The anti-war international coalition

The characteristic feature of the hybrid war is the possibility of its simultaneous engagement with any number of opponents. Currently, the U.S. is waging war on all continents. It wages war against Russia in Europe, actually occupying Ukraine and creating threats of a new world war. It wages war against China, the political system of which is being tested for strength with the " umbrella revolution" in Hong Kong, and with Japanese provocations in respect of disputed islands.

It wages war against the Arab world, in which a full-scale religious war has been unleashed, exacerbating the chronic confrontation between Shahs and Sunnis, and provoking the creation of a full-fledged terrorist " Islamic State." It wages war against Venezuela, Brazil and Bolivia ruled by the political forces out of favor with the U.S. In addition to all this, let us not forget the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as long-standing conflicts with Iran, North Korea and Cuba. The advances toward the latter should be perceived as a sign of the forthcoming large-scale interference in internal affairs after the death of F. Castro, as happened in Libya after the " warming" of the attitude towards Qaddafi.

The U.S. is waging a hybrid world war on a multitude of battlefronts, relying on its monopoly in the world currency issuance. This gives it the opportunity to finance its military, propaganda, organizational and other costs of waging war at the expense of other countries holding American treasury obligations, including the victims of U.S. aggression. Moreover, the war itself is arranged on the basis of self-repayment. Mineral deposits, infrastructure facilities, the domestic market are transferred to the U.S. corporations. The Federal Reserve organizes monetary circulation, linking the issue of the national currency to the growth of foreign exchange reserves in the form of U.S. bonds. The ones who have to pay for the activities of the occupation authorities are the peoples of the captive countries, on which pseudo-elections are imposed that legitimize the power of American puppets.

A classic example of the U.S. methodology for conducting a hybrid war is the occupation of Iraq.

Immediately after the seizure of this country, which entailed almost no losses owing to the bribery of the military leaders of the Saddam regime, who betrayed their leader in fear of an imminent defeat from NATO's many times superior forces[170], the administration of its economy was assumed by a temporary coalition administration led by U.S. Department of State official Lewis Paul Bremer. By orders of the latter, hundreds of state companies and natural resources were privatized in favor of the U.S. corporations, radical liberalization of economic regulation was carried out, and American GMOs were forcibly imposed in agriculture[171].

In Afghanistan, the recoupment of the occupation costs is achieved through the production and export of drugs, the sales volume of which has grown by more than an order of magnitude compared to the period of the Taliban's rule. According to statistics of the Russian Federal Drug Control Service, 150 billion doses of heroin are produced annually in Afghanistan. Similarly, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reported that in Afghanistan in 2014 they obtained a record opium poppy crop on the total area of 224 thousand hectares, amounting to 6.4 thousand tons of opium. There is no doubt that the bulk of its sale will accrue to Central Asia, the Caucasus, Russia and Ukraine.

It wouldn't go amiss to note that the foreign forces led by the U.S., having entered Afghanistan in 2001, declared the destruction of terrorism and drug control as targets of their invasion. The exemplary and self-explanatory fact is that since the introduction of troops and the allegations that terrorism in Afghanistan is fueled by drugs, the number of opium poppy plantations and the production of drugs in Afghanistan have increased more than 40-fold. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Afghanistan produces about $7 billion worth in drugs annually (from 2001 to 2010, the production of drugs amounted in value terms to $70 billion).

The dismembered Yugoslavia was placed under management of the EU that has both to bear the costs keeping the non-viable economies of the former SFRY republics, and to tolerate the criminal regime in Kosovo, the sting of which was felt by many residents of nearby European countries. The Baltic republics were also transferred to the upkeep of the EU and have lost much of their economy after joining it. It will become clear in the near future whether the EU would be able to sustain in addition to them also Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, which have been forcibly imposed the Agreement on the Association with the EU.

Thus, by unleashing aggression against some or other sovereign country, the U.S. appropriates trophies and profits from the exploitation of its resources, leaving the financing of costs to the population and partners. This allows it to even partially privatize the use of criminal warfare methods in order to avoid excessive political risks. The U.S. has invented such phenomenon as private military companies (PMCs), widely used as a strike force for secret operations, the involvement in which the U.S. tries to hide.

PMCs not only supply products in the interests of the military, but also render services for conducting combat or punitive operations, advising native troops, protecting facilities, and provide to their customers the professionals required for military affairs. PMCs work in the areas where open actions by the U.S. military are considered inadvisable for some reason[172]. In fact, the U.S. revived the political cover of the pirates loyal to the British crown, who captured Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch ships sharing trophies with the English throne, which had been practiced for centuries.

According to the U.S. Center for Public Integrity, the U.S. Department of Defense has concluded since 1994 more than 3, 600 contracts with 12 U.S. PMCs for a total of $300 billion. Obviously, these are only direct contracts through the military department. Other contracts could have been concluded with other U.S. government agencies. According to rough estimates, the volume of services and supplies of American private military companies during the presidency of George W. Bush amounted to $100 billion a year.  However, no one can give the exact figures.

Given the specifics of their activities, PMCs are manned largely from among former military personnel or ex-employees of state military-industrial structures. Since the business of PMCs is mainly based on the exploitation of low-intensity military conflicts, PMCs are interested in supporting such conflicts, provoking and supporting them through lobbying in the government agencies. Only officially PMCs allocated $12.4 million since 1999 for conducting various kinds of election campaigns, including presidential ones.

The policy of the U.S. administration regarding private military companies is encouraging. In December 2005, delivering a lecture on the situation in Iraq at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, the U.S. Secretary of Defense D. Rumsfeld touched upon the activities of PMCs in Iraq. He said that private military companies operated under laws governing the behavior of Americans abroad, have the ability to attract human and other resources, both Iraqi and from other countries, and it would be unreasonable not to resort to their services.

Most of all, in the light of recent Ukrainian events, the talk of the town was the activity of the largest U.S. PMC, Xe Services LLC (Blackwater). The company gets 90% of its orders from governmental organizations, the remaining customers being oil producers, insurance companies and other private organizations. The employees of Xe took part in the Afghan war, but they got wide publicity due to the incident of their participation in the Iraq war, related to the killing of civilians and the smuggling of weapons. Another example of the criminal activities of U.S. PMCs is the MPRI, the employees of which took part in Operation Storm, which ended with the disintegration of the Republika Srpska Krajina and the Republic of Western Bosnia. In July of 2008, MPRI trained the Georgian army before the conflict in South Ossetia.

Private military companies have a prototype in the political history of the Anglo-Saxons, namely, the British pirates.

They were widely used by the British crown to undermine the might of Spain. Despite the fact that the British pirates for many centuries were robbing the English Channel and the adjacent waters, the main history of the British piracy is associated with the era of colonial wars. It can be divided into three stages. The first of them falls to the end of the 16^th century, the time of the first Anglo-Spanish clashes; the second one, to the late 17^th and early 18^th century, and the third continued until the eradication of piracy in the mid-19^th century. During the first two stages, Britain sought to use the corsairs to fight its external enemies. Queen Elizabeth, the inspirer of the first stage, even knighted the pirate Drake after his successful return in 1580 from the round-the-world pirate voyage. It would be wrong to think that Drake's piracy was hushed up; on the contrary, Elizabeth proudly called him " my pirate, " as Drake's pirate operations were directed mainly against Spaniards. Until the 18^th century, " national piracy" was even encouraged, despite the fact that it acquired a truly world-wide scope: coasts of Africa and India, the coast of North America and the Pacific Islands.

Within the framework of the current world economic paradigm created under the decisive influence of the United States, Americans always have an advantage in the conflict with any rival. The effectiveness of the hybrid war which they wage with a half of the world is based on the conformity of its technologies to the institutions of the existing world economic paradigm. On the financial battlefront, the U.S. has an overwhelming advantage in controlling the issue of the world currency and the IMF, which stipulates the rules for the functioning of the global and most national currency markets, including Russia.

Together with its geopolitical allies – Japan, the UK and the EU, the currencies of which also have world status – they control the vast majority of the world's monetary and financial space and have a majority in international financial institutions.

On the information battlefront, the global monopoly of the U.S. media allows them to form public opinion and thus influence voters' preferences, forming a political landscape in most democratic countries. Where this influence is not enough, the complementary technologies described above are used to obtain the result desired by the U.S., starting with financing and promotion of their agents of influence and ending with killing of their political opponents and arrangement of coups d'é tat. On the other important battlefronts of the hybrid war, namely cultural, ideological, food, energy, communications, the U.S. has significant advantages as well. None of the countries with an open economy and a democratic political system can win in a conflict against the U.S. within the framework of a hybrid war. The convenience of the latter lies in the fact that it does not need to be announced, it can be conducted on the sly, and is even possible to smother the enemy with embraces so that until the last moment it will not be aware of the war waged against it. Hybrid war allows the aggressor to avoid not only losses, but also responsibility for consequences, which are blamed on " indigenous" politicians. This war can be arbitrarily stretched in time, divided into stages, terminated and restarted at any time, depending on the circumstances.

 As has been shown by victorious campaigns of the U.S. against the USSR, the SFRY, Ukraine, the enemy which is not ready for a hybrid war, even if it is very strong and capable of inflicting unacceptable damage, is unable to defend itself. It is impossible to use tanks against television or rockets against money.

This means that within the existing world economic paradigm, no country is immune from U.S. aggression. Only countries with a closed financial, information and political system can effectively oppose it. However, self-isolation leads to technological lagging and economic degradation, which entails a fall in living standards and internal political risks. The aggressiveness of the U.S. can be curbed only by moving to the new world economic paradigm accompanied by restructuring of the main institutions of the functioning of the global financial and information systems, as well as by creation of mechanisms of responsibility for compliance with international law standards.

The anti-war international coalition for the transition to the new world economic paradigm could include:

· the countries of the EEU and CSTO, closely connected with Russia by their historical destiny and national interests;

· the countries of the SCO, which are well aware of the danger of another Western aggression;

· the countries of the BRICS, the economic recovery of which can be thwarted by the U.S.-organized destabilization;

· the countries of Indochina, which are not interested in deterioration of their relations with Russia;

· some countries of the Near and Middle East that manage to retain their sovereignty, for which the world war will mean the escalation of their own regional conflicts;

· the Latin American countries of the Bolivarian Alliance, for which the whipping up of a new world war will mean a direct U.S. invasion;

· the developing countries of the Group of 77, the heirs of the Non-Aligned Movement, traditionally opposing wars for a just world order;

· European countries, the political elites of which will be able to act in their own national interests, and for which the next world war in Europe is completely unacceptable.

As an incentive for the creation of such a coalition, it is necessary to put forward common threats to all of its participants centering on unleashing of a global hybrid war by the U.S. An important condition for the successful creation of such a coalition, as noted above, is deprivation of the U.S. of its monopoly for ideological domination by consistently exposing the anti-human consequences of its interventions, the massacres of civilians committed by its military, the destructive results of the rule of U.S. proté gé s in various countries. It is necessary to destroy the image of U.S. infallibility, to uncover cynicism and deceit on the part of U.S. leaders, the disastrous consequences of their policy of double standards, incompetence and ignorance of U.S. officials and politicians.

Influential allies in creating an antiwar coalition could be religious organizations that oppose promotion of a cult of permissiveness and debauchery, undermining of family and other universal values.

They could help the coalition members work out and offer the world a new unifying ideology, proceeding from restoration of the immutable moral limitations of human arbitrariness. International humanitarian and anti-fascist organizations also could play a constructive role. Another ally could be the global scientific and expert community acting from the perspective of sustainable development and generating development projects that unite humanity.

The actions of the anti-war coalition should be directed not only at reaffirming and destroying the political domination of the U.S., but above all, at undermining the U.S. military and political power based on issuance of the dollar as the world currency. In the event of continuing aggressive U.S. actions to incite the world war, coalition members should reject the dollar in mutual trade, and abandon dollar instruments in placement of their gold and currency assets.

The anti-war coalition should elaborate a positive program for the organization of the world financial and economic architecture on the principles of mutual benefit, justice and respect for national sovereignty. In other words, there is a need for consensus on the basis for formation of the new world economic paradigm. In order to avoid a global catastrophe in the situation of the growing hybrid war chaos, there is a need for consensus on critical issues of the world economic system: climate, energy, finance, food, water, population, waste management[173].

We have already mentioned the necessary measures for financial stabilization, improving the regulation efficiency of financial markets, banking, financial and investment institutions, stimulating the growth of the new technological paradigm and progressive structural changes, and formation of appropriate new institutions. They ought to eliminate the fundamental causes of the global crisis, the most important among which are the following:

· the uncontrolled issuance of world reserve currencies, which leads to abuses by issuers of their monopoly position in their own interests at the cost of growing disproportions and destructive tendencies in the global financial and economic system;

· inability of the existing mechanisms that regulate the operations of banking and financial institutions to protect national financial systems against speculative attacks with a view to their destabilizing, as well as against excessive risks of cross-border flow of speculative capital and formation of financial bubbles;

· exhaustion of the limits of growth of the dominant technological paradigm and inadequate conditions for emergence of the new one, including a lack of investment for the widespread introduction of clusters of its underlying technologies.

The anti-war coalition should come forward with a positive program of measures to overcome the global crisis by eliminating its causes and creating stable conditions for the functioning of the global financial market and international monetary exchange on a mutually beneficial basis, and for development of an international production cooperation and global trade in goods and technologies.

These conditions should allow the national monetary authorities to organize lending for the development of production facilities pertaining to the new technological paradigm and modernization of the economy on its basis, stimulating innovative and business activity in the promising areas of economic growth. To this end, the issuing countries of the world reserve currencies should ensure their stability by observing certain restrictions on the size of the public debt and the deficit of the payment and trade balances. Moreover, they should comply with the requirements established in an appropriate manner for the transparency of the mechanisms they use to ensure the issuance of their currencies, and ensure unimpeded exchange of these currencies for all assets traded within their territory.

An important requirement for issuers of world reserve currencies should be compliance with the rules of fair competition and non-discriminatory access to their financial markets. At the same time, other countries that observe similar restrictions should be given the opportunity to use their national currencies as an instrument of foreign trade and monetary exchange, including their use as reserve currency by other partner countries. It is advisable to introduce a classification by categories for national currencies that aspire to be the world or regional reserve currency, depending on whether their issuers meet certain requirements.

Simultaneously with the adoption of requirements for issuers of world reserve currencies, it is necessary to tighten control over the movement of capital in order to prevent speculative attacks that destabilize the global and national monetary and financial systems.

To achieve this, the coalition countries need to introduce a ban on the transactions of their residents with offshore zones, and not admit to refinance schemes the banks and corporations established with participation of offshore residents. It is also advisable to impose restrictions on the use in international settlements for the currencies, the issuers of which do not comply with the established requirements.

To determine the requirements for issuers of world reserve currencies and monitor their compliance, it is necessary to implement a deep reform of international financial institutions in order to ensure fair representation of the participating countries according to an objective criterion that takes into account the relative weight of each of them in world production, trade, finance, natural potential and population. The same criterion can be used to establish a basket of currencies for the release of a new SDR, in relation to which the rates of all national currencies, including world reserve ones, could be determined. At the initial stage, this basket could include the currencies of those coalition countries that would have agreed to assume obligations to comply with the established requirements.

Implementation of such large-scale reforms requires appropriate legal and institutional support. This can be done by granting to the coalition resolutions the status of international obligations of countries interested in their implementation, as well as by relying on UN institutions and authorized international agencies.

In order to stimulate the global spread of socially significant achievements of the new technological paradigm, it is necessary to launch an international system of global strategic socio-economic planning, including the development of long-term forecasts of scientific and technological progress, determining the prospects for the development of the global economy, regional associations and large countries, identifying opportunities to overcome the existing disparities, including gaps in the level of development between advanced and underdeveloped countries, and a choice of priority development directions and indicative plans of activity of the international organizations.

It is obvious that the U.S. and the G7 countries will oppose the implementation of the above proposals on reforming the world monetary system, which will undermine their monopoly right of uncontrolled issuance of world currencies. The current routine for the exchange of economic activity results and factors between developing and developed countries is quite satisfactory to the latter. Reaping huge benefits from the issuance of world currencies, leading Western countries deter access to their own markets of assets, technology and labor, imposing ever new restrictions.

As shown by the policy pursued by the U.S., it prefers inciting the world chaotic war aimed at protection of their dominant position to the reform of the global financial system based on justice, mutual benefit and respect for sovereignty. Therefore, in order to become valid and effective, the anti-war coalition should have sufficient defensive capability to repel American aggression and attempts at military and political destabilization anywhere in the world. To achieve this, it is desirable to expand the format of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), to involve China, Vietnam, Syria, Cuba, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, to establish mechanisms of partnership for peace with India, Iran, Venezuela, Brazil, as well as with other countries menaced with the U.S. aggression.

Despite the heterogeneity of these countries, the formation of their anti-war coalition may assume an avalanche-like character, as countries that are small and incapable of defending themselves will be interested in participation if assured of the commitment of the superpowers to create it.

The correlation of forces between the U.S and the anti-war coalition depends critically on the position of European countries. Bound by NATO, they are firmly following in the wake of the U.S. foreign and military policy. At the same time, the hybrid war against Russia unleashed by the U.S. is contrary to their interests. The U.S. aggression in Ukraine entails serious threats to the security of European countries. The U.S.-initiated sanctions against Russia affect in the first instance their economic interests. Therefore, the efforts made by the Russian President Vladimir Putin to explain to the leaders of European countries the perniciousness of U.S. policy towards Ukraine are so important.

But even without European countries, having the military-political and economic power comparable to NATO, the anti-war coalition could win in the U.S.-imposed confrontation and, regardless of its will, could start reforming the world financial and monetary system in the interests of sustainable economic development of both global and all national economies. If G7 countries refuse to " scoot over" in the management bodies of international financial organizations, the anti-war coalition should have sufficient synergy to create alternative global regulators.

The creation of such a coalition can be initiated on the BRICS basis, starting with the solution of issues of ensuring their economic security, including:

· the creation of a universal payment system for the BRICS countries and the issuance of a common BRICS payment card, uniting Chinese UnionPay, Brazilian ELO, Indian RuPay, and Russian payment systems;

· creation of an interbank information exchange system (similar to SWIFT) independent of the U.S. and EU;

· transition to the use of own rating agencies.

The leading role in the creation of the antiwar coalition will have to be assumed by Russia, since it is in the most vulnerable position and will not be able to defeat the world war unleashed against it without the creation of such a coalition. If Russia does not initiate the creation of such a coalition in the near future, then the anti-Russian coalition formed by the U.S. could absorb or neutralize potential Russian allies. Thus, the war provoked by the U.S. in Europe against Russia may prove beneficial to China. Following the Chinese parable of an intelligent monkey that waited in the tree for two tigers to finish their fight, and then grabbed their take, China might prefer a strategy of non-intervention. A mutual weakening of the U.S., EU and Russia makes it easier for China to achieve global leadership. Brazil could succumb to the pressure of the U.S., while India could clam itself in solving its internal problems.

Russia has historical experience of leadership in world politics, as well as necessary spiritual authority and sufficient military-technical power that are at least equal to those of the U.S. But in order to claim leadership, the Russian public consciousness needs to get rid of the inferiority complex imparted by pro-Western media in the period of Gorbachev's Perestroika and American domination under the Yeltsin regime.

It is necessary to restore the historical pride of the Russian people for the centuries-old persistent creation of a civilization that united many nations and cultures and repeatedly saved Europe and mankind from self-destruction. Another thing to do would be to reinstate the understanding of the historical continuity of the role of the Russian World in the creation of a universal human culture, beginning from Kievan Rus to the modern Russian Federation, which is the successor to the USSR and the Russian Empire. In this context, the Eurasian integration process should be presented as a global project to restore the common development space for nations that have lived together, cooperated and enriched each other for centuries, from Lisbon to Vladivostok and from St. Petersburg to Hanoi.

Although the Eurasian integration differs from the European one in that it does not imply the unification of political and economic systems, it needs a common understanding of the mechanisms of functioning of the modern economy. This understanding is given by the new paradigm in economic science, called " evolutionary."

 

⇐ Предыдущая78910111213141516Следующая ⇒

Поделиться: