Dr Alf poses the question about how the US and Europe should strengthen strategic focus to reduce the bickering in response to Russian/Chinese strategic partnership.
To my mind, this requires commonality of vision and an acknowledgement of where true power actually lies, plus an understanding grounded in reality by the West of where its interests lie.
America sees itself as the world’s policeman, the strongest military power and the arbiter of which regimes are legitimate, which should be “taken down” and which should be bullied, helped, approved of and left alone.
Europe does not really exist as a separate country and has Germany as its real master although the British Establishment cannot in their minds accept that particular reality. They, in the shape of the Queen who heads the former British Empire through the use of her Governors General, puppet leaders in the newly “independent countries”and her personal ownership of enormous acres of land (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Kentucky, Manhattan, NY, NY, plus UK), still aspire to control the entire world.
Beyond that, some 21 families, plus the Black Nobility families, the Vatican and through it the Jesuits, the Sun Society and the Knights of Malta, also exercise power.
Through the various groupings beneath these upper levels, the West is really run from three capitals, The City of London, the Vatican and Washington.
In total, there are around say 2,500 people effectively controlling some 189 countries, much of its food supply and most of its energy.
Russia, China and non-aligned countries are not part of this structure although there are people in both Russia and China who are or were part of this edifice. Putin has expelled most of them from Russia which is why so many of them live in London. The Chinese have them in the form of the Li Ki Jiang family but because China has been earmarked for growth and development that country will be allowed to grow economically until such time as a war can be started to curtail their military power.
This is similar to the strategy that was adopted with Germany in the two World Wars, allow it to forge ahead economically, finance its war machine, finance another war machine, wage a World War and bring it to heel.
Because of miscalculations on the part of the 2,500 people in overall charge, China has caught up technologically, much faster than they anticipated (4 years instead of 20), so the plan is now one of “containment” coupled with denial of mineral supplies through regime change in Africa. China has also profited from Globalization, a mental construct of the Club of Rome, and has used the money to build up its military, its cyber warfare capability and its ability to control financial flows via Hong Kong which will be the number one financial center by 2016 (the City of London is now 2nd).
Russia has minerals that the Chinese want and need, and it has very advanced space based weapons systems and weather warfare capabilities.
Thus between them, China and Russia might be the modern “Carthage” that “Rome” wishes to destroy (See PNAC website), but the outcome in a direct conflict might prove problematic.
Until all these competing groups within the West decide on a common approach or are succeeded by new groupings which have the interests of ordinary people at heart, the “bickering” Dr Alf talks about will continue unabated and there never will be a strategic solution.
However in the meantime we, in the UK, would do well to think about our common interests by:
1) Becoming self-sufficient in energy within 5 years across the UK and Europe through fracking, wave power, nuclear power and eventually “Singlepoint energy”
2) Encouraging more inward investment from China and Russia but not in power generation, the London Underground infrastructure company, food supply, water supply or devices which give them access to our computer networks
3) Massively expanding 3D printing to make us less reliant on imports
4) Issuing infrastructure bonds to use foreign funds from Sovereign Wealth Funds to pay for infrastructure improvements
5) Using robots to make things here and in Europe to offset Far Eastern and Chinese advantages in inexpensive labour
6) Abandoning the Malthusian doctrine, ”environmentalism” and other forms of defeatist nonsense, and trying to reach a form of rapprochement with these countries looking at what we are each good at rather than pretending that we have all the answers
Similarly, where there are climatic problems, it is cheaper for all of us to develop technologies to assist adaptation and overcome them than it is to make ourselves uncompetitive through carbon taxes.
7) Become self-sufficient in food and improve productivity thus making it more attractive to make things here
8) Put sensible tariffs in place so that we allow imports but not in an unfettered way
9) Stop engaging in megaphone diplomacy which simply put the Chinese and the Russians on the defensive and encourages them to come closer together to counter the perceived threat from us