Hillary, US Foreign Policy and How “Putin Derailed the West”

Donate

Hillary, US Foreign Policy and How “Putin Derailed the West”

Written by Mike Whitney; Originally appeared at CounterPunch

“Nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.” — Zbigniew Brzezinski, “Between Two Ages: The Technetronic Era”, 1971

“I’m going to continue to push for a no-fly zone and safe havens within Syria….not only to help protect the Syrians and prevent the constant outflow of refugees, but to gain some leverage on both the Syrian government and the Russians.” — Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Third Presidential Debate

Why is Hillary Clinton so eager to intensify US involvement in Syria when US interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya have all gone so terribly wrong?

The answer to this question is simple. It’s because Clinton doesn’t think that these interventions went wrong. And neither do any of the other members of the US foreign policy establishment. (aka–The Borg). In fact, in their eyes these wars have been a rousing success. Sure, a few have been critical of the public relations backlash from the nonexistent WMD in Iraq, (or the logistical errors, like disbanding the Iraqi Army) but–for the most part– the foreign policy establishment is satisfied with its efforts to destabilize the region and remove leaders that refuse to follow Washington’s diktats.

This is hard for ordinary people to understand. They can’t grasp why elite powerbrokers would want to transform functioning, stable countries into uninhabitable wastelands overrun by armed extremists, sectarian death squads and foreign-born terrorists. Nor can they understand what has been gained by Washington’s 15 year-long rampage across the Middle East and Central Asia that has turned a vast swathe of strategic territory into a terrorist breeding grounds? What is the purpose of all this?

First, we have to acknowledge that the decimation and de facto balkanization of these countries is part of a plan. If it wasn’t part of a plan, than the decision-makers would change the policy. But they haven’t changed the policy. The policy is the same. The fact that the US is using foreign-born jihadists to pursue regime change in Syria as opposed to US troops in Iraq, is not a fundamental change in the policy. The ultimate goal is still the decimation of the state and the elimination of the existing government. This same rule applies to Libya and Afghanistan both of which have been plunged into chaos by Washington’s actions.

But why? What is gained by destroying these countries and generating so much suffering and death?

Here’s what I think:  I think Washington is involved in a grand project to remake the world in a way that better meets the needs of its elite constituents, the international banks and multinational corporations.

Brzezinski not only refers to this in the opening quote, he also explains what is taking place: The nation-state is being jettisoned as the foundation upon which the global order rests. Instead, Washington is  erasing borders, liquidating states, and removing strong, secular leaders that can mount resistance to its machinations in order to impose an entirely new model on the region, a new world order. The people who run these elite institutions want to create an interconnected-global free trade zone overseen by the proconsuls of Big Capital, in other words, a global Eurozone that precludes the required state institutions (like a centralized treasury, mutual debt, federal transfers) that would allow the borderless entity to function properly.

Deep state powerbrokers who set policy behind the smokescreen of our bought-and-paid-for congress think that one world government is an achievable goal provided they control the world’s energy supplies, the world’s reserve currency and become the dominant player in this century’s most populous and prosperous region, Asia. This is essentially what Hillary’s “pivot” to Asia is all about.

The basic problem with Washington’s NWO plan is that a growing number of powerful countries are still attached to the old world order and are now prepared to defend it. This is what’s really going on in Syria, the improbable alliance of Russia, Syria, Iran and Hezbollah have stopped the US military juggernaut dead in its tracks. The unstoppable force has hit the immovable object and the immovable object has prevailed…so far.

Naturally, the foreign policy establishment is upset about these new developments, and for good reason.

The US has run the world for quite a while now, so the rolling back of US policy in Syria is as much a surprise as it is a threat. The Russian Airforce deployed to Syria a full year ago in September, but only recently has Washington shown that it’s prepared to respond by increasing its support of its jihadists agents on the ground and by mounting an attack on ISIS in the eastern part of the country, Raqqa. But the real escalation is expected to take place when Hillary Clinton becomes president in 2017. That’s when the US will directly engage Russia militarily, assuming that their tit-for-tat encounters will be contained within Syria’s borders.  It’s a risky plan, but it’s the next logical step in this bloody fiasco. Neither party wants a nuclear war, but Washington believes that doing nothing is tantamount to backing down, therefore, Hillary and her neocon advisors can be counted on to up the ante. “No-fly zone”, anyone?

The assumption is that eventually, and with enough pressure, Putin will throw in the towel. But this is another miscalculation. Putin is not in Syria because he wants to be nor is he there because he values his friendship with Syrian President Bashar al Assad. That’s not it at all. Putin is in Syria because he has no choice. Russia’s national security is at stake. If Washington’s strategy of deploying terrorists to topple Assad succeeds, then the same ploy will be attempted in Iran and Russia. Putin knows this, just like he knows that the scourge of foreign-backed terrorism can decimate entire regions like Chechnya. He knows that it’s better for him to kill these extremists in Aleppo than it will be in Moscow. So he can’t back down, that’s not an option.

But, by the same token, he can compromise, in other words, his goals and the goals of Assad do not perfectly coincide. For example, he could very well make territorial concessions to the US for the sake of peace that Assad might not support.

But why would he do that? Why wouldn’t he continue to fight until every inch of Syria’s sovereign territory is recovered?

Because it’s not in Russia’s national interest to do so, that’s why. Putin has never tried to conceal the fact that he’s in Syria to protect Russia’s national security. That’s his main objective.  But he’s not an idealist, he’s a pragmatist who’ll do whatever he has to to end the war ASAP. That means compromise.

This doesn’t matter to the Washington warlords….yet. But it will eventually. Eventually there will be an accommodation of some sort. No one is going to get everything they want, that much is certain. For example, it’s impossible to imagine that Putin would launch a war on Turkey to recover the territory that Turkish troops now occupy in N Syria. In fact, Putin may have already conceded as much to Turkish president Tayyip Erdogan in their recent meetings. But that doesn’t mean that Putin doesn’t have his red lines. He does.  Aleppo is a red line. Turkish troops will not be allowed to enter Aleppo.

The western corridor, the industrial and population centers are all red lines. On these, there will be no compromise. Putin will help Assad remain in power and keep the country largely intact. But will Turkey control sections in the north, and will the US control sections in the east?

Probably. This will have to be worked out in negotiations, but its unlikely that the country’s borders will be the same as they were before the war broke out. Putin will undoubtedly settle for a halfloaf provided the fighting ends and security is restored. In any event, he’s not going to hang around until the last dog is hung.

Unfortunately, we’re a long way from any settlement in Syria, mainly because Washington is nowhere near accepting the fact that its project to rule the world has been derailed. That’s the crux of the matter, isn’t it? The bigshots who run the country are still in denial. It hasn’t sunk in yet that the war is lost and that their nutty jihadist-militia plan has failed.

It’s going to take a long time before Washington gets the message that the world is no longer its oyster. The sooner they figure it out, the better it’ll be for everyone.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • When shall people understand that the neocons that rule Washington are psychotic and don’t see the world as normal people would. These are the same people who demand “full-spectrum dominance” and ask, “What is the use of having nukes if you can’t use them?” These are the same people who loudly declare that the US is the exceptional indispensable country that MUST lead the world. No one seems to notice that these people are telling the American people the same lies that Adolph Hitler told the German people just prior to World War II.

  • Marek Pejović

    I think this process could be called “Africanization of middle east”. this is not balkanization, as splitting one successful state into many small fiefdoms, but rather exposing a country to state of chronic chaos which will lead to deterioration of security, education and potentials of a country to successfully run itself. this has happened in African countries since their independence. over decades of civil wars and dictatorships, the core strata of educated people in many african countries was in part killed or emigrated. as resault, the general level of elites to run the state effectively has greatly deteriorated.

    Thus, the goal of africanization is to deteriorate the capacities (culture, education systems, organization level) of a country and effectively “dumb down” it’s leadership system and break it sufficiently into chaos without officially redrawing the state borders. for example, people who make decisions in Afghanistan today are uneducated bearded warlords and elders. back before the taliban, educated people ran the country.

    This kind of africanization will make the middle east:
    1. too weak on level national government to resist western interests
    2. being too divided to ask foreign powers for help (look at Lybia)
    3. allow for “inofficial” resource extraction, just like in Africa, where the much more primitive governance system allows extraction of mineral resources at cheap price in non-regulated conditions.

  • Marek Pejović

    I don’t agree on Putin wanting to end the war ASAP. i mean, yes, in general, but i believe he is much more into results than pressure with time. he has showed himself to be quite a player in this game.
    As for Erdogan, he still can make erdogan suffer dearly and retreat without ever firing a bullet, in fact, turkish invasion has a great potential since it puts immense pressure on the YPG. only in dire circumstances will the YPG consider renegotiations into Syrian state system. and Tureky is conveniently providing this role which would have otherwise had to be provided by SAA. Kurds are Putin’s trump card in Syria, when Erdogan is concerned. he can arm them with just about anything, and well armed Kurds will be a real pain to deal with. so, using kurds (once they are generally in line with idea of inegrity in Syria) to force the turks back will probably happen. and it will also weaken the turks.
    Putin also knows that the forces of destabilization will wear down on syria and middle east and will not have the strength to come after him in his home country.

  • John

    I am in general agreement with what the author of the article has written. In my opinion, it is well thought out and very clear. I see tons of what Mr. Whitney is talking about. So, can anything more be added?

    There are two major problems that the ‘rule the world crew face’, which I don’t think they can get around. The first one to mention is debt. For one reason or another, US debt isn’t so attractive anymore. It is being unloaded by more than a few folks. They can compensate for now but, not forever. Blowing incredible sums of money on absolutely questionable ventures and projects, is ripping up their effort to move forward. They were not as smart as they thought they were. Without debt spending, the plan dies in seconds at this point.

    The other aspect, which I think is a larger and longer term problem for Hillary et al, is that the American public is beyond the limit of BS it is willing to swallow, regarding how great we are and how much we need to be constantly at war. Things have gotten to the point where it has been outed that the US is arming and supporting AQ via intermediaries. We are so far from where it started in 2001, the War on Terror, that I need a star map to keep myself orientated. Without public support, this plan will also go down in bloody flames. They needed to keep it secret to work and that has long since passed. A good afternoon to all.

  • Otto Heinrich Wehmann

    I like 007: SKYFALL too!!!!

  • Percival

    Founder of Delta Force, former CIA and CFR details soft coup against the Clintons.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov5kvWSz5LM

    • Percival

      Here is another interview from today with Steve Piecenik (the man in the above video) discussing more about the intelligence community revolting against the Clintons.

      https://youtu.be/zic64WhR14k

    • Joseph Scott

      This guy didn’t found Delta Force. 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta was formed by Col. Charlie Beckwith, out of a similarly named unit Beckwith had operated in Vietnam, and incorporating ideas he had learned from the British SAS. This Pieczenik guy wasn’t even military.

      • Percival

        Apparently he was a co founder and instrumental in getting it off the ground. He was a State Dept. official and psychological warfare expert who worked under numerous Presidents. It may be BS, but he WAS a member of CFR who came out against the Regime after 9/11 and became a truth teller.

        • Joseph Scott

          Well, I have no particular basis to dispute the claim he makes above, I just wouldn’t call that ‘founding’ the unit. He may have helped get Beckwith the green light, but Beckwith had been developing the concept and the basis of the unit for a decade or more.

          Of course, the fun with such an ‘ex-CFR member’ is always, are they actually ‘ex’ or is this a disinformation op? I’m sure you’ve considered as much, and I’m not criticising you posting the video, just reminding people to keep an open mind to the full range of possibilities. They like to exploit wishful thinking. For example, the whole Republican vs. Democrat thing is staged as way to manage people, and it has so far worked quite well as far as keeping many military and intel people from seeing the evil at work in the whole edifice, because they can just blame the Democrats.

          • Percival

            I understand. I know Beckwith was the primary founder. You are correct about “ex” CFR people. He’s a psychiatrist who specializes in psychological warfare and regime change. Worked under Kissinger. Highly suspicious. If you look at his works, it appears he rejects most aspects of globalism and nation building now. He thinks Russia has been neutral rather than “aggressive”. He has some good things to say, but it would be foolish to forget his background and cozy relations with the global elite. Caution is urged when analyzing his statements.

  • SOF

    This is really the essence of the problem. We are dealing with psychopaths. We can’t project our humanity ‘they would never do that’ vibe on them. They see it as just business, demolishing countries and ruining them. Ruining countries is not an accident, it is part of their larger plan. Psychopaths have no empathy, and they run the shadow governments and the western banking Cabal.

  • john mason

    It appears that to stop this US elite actions is simply to assassinate them. Period.

  • (((foreign policy establishmen))) , is borg now another term for not using the word jews ?

  • Jesus

    When Russia, China …etc decided to follow a multi polar world structure, it was obvious that they would be in potential direct conflict with the US. I believe that Russia and China are coordinating their efforts jointly to undermine the US plans world wide. So what if the borg wants to establish a no fly zone in Syria, the borg members are known to be great deceivers and manipulators, having their idea of the world order they want, they are not known to be logical and rational thinkers regarding military matters and associated implications. They have a deluded opinion of their conventional and nuclear military capabilities, having chased goat herders for the last 15-20 years. Russia does not need to compromise on anything in Syria, seeing the borg subterfuge that makes agreements with US unreliable and one sided.
    The US cannot approach Syria from the Mediterranean or the Persian Gulf and engage the Russians militarily without taking significant losses. Taking significant losses is a new concept for the US military that has so far enjoyed easy conflicts with minor or non existing losses.
    Russia is well positioned and can play a waiting game in Syria scoring multiple political points and paint US led coalition in its proper colors, being terrorist enablers and supporters.
    China will withstand US in the South Pacific, and has some economic black swans they can unleash on US if the political situation deteriorates.
    I do not see neither Russia nor China backing down or compromising with the US, if US is reluctant of heavy conventional losses in case of a limited armed conflict, how much more reluctant will they be to contemplate a nuclear exchange? Western culture has reached a level of corruption where self gratification, absorption, and all other vices permeate every day life. Rome used to have the hardiest and most capable army of the antiquity, around the 4th century AC, their army had become inept in the face of barbarian migrations and attacks; one reason leading to such ineptitude was easy life, the soldiers considered wearing armor and a heavy helmet burdensome and uncomfortable.

  • Douglas Houck

    “because Washington is nowhere near accepting the fact that its project to rule the world has been derailed”

    To me that is the question. While the recent switch of Turkey, Egypt, India, and possibly the Philippines, and to some extent Japan toward rapprochement with Russia. along with China’s, One Belt, One Road , and Eurasia’s ever expanding Shanghai Cooperation Organization, (SCO) should signal that the US has lost the ability to control the world (as Brzezinski stated in his April 2016, “Towards a Global Realignment”), but there has been no suggestions from Hillary Clinton that she understands that the time for US global hegemony is over.

    I believe President Putin is prepared to go to thermonuclear war to convince President Obama that the days of the US Empire, it’s use of regime change, and the interference in the internal affairs of other countries are over. Al-Raqqua will be the decision point.

    The US has stated that after Mosul they will move to Al-Raqqa. This is “Plan B”. It would allow the US and it allies to meet most of its original objectives, weaken Syria, prevent Iran from supplying Hezbollah, and even run a natural gas pipeline from Qatar/Saudi Arabia up to Turkey. Everything but the removal of Al-Assad. In that, after liberating Al-Raqqua the US and or it’s allies will not leave.

    A major tenet of the SCO is non-intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign nations. President Putin is trying to bring order to the world by saying nation states are the ultimate form of government and that everyone has to obey international laws. Currently, with the US as world hegemon it is anarchy at the top. This will only lead to confrontations between the US and China and/or Russia.

    Since Russia knows it can’t win in a protracted non-nuclear military confrontation, it has to show that it has not only the means but the will to use it’s nuclear weapons. This is the reason Russia has shown it’s latest ICBMs which can attack our missile defense systems, run civil defense exercises within it’s major cities, called back its children from overseas, scrambled the US’s GPS signal around Moscow, placed nuclear armed cruise missiles near Germany, (mere minutes from any European capital), and brought all its latest military equipment to the Middle East, along with Iran via the Houthis to shoot anti-ship missiles at the US to get them to use for the first time their naval anti-missile defense system so it can be studied.

    The Russians are asking the Syrian Kurds to join them and be guaranteed an autonomous region within Syria’s existing borders. If the Kurd’s accept, the US has almost no one else (except the Turks) that they can use to confront ISIS in Al-Raqqa.

    This will all take place withing the next couple of months as they know their best chance is with President Obama and not Hillary Clinton.