As the Corrupt ‘Democratic’ U.S. Global Empire by and for Billionaires Collapses

2 October 2026, posted by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

——

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PE2wX0UISo

“USS Roosevelt + 9,000 Marines Sail for Iran /Seyed M. Marandi”

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive, 1 October 2026

[Marandi is a Tehran professor who has excellent contacts in, and reflects the thinking of, Iran’s Government, and is therefore widely interviewed by media — such as Daniel Davis’s superb and always honest youtube interviews — that seek to understand and publicize Iran’s perspective (not, like the billionaires-funded media in The West do, the U.S. Government’s perspective). Marandi’s track-record for truth has always been outstanding.]

00:00

DAVIS: How do you [Iran] get a deal done when the counterparts to the US [Trump] are crazy and irrational? Whatever you want to use to >> TRUMP: “Maybe you blow them up. Maybe you blow them up. We have to make that decision. We blow them up. We make a deal. But the time is coming. It’s going to

00:19

end very soon one way or the other.” >> DAVIS: Yeah. See, that’s oftentimes Trump says stuff that is just kind of just not connected to anything. But when it says something like that and then it’s connected with that uh breaking news that Gary just had on the screen there [the Trump statement]

00:32

and a third aircraft carrier is heading into the areas here. Um and this aircraft carrier will arrive in November just as the midterm election gets underway. Uh that that implies something could genuinely be coming. And now he said it again just as you ex put out on

00:50

an expost a few minutes ago. Is there concern in Iran that he may really be ready to go back to full-scale war? >> MARANDI: Yes, that is a possible scenario. And the Iranians have said that if the United States restarts a war and targets Iran’s uh critical infrastructure that

01:11

Iran will destroy everything on the other side of the Persian Gulf and that means uh oil and gas installations, electrical power plants. [And desalination plants.] They will bring an end to the countries that were partners in this assault against the Iranian people, meaning Saudi Arabia,

01:25

the Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, and perhaps Jordan and of course the Israeli regime will be hammered as well. So if Trump goes for uh to because if he an all-out war on Iran and the targeting I mean let’s put aside nuclear weapons that’s a different scenario all

01:43

together, but let’s say he goes after Iran’s electrical power plants that would lead to countless deaths in Iran because hospitals were would be uh would no longer function properly factories would I mean essential needs of the Iranian people would be put in great

02:00

jeopardy. So, since these countries are partners in the this genocidal act, the the Saudis and the others, Iran will retaliate in the most devastating way possible. And what will happen is that the global economy will collapse. There will there will not be a drop of oil or

02:23

natural gas or LNG or or anything to come out of the Persian Gulf for many perhaps years to come. uh it will be a decisive counter strike by Iran and I I have no doubt that the Iranians will will will not pull any punches. So it will lead to a global catastrophe. It

02:42

will lead to a global economic depression in my opinion worse than the 1920s at a time when the world is already in deep trouble as it is. The Iranians as as we as we all know the Iranians are not seeking war. They did not start this war. [The U.S. did in 1953, and especially after the U.S. regime’s Shah was overthrown by Iranians in 1979 and Saudi agents won control over Bill Clinton’s MidEast policies in 1996.] They did not um uh

03:00

threaten the United States. Uh we saw that the head of Joe Kent, who you know uh far better than I, I’ve just seen him and his resignation letter, I’ve seen him on online. Uh but he said in his resignation letter at the beginning of the war, that Iran was not pursuing a

03:21

nuclear weapon, that Iran was no threat to the United States, and this is all about the Israeli regime and the Zionist lobby. So if we have a global economic catastrophe, this is definitely due to the same group of people who force this war upon the Iranian people and upon the

03:38

world by extension. >> DAVIS: And you you say that that’s if it goes conventional. It’s just catastrophe for everybody. Everybody would lose. Iran would lose, the United States would lose, the Gulf countries would lose, the global economy, everybody would lose on

03:54

that. But when Trump specifically said that Iran just a few minutes ago will cease to exist, the only way you can do that is with nuclear weapons. We’ve obviously proven conventional weapons can’t make Iran cease to exist. They could hurt them, but they can’t make

04:09

them cease to exist. What would Iran do if it was actually a nuclear weapon? >> MARANDI: Well, Dr. Larijani who uh by the way President Putin praised in in uh moments ago when I was uh upstairs uh Dr. Larijani who was the chair of the Supreme National Security Council until

04:31

uh he was murdered by Trump and Netanyahu. He once said that if Iran faces existential threat its nuclear posture will change. And uh I I think that that speaks for itself. Hopefully this is not something that uh is on the table because I think that that will be

04:51

something that changes the entire world and perhaps the fate of humanity will be sealed as a result because if the if the Trump regime wants to use nuclear weapons or the Netanyahu regime wants to use nuclear weapons, well then President Putin will be able to make a similar

05:09

decision in Europe if he so chooses. And if and as I said the Iranians will be pursuing uh a new nuclear posture and and so will countries across the world. Everyone will know that from now on you have to have nuclear weapons. So Trump will be pushing the globe towards uh

05:26

complete destruction. >> DAVIS: You know, there there has been some speculation and even on our show uh I guess a week or so ago, uh we had uh Colonel Larry Wilkerson on and and he suggested that or he thought uh it’s not unreasonable to suggest that Iran may

05:43

have a nuclear weapon already because of what happened with Operation Midnight Hammer last year. Everybody’s watching these, you know, facilities that were hit last year. Uh they’re looking at Pickax Mountain. Uh but many people have pointed out that these missile cities

05:56

that you’ve told us about that are scattered throughout the country like 30 or 40 of them, how many there are we have no idea what’s going on in any of them. And uh Dr. Ted Postol on our show has suggested that Iran has the scientific capability to in any of those

06:12

facilities away from anybody’s eyes to be able to set up new centrifuges and to potentially even do make a bomb there in any one of those places. What do you think of the possibility that Iran actually has something like that? >> MARANDI: Well, up to the point where Iran says we

06:29

continue to remain within the NPT and that the current fatwa stands, I have no doubt that they will not produce a nuclear weapon. Uh but if uh if that if that ends for whatever reason, then Iran’s nuclear posture will change. I I don’t know what could trigger that

06:51

change and uh when such a uh and and then what would happen afterwards because obviously uh these are not things that I’m privy to. But I but I have I have no doubt that as long as Iran officially says that we continue to be we can that the fatwa is uh still in

07:13

place then I I don’t I do not believe that Iran will move in I I have no doubt that Iran will not move in a different direction >> DAVIS: in in the event that Trump does use nuclear weapons. I mean the the results for the Iranian country would just be just unfathomable. I mean, the death

07:32

toll could literally be in the millions uh depending on where where the the targets were selected if if anything happened in that. How would they respond to that? And would would it potentially that not matter if you wanted to change your nuclear posture afterwards because

07:45

you may be destroyed? >> MARANDI: Well, again, as you said earlier, Iran has many, many underground sites and it has u and nuclear technology as professor Postol has pointed out is not like it is in the past and Iran’s nuclear technology is not what it was in the past. So, uh enrichment can be

08:08

carried out much more easily and in a much smaller space than before. But again, at the moment, I don’t I I personally do not think that Trump will use a nuclear weapon at this stage. I’m I’m in no position to say anything uh for certain. I’m just speculating as a

08:28

as an Iranian citizen sitting here in Moscow for the for the time being. But uh uh but uh but in but even if a nuclear weapon is not used, if let’s say Trump does go and start targeting Iran’s electrical power grid grid, that is uh no less destructive than a nuclear

08:50

weapon uh across the country. Uh many many thousands will die, maybe tens of thousands over a long period of time, maybe hundreds of thousands. Uh so uh imagine the United States without electricity with a you know during a a prolonged period. Imagine what would

09:09

happen to children to people who need medicine to people who need to go to the hospital for all sorts of things that we really don’t contemplate under ordinary circumstances because electricity is you know so much is taken for granted. So, uh, in any case, whether Trump goes and

09:29

does something crazy or whether he does another crazy thing by targeting Iran’s infrastructure, Iran will be relentless. Iran will destroy uh everything in the Persian Gulf. I and and beyond and obviously is the Israeli regime and perhaps Jordan, which facilitated uh all

09:48

this these atrocities against Iran. The devastation across the globe, Colonel, I think is something that none of us would be able to calculate. But Iran will have no option because these countries are a part of the war against Iranian people. Saudi Arabia, they’ve helped slaughter

10:06

Iranians and without them, the United States would not be able to do what it has done. The children of Minab, the children of La Mer, the leader, the Dr. Larijani and others the bombing of hospitals all this none of this could have been done without the full support

10:22

of these uh these countries. So Iran will not initiate any such attack but Iran will definitely retaliate. >> DAVIS: And and one of the possibilities is that President Trump is just bombastic uh in order to scare the Iranians. In fact, uh what he said in another interview, uh

10:43

was uh we seem to have lost him here. Um we hopefully we’ll get Professor Morandi back. We’ll we’ll take a look at that uh when he gets back in here. But one one of the concerns uh that we have is that maybe they’re just uh I think we got him back here. Lost him for Sorry about

10:60

that. We lost you for a second. >> Sorry about that. >> Very good. >> I heard the question. >> Yeah. So, so the issue is here was President Trump basically saying, “Hey, uh maybe Iran will just surrender.” >> MARANDI: Yeah, that’s that’s not going to happen. I I think uh

11:20

>> sorry, go ahead and play that, Gary. [interview of Trump] >> “Iran, in your opinion, about to give up, about to concede? >> TRUMP: “Well, they’re doing very poorly. I don’t know if they’re going to give up yet, but they’ll give up. But uh they’re doing very poorly.” >> Mr. President,

11:36

>> TRUMP: “You know, we took more oil out of the Hormuz Strait over the last couple of days than at any point in history, including long before we had the war to stop the nuclear weapon. And this is to stop the nuclear weapon. Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.”

11:52

>> DAVIS: So what do you make? Is this going to scare Iran into just surrendering and giving Trump what he wants? >> MARANDI:  No. There’s not a chance in the world that this is going to happen. The Iranians are going to remain steadfast. They will demand the MOU be respected.

12:10

Trump signed it and um Iran we we’ve already seen over 7 months of this war and Trump has been saying that Iran will capitulate literally from day one and two. He he was saying that Iran has no leadership. It has no air force. It has no navy. it has, you know, we we’re in

12:30

full control of the strait of Hormuz. We’ve won, they there’s no one to negotiate with. He’s been saying that for uh for since uh late February and uh he will continue to say that. But uh if if everything is fine, then why would he want to exterminate uh 90 million

12:48

people? And you know one of you know what is so cowardly colonel is how you don’t see any outrage in western media among western politicians among western elites of course except for in the alternative media space among the usual suspects u u you you we don’t see that

13:08

and he’s repeatedly he’s and he’s normalizing uh genocide by constantly saying it and I think he even if he doesn’t personally carry it out he’s uh he’s creating a an environment where uh genocide can be become more easily uh pursued by Netanyahu and by or by his

13:30

successors or whoever is in charge of the this genocidal regime in in Palestine. But in any case, these genocidal statements that he’s making repeatedly and, you know, speaking about exterminating over 90 million people is uh is something that you’d think

13:48

parliaments across Europe who uh if some teenager in Iran gets a bloody nose from a police officer, uh they’d be up in arms. You’d think that they would all be up in arms. They would be signing petitions that there would be statements from parliaments that media uh media

14:08

would be outraged that they would be the top news story that you know criminal uh is in the is in the White House. But no, it’s uh it’s okay when it comes to Iran. >> DAVIS: Yeah, that’s uh it’s very very egregious and lamentable to me because uh it’s I mean just humanity uh should be making

14:28

those points as you as you point out. But instead, what we see, this is uh I’d like your your reaction to this. This is General Keith Kellogg, who used to be one of President Trump’s senior advisers uh and an envoys to both the in the Middle East as well as to

14:45

Ukraine. Um he basically said, “Here’s how diplomacy is going to work. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi should basically uh just sit down and shut up.” KELLOGG: “We need to tell Araghchi kind of go sit in the corner, keep your mouth shut, just do what we think needs to be done for

15:03

the world, for the region, for the American citizens as well. I think this is going to carry through the midterms. What’s going to happen? Tell the American people why this is so important. I will tell you from being inside the White House in the national security frame, you treat a

15:18

nuclearpowered nation significantly different than a non-nuclear nation. And we don’t want Iran all of a sudden have a nuclear weapon because if they try to get a nuclear weapon, the Saudis will get one. The Emiratis will get one that we already know the Israelis have one

15:33

out there. And you’re to talking about total destabilization. And then when you look at their missile fleet, which is the largest in the world, they’ve got medium range ballistic missiles that can reach all the way to France and potentially get to the United States.

15:46

You don’t want that to happen.” >> DAVIS: So what do you think about that? uh he should just shut up and do what he’s told. >> MARANDI: Yeah, there are Washington is truly has truly gone mad and uh it’s not just him. miss the the fact that you could have such insane

16:06

people on national television and uh it just they say it and they walk away walk out of the studio and there’s no outrage in the country that you know such madness uh is is we see such madness on live television. The Iranians are not going to give up their sovereignty

16:29

…

VIEWER COMMENTS: The vast majority blame Trump and Israel. And @tafa9097 said “Remembering the huge faith we had in United Nations when I was in school our lamentation should be for the death of human hope embodied in the structure of the United Nation and the concept of an International Law. Quel dommage.”

——

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qobBDQQMw8

“’Unbridled Violence’: 1,900 Arrests As French High School Protests Spiral Into Chaos | Adam Sage”

2 October 2026

… Schools have been set on fire. Thousands of protesters arrested across France in scenes described as urban violence. Students are striking against poor learning conditions, their sixth form colleges. The demonstrators are demanding more funding for their schools and reform of the university admission system. We can speak now to Adam Sage, the Times Paris correspondent who’s at a lycee [high school] just outside of Paris. Adam, good morning. >> Good morning. >> Give us an idea of the scale of the demonstrations. >> Uh it’s it’s very difficult to give an idea because it’s completely out of control really. Um yesterday the interior ministry uh said that there were 1,900 arrests across the country, 305 police officers injured, 40 head teachers injured. Um hundreds of schools damaged, one in Nantes that was partially burnt down. Uh this is seems to be a movement that’s gone up from the from from the ground and is completely out of control, started by um teenage six formers but now with students joining in um and with left-wingers joining in as well. Uh possibly slightly quieter today than yesterday which was a day of what the interior minister said was unbridled violence. Um quieter because there are 400 uh lease or six colleges that are actually shut today. But no one thinks that this is the end of the movement. There’s been a national day of protest for for next Tuesday. So the government is on tenderhooks really waiting for the next developments. >> I mean burning down schools hurting head teachers. It does sound it it really does sound fairly violent and and of urgency to be addressed. I mean what has Macron said? What have the government said? >> Well uh yes absolutely. I mean France is is used to protest and it’s used to university protests and six form protests but this was on another scale yesterday. Uh the government essentially has been denouncing what it calls unacceptable violence notably against teachers and headteachers. uh it is blaming the far-left uh France party, the France Unbound party which is pretty much a Corbinite left-wing party very close to Jeremy Corbyn in the UK. Uh so the government is blaming that for whipping up the violence, orchestrating the violence. Party denies that and indeed the the the protesters, the teenage protesters deny that as well. But so far that has been the the government’s response to this.

…

The French education system which was once widely admired has deteriorated greatly in the last few decades. It’s the most centralized in Europe if not the world apart from China perhaps. It’s uh everything is run from Paris on in terms of curriculum. But the the what’s interesting is that the material side of the schools which is what the students are most complaining about is financed and organized regionally in France that that is the local authorities doing it. So so the complaining about the government is not really being terribly effective at the moment. >> And is there any end in sight? >> No, we’re in still in the in the growing phase as they say here. It’s will these things will eventually always peter out and but the question is how how steep the violence will become because the riot police are now very active and we all know what that what that leads to in these this sort of confrontation at France. >> Absolutely. Well, that’s Charles Brennan the correspondent for the times in Paris bringing us up to date on the school riots that are engulfing the country.

VIEWER COMMENTS: The vast majority blame the rioters and leftists, not the profoundly corrupt billionaires-controlled Government that is causing an increasing sense of hopelessness amongst France’s non-elites.

——

MY COMMENT:

I had hoped that Davis would have asked Marandi “You are in Moscow, now. Are you discussing these matters with persons in Russia’s Government?”

So, I asked ChatGPT: “At https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PE2wX0UISo, Dr. Marandi is being interviewed from America while he is in Moscow but the interviewer did not ask whether Marandi is speaking with persons from Russia’s Government. There is much speculation that Russia might respond nuclearly against America if America nukes Iran. What can you find about how much Russia is supplying to Iran and how deep their involvement in this war is?” It replied:

Yes. I investigated this more deeply, with particular attention to evidence that has emerged in September 2026, because it materially changes the picture.

My conclusion is that Russia’s involvement in Iran’s war is considerably deeper than merely supplying Iran with weapons. Russia appears to be participating indirectly in Iranian combat operations by supplying intelligence used for targeting U.S. forces. That is considerably better established than Russian delivery of S-400s, for which I still find no persuasive evidence.

The most important evidence: Russian targeting intelligence

In March, U.S. officials told the Washington Post and PBS that Russia was giving Iran information on the locations and movements of American warships and aircraft. PBS reported that officials described Russian information showing the real-time movement of U.S. troops, ships and aircraft. The Washington Post

At the time, there was reasonable uncertainty about how consequential this was. Static American bases are already known to Iran.

But an investigation published in September produced much stronger evidence.

CNN reconstructed Russian satellite movements before Iran’s March 27 attack on Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia. Fourteen Russian intelligence satellites passed over the base shortly before the Iranian attack. They weren’t all doing the same thing: the constellation included imagery, signals-intelligence, infrared and synthetic-aperture-radar satellites. U.S. and other intelligence sources told CNN that Russian satellite information was being supplied to Iran and contributed to Iranian precision strikes. CNN Transcripts

That Iranian attack wounded 12 Americans and destroyed an extremely valuable E-3 AWACS aircraft. CNN’s sources said the precision achieved would have been extremely difficult without Russian geospatial intelligence. They also suspected Russian intelligence contributed to additional Iranian attacks. CNN Transcripts

CSIS examined the evidence just two days ago, September 30, and concluded that Russian-Iranian intelligence cooperation is expanding and improving Iranian targeting and surveillance of American forces. CSIS

That puts Russia considerably further into this war than simply selling Iran equipment.

What Russia is actually supplying

The publicly documented/reported Russian assistance now includes:

Russian assistance	Evidence	Confidence
Satellite imagery of U.S. forces	U.S. officials + subsequent satellite reconstruction	High
Locations/movements of U.S. ships and aircraft	U.S. officials	High
Signals/electronic intelligence	Multiple intelligence assessments	Substantial
Drone targeting/tactical expertise	U.S./European reporting	Substantial
Advanced/fiber-optic drone technology	Multiple reports	Substantial
Russian-manufactured Shahed derivatives	Ukrainian intelligence/allegations	Reported, less independently verified
Explosives, ammunition, drone components	CRS synthesis of reporting	Substantial
Assistance developing advanced cruise missiles	CRS/intelligence reporting	Reported
Cyber cooperation	Ukrainian intelligence assessment reviewed by Reuters	Reported, attribution difficult
S-400	No convincing delivery evidence found	Unconfirmed

The Congressional Research Service summarizes the wartime assistance as Russian deliveries of explosives, drone components and ammunition, plus targeting intelligence, drone advice and proposed additional drone transfers/training. Every CRS Report

Reuters obtained a Ukrainian intelligence assessment that goes considerably further. It said Russian satellites made at least 24 surveys covering 46 military or critical sites in 11 Middle Eastern countries during March 21–31. Some of those locations were subsequently attacked by Iranian missiles and drones. The same assessment described Russian-Iranian cyber cooperation. MarketScreener

Reuters also reported that Western security sources and a regional official close to Tehran said Moscow had provided satellite imagery and helped Iran modify its drones using lessons Russia learned in Ukraine. Investing.com

So I would describe Russia as an indirect belligerent in practical military terms, while noting that this is an analytical description rather than Russia’s formal legal status: Moscow isn’t publicly sending Russian forces to attack Americans, but Russian intelligence apparently has been helping Iran locate and attack American military assets.

But Russia has deliberately stopped short of direct intervention

This boundary is important.

Russia and Iran signed their Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty in 2025, but it conspicuously contains no mutual-defense obligation. Reuters reconfirmed that point last week when Lavrov and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi met in New York. Russia publicly continues to advocate a diplomatic settlement. Reuters

That means Russia is not legally committed to enter the war if Iran is attacked.

And I still find no good evidence that Moscow has supplied Iran with operational S-400 batteries during this war.

There is a real Russian-Iranian deal for 500 Verba MANPADS launchers and 2,500 9M336 missiles, reportedly worth about €500 million, but the leaked contract says deliveries run from 2027 through 2029. Reuters couldn’t independently verify the underlying FT documents. Yahoo News

Thus Russia’s most consequential present contribution may actually be information rather than hardware.

What about Russia retaliating nuclearly if America nukes Iran?

Here I would be much more cautious than the speculation you’ve encountered.

I find no Russian commitment saying that a U.S. nuclear attack on Iran would automatically produce a Russian nuclear attack on the United States.

The Russia-Iran treaty doesn’t provide a nuclear umbrella and doesn’t even contain a conventional mutual-defense guarantee. Reuters

That doesn’t tell us what Moscow would do in the unprecedented event of an American nuclear attack on Iran. Russian decision-making in such a crisis couldn’t reliably be inferred from the treaty alone. But there is a very large evidentiary difference between:

“A U.S. nuclear attack on Iran could produce an extremely dangerous U.S.–Russia nuclear crisis”

and

“Russia has committed itself to retaliating nuclearly against the United States.”

I find substantial grounds for the first proposition and no solid evidence for the second.

Marandi being in Moscow is therefore interesting—but not evidence by itself

Mohammad Marandi being physically in Moscow while giving that interview is potentially interesting given the depth of Russian-Iranian governmental contact I’ve described. But I haven’t found evidence establishing that Marandi himself is meeting Russian government officials during this visit. I therefore wouldn’t infer that from his location alone.

What is documented is extensive government-to-government contact at considerably higher levels: Putin and Pezeshkian have been in contact; Lavrov and Araqchi met as recently as September 25; and the two governments have an established defense/intelligence relationship. Reuters

The part I find most consequential for the question you’re pursuing is this: if the United States resumes attacks, Russia doesn’t need to send S-400s or Russian troops into Iran to affect the war substantially. Its satellites can potentially tell Iran where American carriers, aircraft, relocated air defenses and other high-value assets are.

And we now have evidence that Russia has already been doing something very close to exactly that. The September investigation into Prince Sultan Air Base makes the Russian role look much less like ordinary “military aid” and much more like intelligence support integrated with Iranian targeting. CNN Transcripts

That raises a further question directly relevant to the forces we spent yesterday identifying: Are Russian satellites currently surveilling the two U.S. carrier groups, Fairford, the incoming Theodore Roosevelt and Makin Island groups, and the newly reinforced Patriot positions? Some of that can potentially be investigated from publicly available satellite-orbit information and recent reporting.

I inquired further and found that the forces that the U.S. is supplying for the next bombing of Iran are significantly more sophisticated and coordinated than even the last time — which was very successful against Iran’s air-defenses — whereas Iran’s air-defenses will not be substantially better than last time. So: I have concluded that Iran is expecting to be damaged even worse than before, and that its top goal, which is paramount above its own survival, is to inflict enough damage upon America’s empire so as to effectively end the U.S. regime’s hopes of ultimately taking over the entire world. Iran’s is an extremely heroic endeavor. What the Governments of Russia and of China will do after it, no one can yet reasonably predict. However, if Iran’s effort succeeds, then both countries should not only be greatly relieved but deeply in debt to Iran, and maybe Iran will then rise again, as the U.S. empire collapses into the depths of its own corruptness.

I should acknowledge that the predominant geostrategic viewpoint of those who oppose the U.S. empire is to accept it, not to end it. That was, for example, the viewpoint by Greenland’s Government when I headlined on September 24th “Greenland’s Prime Minister Signed Away to U.S. $45B of Rights for $0.” Coexistence with the fascist-supremacist-imperialistic U.S. regime is preferred to retaining one’s own national sovereignty, and so one accepts colonial status in that fascist-supremacist empire. Another example is Andrew Korybko’s October 2nd “India Should Explore Joint Investments With The US In Russia’s Resource Industry”, which closed: “India would therefore do well to propose its involvement in any potentially forthcoming US investments in Russia’s resource industry brought about through the quid pro quo that Coale will pitch to Putin. The optics of India and the US replacing China’s role in the Arctic LNG 2 project from which it withdrew in summer 2024 under US sanctions pressure, for example, would also be in Delhi and Washington’s interests. That could happen as soon as year’s end if Putin, Trump, and Modi have the political will.” Trump has made clear that the only acceptable relationships for the U.S. to have even with its own colonies (‘allies’, such as Denmark) is exploitation — NOT co-development and win-win, but ONLY win-lose; and, so, no country such as China, Russia, and India, that isn’t yet a U.S. colony, should accept this arrangement. I therefore propose instead a solid wall between the economy of America and the economy of any nation that isn’t yet a U.S. colony. Therefore, as a prominent example, I asked ChatGPT “What would happen to China’s economy if the U.S. established and enforced 100% tariffs against China?” It  answered “If by “100% tariffs” you mean an additional U.S. tariff of 100% on essentially all goods imported directly from China, enforced sufficiently well to prevent simple transshipment through third countries, it would be a serious shock to China — but not remotely an economic knockout. There is unusually useful evidence for exactly your hypothetical. The IMF’s 2026 U.S. Article IV report actually modeled a 100% tariff between the United States and China. It estimates that China’s real GDP would initially be about 0.8% lower than otherwise. After supply chains and trade patterns adjusted over roughly 4–5 years, the continuing GDP loss would fall to roughly 0.4%. Bilateral goods trade would eventually become nearly negligible. …”

I replied: “Your answer fails to include the enormous damage that such U.S. tariffs would produce to America’s economy.” It responded: “Yes. My previous answer understated the American side of the damage. … Empirical work on the earlier U.S.-China tariffs found that the tariffs were almost completely passed through into the prices American importers paid; Chinese exporters generally did not absorb the tariff by cutting their pre-tariff prices correspondingly. … Crucially, the IMF says substitution is initially harder for the United States than for China: immediately after the tariff, China’s share of U.S. imports falls only from about 13% to 6%, whereas America’s share of Chinese imports falls from about 7% to 2%.”

I believe that the U.S. empire is far more vulnerable to collapse than is yet recognized. It is a card-player that bluffs its hand and ought to be called. So, I disagree with analysts such as Korybko.

Anyone who wants a good introduction to the current geostrategic situation that focuses on the rise of Asia’s dominance at the expense of the U.S. empire’s existing dominance will find that from Ryan Perkins today (October 2) video interview of him, “China, Russia, and the Battle for Eurasia”.

America’s “You’re either with us or against us”, under any rational calculation, demands an “against us” response. The termination of all imperialisms (which today means America’s globally, and Israel’s in the Middle East) was the ultimate objective of FDR in WW2, and it can be achieved and will enormously improve the world’s future.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.