too: Why do you want to do this?” Yeltsin asked Clinton.

As the documents show, Yeltsin insisted that Russia had “no claims on other countries,” adding that it was “unacceptable” that the US was conducting naval drills near Crimea.

“It is as if we were training people in Cuba. How would you feel?” Yeltsin asked. The Russian leader then proposed a “gentleman’s agreement” that no former Soviet republics would join NATO.

Clinton refused the offer, saying: “I can’t make the specific commitment you are asking for. It would violate the whole spirit of NATO. I’ve always tried to build you up and never undermine you.”

NATO bombing of Yugoslavia turns Russia against the West

Although Clinton and Yeltsin enjoyed friendly relations, NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia tempered Moscow’s enthusiastic partnership with the West.

“Our people will certainly from now have a bad attitude with regard to America and with NATO,” the Russian president told Clinton in March 1999. “I remember how difficult it was for me to try and turn the heads of our people, the heads of the politicians towards the West, towards the United States, but I succeeded in doing that, and now to lose all that.”

Yeltsin urged Clinton to renounce the strikes, for the sake of “our relationship” and “peace in Europe.”

“It is not known who will come after us and it is not known what will be the road of future developments in strategic nuclear weapons,” Yeltsin reminded his US counterpart.

But Clinton wouldn’t cede ground.

“Milosevic is still a communist dictator and he would like to destroy the alliance that Russia has built up with the US and Europe and essentially destroy the whole movement of your region toward democracy and go back to ethnic alliances. We cannot allow him to dictate our future,” Clinton told Yeltsin.

Yeltsin asks US to ‘give Europe to Russia’

One exchange that has been making the rounds on Twitter appears to show Yeltsin requesting that Europe be “given” to Russia during a meeting in Istanbul in 1999. However, it’s not quite what it seems.

“I ask you one thing,” Yeltsin says, addressing Clinton. “Just give Europe to Russia. The US is not in Europe. Europe should be in the business of Europeans.”

However, the request is slightly less sinister than it sounds when put into context: The two leaders were discussing missile defense, and Yeltsin was arguing that Russia – not the US – would be a more suitable guarantor of Europe’s security.

“We have the power in Russia to protect all of Europe, including those with missiles,” Yeltsin told Clinton.

Clinton on Putin: ‘He’s very smart’

Perhaps one of the most interesting exchanges takes place when Yeltsin announces to Clinton his successor, Vladimir Putin.

In a conversation with Clinton from September 1999, Yeltsin describes Putin as “a solid man,” adding: “I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

A month later, Clinton asks Yeltsin who will win the Russian presidential election.

“Putin, of course. He will be the successor to Boris Yeltsin. He’s a democrat, and he knows the West.”

“He’s very smart,” Clinton remarks.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

New Satellite Images Reveal Aftermath Of Israeli Strikes On Syria; Putin Accepts Offer to Probe Downed Jet

The images reveal the extent of destruction in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


An Israeli satellite imaging company has released satellite photographs that reveal the extent of Monday night’s attack on multiple locations inside Syria.

ImageSat International released them as part of an intelligence report on a series of Israeli air strikes which lasted for over an hour and resulted in Syrian missile defense accidentally downing a Russian surveillance plane that had 15 personnel on board.

The images reveal the extent of destruction on one location struck early in attack in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport. On Tuesday Israel owned up to carrying out the attack in a rare admission.

Syrian official SANA news agency reported ten people injured in the attacks carried out of military targets near three major cities in Syria’s north.

The Times of Israel, which first reported the release of the new satellite images, underscores the rarity of Israeli strikes happening that far north and along the coast, dangerously near Russian positions:

The attack near Latakia was especially unusual because the port city is located near a Russian military base, the Khmeimim Air Force base. The base is home to Russian jet planes and an S-400 aerial defense system. According to Arab media reports, Israel has rarely struck that area since the Russians arrived there.

The Russian S-400 system was reportedly active during the attack, but it’s difficult to confirm or assess the extent to which Russian missiles responded during the strikes.

Three of the released satellite images show what’s described as an “ammunition warehouse” that appears to have been completely destroyed.

The IDF has stated their airstrikes targeted a Syrian army facility “from which weapons-manufacturing systems were supposed to be transferred to Iran and Hezbollah.” This statement came after the IDF expressed “sorrow” for the deaths of Russian airmen, but also said responsibility lies with the “Assad regime.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also phoned Russian President Vladimir Putin to express regret over the incident while offering to send his air force chief to Russia with a detailed report — something which Putin agreed to.

According to Russia’s RT News, “Major-General Amikam Norkin will arrive in Moscow on Thursday, and will present the situation report on the incident, including the findings of the IDF inquiry regarding the event and the pre-mission information the Israeli military was so reluctant to share in advance.”

Russia’s Defense Ministry condemned the “provocative actions by Israel as hostile” and said Russia reserves “the right to an adequate response” while Putin has described the downing of the Il-20 recon plane as likely the result of a “chain of tragic accidental circumstances” and downplayed the idea of a deliberate provocation, in contradiction of the initial statement issued by his own defense ministry.

Pro-government Syrians have reportedly expressed frustration this week that Russia hasn’t done more to respond militarily to Israeli aggression; however, it appears Putin may be sidestepping yet another trap as it’s looking increasingly likely that Israel’s aims are precisely geared toward provoking a response in order to allow its western allies to join a broader attack on Damascus that could result in regime change.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending