in

Biden Administration Seeking to Provoke China to War

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

Eric Zuesse

The United States now routinely violates a fundamental agreement that had been reached between Russia and the U.S. at the Yalta Conference in February 1945. FDR and Stalin agreed together that though every major power has a right to intervene in the internal affairs of other nations in its “neighborhood” insofar as is necessary in order to block such a nearby nation’s alliance with any hostile major power (an example is the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, in which Kennedy had a right to block Cuba from receiving Soviet missiles), no such right to intervene in a foreign country’s purely internal or domestic affairs (such as “human rights”) exists: i.e., the international right to intervene exists ONLY to protect that given major power’s own national security, but not to intervene into that nearby nation’s internal affairs for any other reason. Nor to post forces nearby that other major power. This was FDR’s view, and it was Stalin’s view. They both agreed to disagree together against Churchill’s view, his view that a major power should be allowed to intervene outside of its own neighborhood, or to “have an empire.” Whereas Churchill insisted upon Britain’s continuing to own India, Burma, and other regions that weren’t in Britain’s neighborhood, FDR and Stalin refused to recognize any such right, of any nation.

This was the fundamental disagreement that FDR and Stalin together had against Churchill. It is likewise today the position of Russia and of China but no longer the position of the U.S. Government, which — almost as soon as FDR died on 12 April 1945 — adopted Churchill’s view, the view that empires are okay.

The Soviet Union violated this FDR-Stalin agreement after Stalin died in 1953, when it tried in 1962 to place its missiles into Cuba, which not only is not in Russia’s neighborhood, but it is only 100 miles away from the U.S. border. So, it’s in another major power’s neighborhood — America’s. On 28 October 1962, JFK and Khruschev agreed together that the Soviet Union had been violating the FDR-Stalin agreement which had been arrived at in Yalta; and, so, the Soviet Union would remove its missiles from Cuba. JFK likewise agreed that America’s having missiles in Turkey was in violation of the FDR-Stalin agreement at Yalta, and so he ordered those missiles withdrawn, but this would need to be done without being publicly announced, because Turkey was a NATO member-nation. Both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. recognized and retrospectively honored their commitments that had been reached between Stalin and FDR — but because of Churchill’s opposition the FDR-Stalin agreement could not be publicly announced. UK’s opposition could not affect this bilateral agreement (between U.S. and U.S.S.R.). And the 28 October Kennedy-Khruschev agreement was likewise a bilateral matter, though it did require Turkey’s cooperation, which was provided.

In recent decades, the U.S. Government — now being the U.S. regime, the head of the world’s largest empire — refuses to abide by the FDR-Stalin agreement, and the U.S. demands that both China and Russia accept and adhere to instructions from the U.S. and its ‘international community’ of vassal-nations and international corporations.

By contrast, as was noted on page 18 of the first Yearbook of the United Nations (the 1946-47 edition), “It was first suggested in the [7 October 1944] Dumbarton Oaks Proposals that the name of the organization [that was to replace all empires] should be ‘The United Nations.’ Committee I/I unanimously adopted the name as a tribute to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was the first to suggest it. Commission I and the Conference accepted the name without dissent.” That was an immense embarrassment to Churchill and every other pro-imperialism leader, but none could publicly stand against replacing empires — including his own — by this new organization. The reason why they couldn’t, was that this new organization (the U.N.) was being formed explicitly against three imperialistic fascist nations — Germany, Japan, and Italy — and people such as Churchill had to keep up the myth that their own nation differed from those countries in principle, and not only as being members of competing international aristocratic gangs. FDR was running this show, and all of its actors had to play according to his rules. The moment that Harry S. Truman took over, he became faced with the question of whether to adhere to FDR’s vision of a U.N. that has sole authority over all strategic weaponry, or else to revert to there being a global competition between empires; and he, on 26 July 1945, chose (partly because he could and because he was now leading the most powerful nation on Earth) for the U.S. to become the supreme empire, over the entire world, so that the U.N. became, instead, merely a talking-forum — because of him. Power corrupted him. (But privately he expressed pangs of guilt at what he was doing — though he never faced these pangs consciously. He was being manipulated by other men, and had no idea that he was. Few nations’ leaders have ever failed as tragically and as monumentally as he did.)

Up until the time in 1991 when the Soviet Union ended and its communism ended and its Warsaw Pact mirror of Truman’s NATO military alliance ended, the myth of a democratic anti-imperialistic United States of America and its democratic NATO allies could continue to be maintained as being, collectively, not an empire but instead an ideological crusade against communism. However, on 24 February 1990, U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush started secretly telling his vassal-leaders such as West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl that though the Cold War would soon end on Russia’s side, it was to be continued on the side of the U.S. and its allies. He was telling Kohl that despite the promises that Bush’s people were making to the Soviet then Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev — promises that NATO wouldn’t “move one inch to the east” and that if it continued at all, then Russia itself could become a member of NATO — NATO definitely would extend eastward to Russia’s border, and was going to continue until Russia itself becomes part of the U.S. empire (another vassal-nation, like West Germany). That was the instruction. In other words: the ‘anti-communism’ thing was just an excuse, a hoax, for the gulls. All-encompassing U.S. empire was the real goal.

On 9 February 2021, America’s Navy Times headlined “Roosevelt, Nimitz carrier strike groups conduct dual carrier operations in South China Sea”, and reported that “Aircraft carriers Theodore Roosevelt and Nimitz, along with their carrier strike groups, conducted dual carrier operations Tuesday in the South China Sea.” Of course, that’s Theodore Roosevelt, the imperialist, and not Franklin Roosevelt, the anti-imperialist. Brian Cloughly bannered on February 16th “Washington’s Energetic Generals and the Emphasis on Preparation for Nuclear War” and he said:

The mission of this enormous force (which has a total of 120 attack aircraft), according to Admiral James Kirk, commanding the Nimitz Strike Group, was to ensure “the lawful use of the sea that all nations enjoy under international law,” and he was echoed by his colleague, Admiral Douglas Verissimo of the Roosevelt Strike Group, saying “we are committed to promoting a free and open Indo-Pacific.” Obviously neither of them is aware that the United States refuses to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which is considered “the ‘constitution of the oceans’ and represents the result of an unprecedented, and so far never replicated, effort at codification and progressive development of international law.”

That threat is very definitely outside of America’s own neighborhood, and consistent ONLY with America’s being “an empire.”

The U.S. regime is an international bully and any of its allies is just part of its gang. This is exactly the sort of situation that FDR had joined WW II in order to end. When he died, international decency became unAmerican, and Truman committed this nation to that (global thuggery), on 26 July 1945. George Herbert Walker Bush merely informed his vassals, starting on 24 February 1990, that the anti-communism thing had been only an excuse. But it always had been.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Report

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

What do you think?

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
17 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sue Rarick
February 23, 2021

It might actually be a good idea for a war to start in about one year. The US is in a really vulnerable position. And probably needs a good nose bleed. All the folk they have depended on to keep fighting their never ending wars have stopped joining and at the same time many of the leaders with actual combat experience are expecting to be part of the many purged. For the most part todays Generals have never been closer to combat other than at a battalion level CO or XO and got their ‘combat’ card punched. Now with the… Read more »

gte
gte
Reply to  Sue Rarick
February 23, 2021

While I agree that affirmative action promotions are going to sky rocket in the US military, if not already, I find it hard to understand why China is corrupt but the successive US administrations are not? Nor do I understand why Chinese military equipment does not work thus implying that the US hardware does. Perhaps I should remind you of the flying duck called the F35 fifth generation fighter jet where over a trillion has been spent and it still has major problems. The US does not have the numbers to take on China. Its ranks are depleted and since… Read more »

Sue Rarick
Reply to  gte
February 23, 2021

The problem with Chinese military equipment is the CCP cronyism. You have CCP family members getting contracts and once the contract is signed they could care less about if the items work or not – Just as long as the number ordered matches the number sent – they don’t have to work and nobody will say anything to upset a CCP member. So the equipment is just assumed to be in working order – don’t rock the ship mentality. As for our readiness. I live next to Ft Campbell, I watch them training as they run past my house. I… Read more »

Randall Bunton
Randall Bunton
Reply to  Sue Rarick
February 24, 2021

Fighting a war with modern conventional weapons would result in regional catastrophe. Nuclear weapons are not needed to inflict massive infrastructure devastation that would result in millions of casualties. It would be swift and terrible for all the combatants. Biological weapons would surely be released with unknown consequences. Nuclear energy plants would no doubt be prime targets to cripple infrastructure. This would be an apocalyptic mistake.

Sue Rarick
Reply to  Randall Bunton
February 24, 2021

More people died in Japan from carpet bombing than the nuclear bombing. In fact there were over 200 mass fire carpet bombings of cities before the 2 nukes.

peter mcloughlin
February 23, 2021

Nations can intervene in issues of vital national security, and the author cites the Cuban Missile Crisis as an example where the US took this stance. In the developing Sino-American crisis the two countries are clashing over what they consider vital interests – security and commercial – but ignore the warnings from history: such titanic hegemonic struggles end in world war, which serves no one’s interest.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

Francis Lee
Francis Lee
February 23, 2021

I remember in the film ‘Apocalypse Now’ a scene where Captain Willard (played by Martin Sheen) commented ‘Everyday Charlie sits in the Jungle and gets stronger, and everyday I sit in the room and get weaker.’ That just about sums up the US position. They cannot win a war against the combined and increasing might of Russia and China, and they know that they can’t. It’s all bluster. Please note The doomed Sicilian Expedition of Athens against Sparta. Things don’t change.

Sue Rarick
Reply to  Francis Lee
February 23, 2021

My opinion is Russia is the actual threat. If you look at China they are basically surrounded by enemies. Russia on the other hand is playing the game well. Since the sanctions they are becoming much more self sufficient. They are not just an oil exporter anymore – they also export a lot of agricultural products (Thank You South Africa for chasing out your agri-business experts) – They are also beginning to export finished manufactured products along with manufactured parts. Add to this they have nurtured good relations with not just China but India as well. That’s about 2.5 billion… Read more »

Glocken-spiel
Glocken-spiel
Reply to  Sue Rarick
February 23, 2021

Why is a country being successful over time at reforming its economy into a more balanced one, reflecting the competitive nature of modern commerce, a threat to the US?

Sue Rarick
Reply to  Glocken-spiel
February 23, 2021

Being a threat was in reference to being more a threat than China. Also, Russia is not dependent on the US whereas China is as an export buyer. Russia sells very little to the US. NS2 takes away the threat of turning off the oil/gas spigot to Europe which the Ukraine has done in the past. .

jdd
jdd
February 23, 2021

The recent pronouncement by the head of the US Strategic Command, Adm, Charles Richard, that nuclear war with Russia or China is “a very real possibility” has not received the attention one would expect. In part because of the unabated portrayal of both countries as an enemy image of the past decades which has enured the American people to such dangerous talk As the author points out, the positing of the “West v East,” in which the world was divided into “spheres of influence” was initiated by Churchill immediately upon the death of FDR. Such a policy harkens back to… Read more »

Sue Rarick
Reply to  jdd
February 23, 2021

One of the reasons Nukes have not been used since WW2 is that there is never going to be a winner.
I read his comments and to me it is more about, we need to spend more money on this stuff.
He sounds like another proponent of the Dulles boys never ending war policy. Which is really a never ending spending policy

Last edited 8 months ago by Sue Rarick
jdd
jdd
Reply to  Sue Rarick
February 23, 2021

That is not the reason, but rather reflects wishful thinking by an uninformed public. The policy of M.A.D. has been a deterrent, although there was a near failure in late 1962, averted only by the diplomacy of the Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev. That close call drove President Kennedy to seek an end to the cold war through cooperation in space and withdrawal from Vietnam, perhaps costing his life. For decades, think tankers and and allied pentagon strategists have sought a way to “win a first strike,” thus encouraging the placement of missiles closer and closer to Russia’s borders. Recent Russian… Read more »

Sue Rarick
Reply to  jdd
February 23, 2021

The reality is that a nuclear war would ruin the Oligarchs money printing machines. Devastate the land and my going to the pistol range often beats all the ex – power a gates has. Money would be worth nothing and might makes right.
That is not in the Oligarch’s best interest. Better to lose a war and keep the money coming in.
The USSR ended but oligarchs kept their wealth, Ukraine was overthrown but the oligarchs kept their power.
The US oligarchs would rather lose than lose their power and money.

jpthiran
Reply to  jdd
February 23, 2021

…jdd find a doctor!…you need one!…

bob
bob
February 24, 2021
Rate this article :
     

Sue Rarick , your right money ,your a sweet heart.!!

HELEN MCAFEE
HELEN MCAFEE
February 27, 2021

The US is out-of-control and a force for ongoing evil. It’s former allies need to dump it, and help their nations rebuild after Covid!!

Salvini loses support as he supports Draghi. Brothers of Italy rises

“Wikipedia” — Bias And Lies (Part 1)