Military, Political and Diplomatic Trends Of 2016 That Will Shape 2017

Donate

Loading the player...

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: southfront@list.ru or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

2016 marked by important of diplomatic, political and military developments around the world.

Britain voted to leave the European Union by 52% to 48% in a national referendum. The outcome of the Brexit referendum has caused strong reaction at home and worldwide. Brexit was supported by the popular majority of Britain and a significant portion of the UK national elite. Even the use of lobbying clout by Cameron’s cabinet did not allow EU supporters to attain victory.

Indeed, leaving the EU would allow the UK to control immigration more efficiently, save billions of pounds in membership fees and advocate its own trade deals while leaving all trade conditions between the UK and the EU relatively unchanged – all while getting rid of restrictive EU regulations, bloated Brussels bureaucracy and run down Eastern and South European economies. In fact, the UK has simply jilted continental Europe. After all, it was Britain that was an active supporter of many decisions that have had a negative impact on the current situation of refugees in the EU and the economic issues of the Member States.

As to the trade cooperation and conditions, the EU could hardly proceed without British industry, technologies and investments. At the same time Britain acquires the first chance to jump in the US-backed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership freely without intra-European debates.

However, EU lobbyists now have moved beyond just the information campaign and diplomatic pressure. They have started to use bureaucratic technologies and well-known “color revolutions” technologies, previously field-tested in Eastern Europe and the Arab countries, to attempt to rip the referendum results to shreds. As a result, the process of the UK exit from the EU was de-facto frozen, ignoring the people’s choice. However, the BREXIT became an important step in the ongoing confrontation between EU citizens and the European bureaucracy.

Following the Brexit, Donald J. Trump won the US presidential elections. While on the campaign trail, President-Elect Donald J. Trump made a range of statements suggesting a shift away from a policy of interventionism, combined with a focus on safeguarding US borders and jobs at the expense of the dominant ideology of globalism. Can and will he deliver on these promises? There are many reasons to believe he will genuinely push US foreign policy in this direction, but at the same time he will face obstacles on his path.

One of the factors clearly helping him is the increasingly indisputable fact that globalism as an ideology has been discredited, except, ironically, among the liberal “creative classes” and among the financial elites. The rest of the society and of the elite is increasingly skeptical of such policies if not downright opposed to them, which means they are willing to experiment with economic nationalism and even isolationism.

At a minimum, the “global elites” will attempt to find as much compromising information concerning Trump, his family, and close associates as possible, in order to make him an “offer he can’t refuse” backed up by a sizable financial “consolation prize”. If Trump refuses to succumb to direct and indirect pressure and attempts to pursue even part of what he promised during the campaign, Trump’s opponents will embark on more drastic measures, including a Maidan-like permanent demonstration aimed at tarnishing Trump’s reputation or even an assassination attempt. While the former is highly likely, the latter is somewhat less plausible because it would result in elevate Trump to martyrdom and also set a precedent for future assassinations, which is something the US elite fears greatly.  However, Trump will have to deal with tremendous and constant psychological pressure that will be exerted on him through his close associates, family, and of course the media, in order to disorient him and throw him off course.

Moreover, Trump’s political foes will pursue an international approach, using NATO and EU as means of exerting pressure on the new administration, through military provocations if need be. US, being a relatively sparsely, resource-rich country not unlike Russia, can pursue a “Fortress America” strategy. The EU would find it much more difficult to do so without embracing authoritarian governance, as it requires a “Lebensraum”-like sphere of influence that will provide natural resources which the continent lacks. But this Europe has no Grande Armee or Wehrmacht– it has to rely on US military power and subversion. Hence the  hysterical European reaction to the US election, for the adoption of a “Fortress America” strategy by the US renders EU’s own strategy of expansion obsolete.

Deciding what to do about the US relationship to Europe that has become a major net drain on US resources will therefore be a major challenge for the Trump Administration. If it is pulled down the same path as its predecessor, it will ultimately be because of its inability to redefine its relations with an increasingly burdensome and costly set of allies on the other side of the Atlantic, and for this reason the outcome of the upcoming elections in Germany and France is of critical importance.

The development of conflicts in the Middle East was alternate side of the changes in the EU and the US. While backers of Syrian terrorists were trying to hold the power at their home, the Russian-Syrian-Iranian alliance made significant steps aimed on combating terrorism in Syria.

The provinces of Latakia, Homs, Hama, Aleppo and the Damascus countryside wre the main areas of operations against terrorists. The joint anti-terrorism forces achieved a series of significant victories in these areas, liberating waste areas near the Syrian capital, the important town of Qaryatayn and the key Syrian city of Aleppo. They also temporarily liberated the ancient city of Palmyra from ISIS, but lost it as result of a large-scale ISIS attack in December.

On October 1, 2015, SouthFront predicted that the Russian military operation in Syria will likely lead to the establishment of a permanent Russian air and naval base in eastern Mediterranean. By October 2016, Moscow expanded its military facilities in Syria, launching a program of transforming the Khmeimim Air Base into a full-fledged military base with a permanent contingent of the Russian Aerospace Forces and announced plans to turn its naval facility in Tartus into a fully-fledged permanent naval base.

Summing up the gains of pro-government forces across the country within the past year and the growing military presence of Russia in Syria, it’s easy to conclude that the course of the Syrian war was dramatically changed and the Syrian-Iranian-Russian forces delivered a devastating blow to terrorists and saving the Assad government from the military defeat. Now, the strategic initiative of the war is in the hands of Syrian-Iranian-Russian alliance.

Another key player in the conflict was Turkey that had entered northern Syria to combat ISIS and Kurdish YPG forces in August. Turkey’s aim was to build a buffer zone with pro-Turkey militant groups and to prevent Kurdish forces from creation a semi-autonomous state in Syria. Turkey’s decision to intervene in Syria was made amid the rapprochement with Russia and Iran. This allowed many experts to suggest that Turkey, Iran, Russia and Syria had some unpublicized agreements over the ongoing crisis. The Turkish-Russian-Iranian negotiations that excluded the US-led block of the so-called “friends of Syria” and took place in Moscow in December contributed to this version. The military coup attempt that took place in Turkey in July and was allegedly supported by some part of the US elite became the main reason of Ankara’s decision to increase cooperation with Moscow and Tehran.

The Russian anti-terrorist operation also pushed the US to take more active steps in combating ISIS in Iraq and Syria that led to the start of advance on Raqqah, Fallujah and Mosul. While Fallujah was liberated, Mosul remained a major ISIS stronghold in Iraq despite the US-led attempts to retake the city from terrorists.

It appears that the pre-election project of the Democratic Party of the USA, under the title “Quick Capture of Mosul” has, seemingly, failed together with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Now, the tactics of the USA administration have changed. This may mean that Donald Trump gets dragged into a quagmire of a war. That being stated, high-ranking Pentagon officials no longer believe that the Iraqi military is capable of taking Mosul, and have been preparing a plan with greater participation of the US Armed Forces.

The US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) also launched an advance on the ISIS self-proclaimed capital in Syria, Raqqah. However, until now, they have not even reached the city.

Conflicts in Yemen and Libya continued to flare in the Middle East with almost no chances to be solved with diplomatic measures, contributing to instability in the region. The Saudi-led intervention turned Yemen into a zone of instability and set conditions for the growth of local al-Qaeda branch. Even despite this, Saudi-led forces failed to achieve their military goals in the area and to inflict a defeat to the Houthi-Saleh alliance backed by Iran.

The rapidly developing relations between Russia and Egypt have been overshadowed by the more prominent relationships between Russia and Syria, as well as Russia and Iran. Nevertheless, the Russia-Egypt relationship deserves closer scrutiny because, unlike the country’s relations with the other two Middle Eastern powers, it concerns a country that until recently appeared to be firmly in Western orbit. The abrupt shift of its geopolitical vector toward Eurasia therefore represents a far bigger change for the region than Russia’s successful support of the legitimate Syrian government, or the close relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran, both of which have been on the Western “enemies list” for decades. The reasons for this shift are twofold, and have to do with the way Western powers interact with Middle Eastern powers in the context of a systemic economic crisis, as well as with Russia’s demonstrated attractiveness as an ally.

From the Russian perspective, Egypt represents yet another bulwark of security against Western encroachment, a symmetric response to NATO expansion, “Eastern Partnership”, and color revolutions. Combined with the military presence in Syria, Cyprus’ general pro-Russian orientation, and the neutralization of Turkey which was also facilitated by an abortive West-promoted coup attempt, the Egyptian-Russian cooperation would impact the balance of power in the Mediterranean.

In 2016, the whole Middle East was affected by the major crisis with Syria, Iraq, Yemen and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Turkey in its core. Turkey faced a military coup attempt, economic decay and Kurdish insurgency that almost turned into a full-scale civil war.

2016 witnessed a sharp escalation in the militarization of the South China Sea. The cause of the escalation is multifaceted and comes from both regional and international quarters. The militarization has been initiated and exacerbated by both China and the United States, both bearing responsibility for the current level of tension in the region. As land reclamation and building efforts on the part of the Chinese continue at Fiery Cross Reef and Mischief Reef in the Spratly Islands with no signs of slowing down in the immediate future, the US increases the size and tempo of future patrols in the area and expands its cooperation with regional powers to counter the Chinese claims.

The Central Asia also remained the point of instability that attracted attention of the key regional players: Russia, the US and China. While Afghanistan remained the main source of instability, neighboring central Asian countries also faced various terror and security threats, strengthened by an instable internal political situation.

Security threats are growing in Europe. The ongoing migration crisis and acute situation with a terrorism threat didn’t force the EU elite to change their failed foreign and internal policy and the union was plunged into shock by the continued series of terror attacks.

If this situation is not to get worse, it would require the adoption of a revised approach, namely a unified, well-funded and comprehensive EU-level migration policy, consisting of combating organized crime among ethnic groups, screening new arrivals, guaranteeing access to social services and labor markets, etc.  Otherwise the EU is risking a massive social explosion provoked by growing inter-ethnic and inter-religious conflict, and the constant perception of a growing terrorist threat. Unless addressed rapidly, these problems could be sufficient to destroy the already fragile EU common security framework.

The general security situation in Europe was further worsened with the smoldering conflict in eastern Ukraine, where the recent escalation took place in December. The situation is worsening due to the economic collapse in Ukraine and the Kiev’s government inability to negotiate and unwillingness to follow the Minsk agreements. Ukraine remained the point that can be used by some powers to instigate destabilization in the whole Europe.

In general, 2016 was a very complicated year in military and diplomatic terms. The reactive processes were observed the international relations at all levels. The number of local conflicts didn’t reduce and even grew involving more and more regional and world powers. The diplomatic, military and security trends formed in the end of 2016 year will shape 2017. It will be the year of continued geopolitical standoff of global powers amid the reducing US influence around the world.

Donate

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Aquartertoseven

    Two things defined 2016 and will define 2017:

    You can’t stump the Trump nor barrage the Farage.

  • John Whitehot

    how about they try to assassinate Trump and blame it on Russia? would not surprise me at all.

    • Arthur Smith

      There is no influentual group with motives. World Government’s satraps in financial ministry don’t count – they are pussies.

      • John Whitehot

        I don’t understand your point. Can you explain?

        • Arthur Smith

          There is no target to effectively blame in Russia. And the only ones suffering from Trump’s election so far are occupation collaborationists like arrested minister Ul’ukaev.

      • Attrition47

        Thanks for using “satraps”, it’s one of my favourites.

  • Nigel Maund

    Good commentary in this video. The arguments are robust. The US has adopted a disastrous strategy in the Middle East for over 20 years and its actually gotten a whole lot worse under the incompetent Obama administration. The Putin Government has played it’s hand brilliantly in the Middle East and North Africa and has demonstated by their loyal support of Syria that they are a real ally that can be trusted, which is a great deal more than the US and the EU has demonstrated. The EU is in one huge mess and will most likely fall apart in 2017 – 2018. Countries in the ME and North Africa are waking up to the massive geopolitical shift taking place which in fact will benefit Russia, Iran and Syria whose influence in these regions can only increase. This may bring greater stability. However, the international banking & corporatist cabal that controls and effectively owns the US and EU can be expected to foment terrorist acts, false flag attacks and war wherever they can to achieve their desire for global hegemony at any price.

    • Arthur Smith

      >The Putin Government has played it’s hand brilliantly in the Middle East and North Africa
      No, we betrayed Gaddafi, who was friendly to us, only to almost lose Syria later.

      >they are a real ally that can be trusted
      Yeah, a crippled ally with hands tied by UN and media, but tangible nontheless. Very thustworthy at arriving late rather than never.

      >will benefit Russia, Iran and Syria
      You are forgetting China with it’s New Silk Road. Almost all the benefits will be reaped by it.

      P.S. Stop thinking in XIX century terms. XX was already about world projects. XXI is about globalism and it’s alternatives. Rolling back to pre-UN (and that’s what regression to geopolitics entails) is like abandoning guns in favour of swords. Sure, primary guns are decayed and failing, but competitors might have kept their maintained. If you dare to voice
      an opinion on world’s fate, you must operate at least on the level of dominant era, XX-level of world projects. Classic nations are not independant actors since WW-I. Projects are not actors since rise of globalism. In XXI nothing matters beside globalism/transhumanism and the paradigm that is going to challenge it. Forget territories and nations, you won’t find world’s frontlines there.

      • Nigel Maund

        The US has consistently betrayed everyone for its own advantage. So I disagree with you as I am deeply opposed to globalism and the role of the international banking cabal and corporatists who have acted to rape and plunder countries across the world right back to the Victorian era. The term “disaster capitalism” coined by Naomi Klein was well described in her book and sums up perfectly Anglo – American foreign policy for the 20th Century and 21st Century where the process has worsened. Human life means nothing to the Anglo – Americans who trample whomsoever they want to obtain their heartless geostrategic and business goals as exemplifed by their brazen financing of a spectrum of jihadist extremist groups across the Middle East regardless of the consequences. Yes you destroyed Qaddafi and destroyed a viable state for the petroleum resources of Libya to underpin the otherwise worthless US$ and even more worthless EURO. I am frankly delighted to see the Aglo – Americans losing their cynical game in the Middle East, which has nothing to do with projects whatsoever, but has everything to do with global petroleum resources of light sweet, especially Arab “A”, crude in world class resources in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and the Caspian and the dependence of US oil refining platforms on these supplies and moreover the US$. The dominance of the latter serves to underpin the NWO – banking cabals quest for global hegemony and a one world Government. Regardless of what ones view of world Government may be, history has proven beyond all doubt that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The US and UK are sure fire proof of this time honored adage. Their actions in the ME and Ukraine are about as corrupt as one can imagine.

        • Arthur Smith

          I’m russian and opposing NWO no less than you. Gaddafi and his people suffered because of RUSSIAN hesitation born of weakness and fear of sanctions. And “playing safe” only brought us collapsing Syria and breaking up Ukraine, followed by sanctions government tried to avoid so much.

          • Nigel Maund

            I agree with that. The Russians are waiting to see what the Trump Government actually does rather than says. I actually support what the Russians are doing as the so called West has perpetrated endless war crimes in the ME for thirty years or more and has been meddling in the region for its oil resources for 80 years. They don’t give a damn about the people they kill or the destruction they have wrought, so long as they control the oil resources at any price.

          • Arthur Smith

            Oil is rapidly losing significance and Russia’s bet is on nuclear power – look at the nuclear fuel market, 70% is ours and growing, since our centrifuges are 2-3 times more energy efficient. It grants us infuelce on Iran, Turkey, even Saudis!

          • Bob

            That is valid point – hesitation at UN Assembly by Russia gave NATO a green light over Libya. But is also important to note, that the NATO overreach in Libya translated into action incredibly quickly. The usual ‘humanitarian bombing’ justification at UN quickly revealed, within days, a premeditated and highly aggressive regime change operation.The US and Qatar were deeply coordinated in months prior and handled the ground operations – weapons and militants transit – in advance of the NATO air attacks. That was big signpost of sheer NATO confidence, and Russia either fretted too much over opposition, or couldn’t decide on Libya’s intrinsic value and were not ready to make that decision in 2011.

      • Bob

        Globalism is just another term for the all out expansion of US economic hegemony – the strategic idea post Vietnam, was to lessen need for direct US military intervention and conquer by economic expansion/ interdependence. Result was mass of 1980-90’s US domestic deregulation aimed at allowing US corporations to move fluidly and international trade pacts to facilitate this.
        That theoretically diminished role of US military intervention hasn’t really worked out so well in last decades, with US forces currently operating in dozens of states. Meanwhile the globalization of US economy has turned out to have enormous consequences for US domestic economy. The upper sector of US wealth strata has done very well out of global expansion, as capital has trickled upwards/ shifted upward into hands of ever fewer in corporate sector, but the necessary consequence of this is the middle class has been reduced and stripped of real wealth in process and traditional working class jobs were simply mass exported outright to any number of tax exclusion work zones.
        The Trump electoral surprise is closely related to the latter, and is a form of actual front-line dissent to globalism from within sectors of US electorate and economy itself.

        • Arthur Smith

          It isn’t US hegemony. Tools don’t dominate.
          Election still can turn out as a distration and manipulation like with Obama.

          And please, don’t explain globalism to me, I don’t even care about it. It can’t be implemented here in Russia and it’s grasp on our government is almost gone. I’m worried about what comes next – The Transition Conflict. The one of Neolithic Revolution scale. You can bother with economy and politics as much as you like, but you will get caught in position of hunter that ignores farming. And farmers are going to burn your forest to get new fields.

          • Bob

            Interesting ideas and very nice metaphor in your last sentence. Not sure what mean by next transition conflict other than something very catastrophic or simply unknown? Assume we’ll disagree, but I think of Syria as a transition conflict (yes, in older sense). If indirect proxy war by NATO/GCC hadn’t been stopped and their gains reversed in 2016 by Russian intervention, then those mercenary foreign elements, paid and handled by various intelligence services, would have eventually been redirected into central Asia.

            Either north to edges of Russia or China – or east to edges of Iran – and used to foment violence and generate sectarian disruptions, that development was just matter of time. From Libya to Syria and onto to Caucasus was to be NATO’s ongoing indirect proxy war tactic – recycling same mercenaries and weapons. That specific NATO flow tactic has been halted for now by reinforcing and stabilization of Syrian government.

            But NATO’s overall strategy for middle east remains Balkanisation and most likely they will attempt to use same approach on either Iran or Russia in future in some guise, as being large, older, multi-ethnic and complex states, NATO strategists are convinced there are vulnerabilities there to be exploited. Interesting, be good.

          • Arthur Smith

            Okay, how about this: first christians were mostly jews, but didn’t care neither for Israel, nor for Roman Empire. They sacrificed themself without regret and bade their time untill both got destroyed.

            Same with this conflict. Globalism and it’s competitors don’t depend on states and economies to survive and thrive. While people like you will work to revert the regression, most of those forces will spend just a fraction of resources to make all you have done irrelevant.

            Yes, the conflict will be catastrophic, but not unknown, it just would take too long to explain and materials on topic that I could recommend are exclusively in russian and somewhat hardcore. The term for the catastrophe itself is “The Phase Transition (of Humanity)”. Yeah, people working on such stuff are mostly physicists/engineers. MIT have some similar developments, but they are limited due to transhumanist majority and cultural traits.

          • Nitin Sharma

            Please share, even if in russian

          • Arthur Smith

            What are you asking for, exactly?

          • Bob

            Thanks for response, will mull that over. I do grasp your basic point, that responding to current geopolitical events in traditional political science paradigm is often that, a response – be it toward NATO or whoever the driving actor is – and in effect behind the play. Catching up with, and identifying the agenda, and that is a basic drawback of the field. Though I would disagree it renders it obsolete. Sometimes you gotta play with the hand your holding! Will take look at some concepts you mention, but now realise you referring to paradigm shift into other very unfamiliar hard science disciplines. Be good.

          • Tudor Miron

            “Yes, the conflict will be catastrophic, but not unknown, it just would
            take too long to explain and materials on topic that I could recommend
            are exclusively in russian and somewhat hardcore. The term for the
            catastrophe itself is “The Phase Transition (of Humanity)”” (c) – I would like to see some of that material. Are you talking about KOB?

          • Arthur Smith

            Heh, no, no KOB, I considered it bullshit even before I got a chance
            to study it, adepts gave an impression. And then I learned about it’s
            origins from infamous “Kremlin insider”:
            https://youtu.be/q-kEkYY-Cxk?t=13s
            It’s
            possible for KOB to have similiar terms, since the one I used
            originates from Schedrovitskiy’s Moscow Methodology Club, but the ideas
            behind it are different. Anyway, I’d recommend “The mentality of
            foresight” classes at Skolkovo Innovation Center:
            magnet:?xt=urn:btih:1407D922A9864F9B0D8156823D338980B75A5437&tr=http%3A%2F%2Fbt3.t-ru.org%2Fann%3Fmagnet

          • Tudor Miron

            Many thanks for your prompt reply. Is that something related to Segey Pereslegin?
            Thanks for the link but it doesn’t work?

          • Arthur Smith

            Yeah, Pereslegin is the one giving most of those lectures.
            Did you try feeding torrent-client magnet link manually?
            Anyway, here’s the torrent itself:
            https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwsDi1t4HTF1TkxrUFdVVkRqS1k

          • Tudor Miron

            Thanks for the video.

          • Joseph Scott

            Correct. USA was actually purpose-built as a Masonic tool.

  • Attrition47

    “Otherwise the EU is risking a massive social explosion provoked by
    growing inter-ethnic and inter-religious conflict, and the constant
    perception of a growing terrorist threat.”

    This is coffee table analysis, the class conflict in its more brutal post 1970 form will dominate Europe, not spurious “crises”.

    • Arthur Smith

      >the class conflict
      Europe is post-industrial, there isn’t enough energy in people for that.

      • Attrition47

        Class existed before the industrial revolution and will continue to exist for as long as the state.

        • Arthur Smith

          That’s the point – states themself are obsolete, look at how easily globalism took over the world once USSR stopped blocking it. How fast the masks were thrown off and UN/EU administrations ceased functioning as intended. The western world is totalitarian for a long time and no class (there are few of them, no idea which one you refer to) has enough fire in itself to overpower the police state.

          • Attrition47

            No, like the former colonies in Asia and Africa, northern hemisphere states have changed their form. After 1918, the British world system limped on, shorn of its Eurasian hinterland and after 1991, the US inheritors of the British Empire Ltd resumed normal business. US capitalism doesn’t make states obsolete, it decapitates them, same as the Germans in East Europe in the 1940s.

          • Arthur Smith

            I didn’t say they were made such by US. Probably, The Internet did it.
            For all I know, they were already obsolete by the time of Jesus, humanity just didn’t press the advance.

    • SnowCatzor

      Their is no ‘class conflict’ in Europe anymore, class conflict is a hangover from the industrial revolution. The only real conflict now is Globalism vs Nationalism i.e. Anarchy vs Stability.

      • John Whitehot

        not at all. The conflict is between financial power vs. productive power (the people which work to produce goods and services). I see how younger people still can’t see things under the economical perspective and sincerely believe that it’s a matter of ideals, but I’m afraid it’s the same usual mistake that has been exploited for ages by the ruling class. Don’t doubt, the financial power will become “nationalist”, if it suits them, and all you folks believing in such ideas will instantly become willing puppets on the side of the elite. They know how to buy people, and it’s not necessarily with money they do that.

      • Attrition47

        Of course there is, just because one side capitulated it didn’t stop, it got worse, that’s why the working class is being criminalised and the state made immune to claims for redress.

      • Arthur Smith

        As long as you are reacting to just the issues at hand, you are being 2 steps behind the enemy – a crippling disadvantage. Reactions against globalistic plans in motion are accounted for from the beginning and you can’t do anything about it as long as you are using obsolete models whose simplicity doesn’t allow to develop adequate response.

    • Nigel Maund

      Agreed! The EU dream is over but the Bureaucrats are trying to move heaven and earth to prevent the worm infested rotten galleon from sinking. Napoleon tried this in 1805 – 1807 as did Hitler to a lesser degree during the war and all attempts have failed and will continue to fail as the cultural issues and trying to mesh together the widely differing economies is impossible. Now, with the NWO foisting uncontrolled immigration of massively different cultures and social backgrounds on the Europeans, including a large sprinkling of highly radicalised terrorists, the entire disastrous situation goes progressively from very bad to utterly impossible. The end to all this will very serious and Europe will be seriously damaged for a long time to come, maybe 50 years!

      • Arthur Smith

        Napoleon, Hitler – what a junk you guys make an example of just to avoid seeking help from the civilization being closest to european. It really hurts us, russians. We were tempted to leave you to your own suicidal devices since not just Napoleon, but teutonic crusade on us. Sure, go on, play haughty once more. We are kinda busy working on a model of future society without wasting time on ungrateful idiots.

      • Attrition47

        I doubt that the European boss class will give up, they want their billionaires’ masturbation club and won’t give up easily.

        Any takers for a bet on May sabotaging the Lexit commitment this March?

      • dutchnational

        A truism : under pressure everything becomes fluid.

        Expect surprises in the EU the coming years.

  • Marek Pejović

    In my opinion, a revised EU policy should also include:
    1. articulated demand for assimilation, in a sense of acceptance of people who do not share the willingness to integrate and rather, view this migration as a form of cultural/religious conquest. with masses of which at least a part is thinking like this, there can be no long-term stability.
    2. repatriation of a certain percentage of migrants, at least those who come from countries that aren’t plagues by outright war, as well as all those who outright refuse to assimilate.
    3. dealing with growing internal destabilization which saudi-funded wahabism supporting mosques in western countries spread.
    4. revised policy should deal (together with Trump administration and Russia and it’s block of middle-eastern allies) on simultaneously creating better socio-political conditions for large-scale repatriation of people. simply put, many of the countries that they come from (Lybia, Afghanistan) are failed states, which need to be restarted. otherwise, this measure will not yield any results and might serve to further aggravate the sentimens of the returnees, and theirp otential desire to take revenge against the west and resort to religious fundamentalism and terror attacks on european soil.

  • Rodney Loder

    Trump has thrown a platitude to Israel in exchange for reducing their Regional Ambitions, Palestine will “best” just sit it out, as jew projections in the ME are narrowed and then ended with a Palestine of Arab Unity.
    Damm as always only KSA and a few Littoral States stand in the way by promoting anarchy to protect their privlige.
    However I aim to redirect the Caliphate to sink their perversions, after all if you think the Caliphate is ended your living in lala land.
    Now I need drugs in a hurry this scene is blowing my mind, happy new year everybody.

  • JB
  • dutchnational

    A nice article, reflecting russian backed ideas and like.

    The reality is a bit different.

    Strategically, Russia is a large country with a large army and a rather small, shrinking population, a weak economy, an underdeveloped industry, an underdeveloped agriculture and a massive weapons industry. A large part of the highly educated part of Russian young are trying to, or already have, emigrate to the west, mainly the US.

    Brexit was a nasty shock for the EU, yes. The EU needed to be shook however and will become stronger for it. We will see how it works out but the remark about UK industry, shrinking for years, is way of the mark. The EU will take back a rather large part of the financial services in London, as far as it pertains the euro.

    East Asia is a potential mess and several countries are starting to expand military and cooperate against China, with the support of the US. Trump, see his remarks on China, is likely to support this.

    All in all, the coming years will be interesting.

    • Arthur Smith

      >small, shrinking population
      Somewhat right, but we are doing good enough after being decimated in WWII and losing Cold War. As soon as people get their spirits up and conceptual vacuum filled, population will recover.
      >a weak economy
      It isn’t economy per se we are having problem with, but finances. We are not allowed to use own currency as an investment tool since 90s.
      >an underdeveloped industry
      It’s developed alright, just butchered by “invertors” and “privatizers”. There are several websited, promoting our achievements in industry, technology, design, etc. Most famous is probably http://sdelanounas.ru/, “made domestically”. Also, Russia is controlling majority of nuclear fuel market, since our centrifuges are 2-3 times more energy efficient, while USA failed to develop their on 3 times. If this is not vanguard of industry, I don’t know what is.
      >an underdeveloped agriculture
      Well, maybe if you are a GMO-fan.
      http://journal-neo.org/author/william-engdahl/
      My favourite publicist on topic from Germany, check him out.
      >a massive weapons industry
      Well, I’m a pacifist, but if there are warmongers out there, why not earn a shinny penny providing defense for (potential?) victims?
      >Russian young are trying to, or already have, emigrate to the west
      Well, it’s complicated. First of all, our vanguard developers have much younger specialists than US. Next, people don’t necessary cease to be russian if they leave the country, but if they do (cease) – we don’t lose much. Finally, some fantastic things can’t be developed without a pool of kindred spirits left in Russia)

  • Hoang Duc

    Are you seeking for a loan for this 2017? Loan Of Success is the best
    company that can give a loan within 48hrs after application via email:
    loanofsucess@gmail.com at a low interest rate of 2% for all kind of loan