0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
822 $

Towards a US-China War? The Creation of a Global Totalitarian System, A “One World Government”?

Support SouthFront

Towards a US-China War? The Creation of a Global Totalitarian System, A “One World Government”?

China’s first domestically developed aircraft carrier, via Reuters.

Written by F. William Engdahl; Originally appeared at Global Research

If we step back from the details of daily headlines around the world and try to make sense of larger patterns, the dominant dynamic defining world geopolitics in the past three years or more is the appearance of a genuine irregular conflict between the two most formidable powers on the planet—The Peoples’ Republic of China and the United States of America. Increasingly it’s beginning to look as if some very dark global networks are orchestrating what looks to be an updated rerun of their 1939-1945 World War.   The powers that be periodically use war to gain major policy shifts.

On behalf of the Powers That Be (PTB), World War II was orchestrated by the circles of the City of London and of Wall Street to maneuver two great obstacles—Russia and Germany—to wage a war to the death against each other, in order that those Anglo-Saxon PTB could reorganize the world geopolitical chess board to their advantage. It largely succeeded, but for the small detail that after 1945, Wall Street and the Rockefeller brothers were determined that England play the junior partner to Washington. London and Washington then entered the period of their global domination known as the Cold War.

That Anglo-American global condominium ended, by design, in 1989 with the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union by 1991.

Around this time, with the onset of the Bill Clinton presidency in 1992, the next phase– financial and industrial globalization– was inaugurated. With that, began the hollowing out of the industrial base of not only the United States, but also of Germany and the EU. The cheap labor outsourcing enabled by the new WTO drove wages down and destroyed one industry after the next in the industrial West after the 1990s. It was a necessary step on the path to what G.H.W. Bush in 1990 called the New World Order. The next step would be destruction of national sovereignty everywhere. Here the USA was the major obstacle.

A little help from our friends…”

For the PTB, who owe no allegiance to nations, only to their power which is across borders, the birth of the World Trade Organization and their bringing China in as a full member in 2001 was intended as the key next step. At that point the PTB facilitated in China the greatest industrial growth by any nation in history, possibly excepting Germany from 1871-1914 and USA after 1866. WTO membership allowed Western multinationals from Apple to Nike to KFC to Ford and VW to pour billions into China to make their products at dirt-cheap wage levels for re-export to the West.

One of the great mysteries of that China growth is the fact that China was allowed to become the “workshop of the world” after 2001, first in lower-skill industries such as textiles or toys, later in pharmaceuticals and most recently in electronics assembly and production. The mystery clears up when we look at the idea that the PTB and their financial houses, using China, want to weaken strong industrial powers, especially the United States, to push their global agenda. Brzezinski often wrote that the nation state was to be eliminated, as did his patron, David Rockefeller. By allowing China to become a rival to Washington in economy and increasingly in technology, they created the means to destroy the superpower hegemony of the US.

By the onset of the Presidency of Xi Jinping in 2012, China was an economic colossus second in weight only to the United States. Clearly this could never have happened–not under the eye of the same Anglo-American old families who launched the Opium Wars after 1840 to bring China to heel and open their economy to Western financial looting–unless the Anglo-Americans had wanted it.

The same British-owned bank involved in the China opium trade, Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank (HSBC), founded by a Scotsman, Thomas Sutherland in 1865 in the then-British colony of Hong Kong, today is the largest non-Chinese bank in Hong Kong. HSBC has become so well-connected to China in recent years that it has since 2011 had as Board member and Deputy HSBC Chairman, Laura Cha. Cha was formerly Vice Chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, being the first person outside mainland China to join the Beijing Central Government of the People’s Republic of China at vice-ministerial rank. In other words the largest bank in the UK has a board member who was a member of the Chinese Communist Party and a China government official. China needed access to Western money and HSBC and other select banks such as JP MorganChase, Barclays, Goldman Sachs were clearly more than happy to assist.

Socialism with Xi Jinping Characteristics…”

All told until 2012 when Xi took charge of the CCP in Beijing, China seemed to be willing to be a globalist “team player,” though with “Chinese characteristics.” However, in 2015 after little more than two years in office, Xi Jinping endorsed a comprehensive national industrial strategy, Made in China: 2025. China 2025 replaced an earlier Western globalist document that had been formulated with the World Bank and the USA, the China 2030 report under Robert Zoellick. That shift to a China strategy for global tech domination might well have triggered a decision by the globalist PTB that China could no longer be relied on to play by the rules of the globalists, but rather that the CCP under Xi were determined to make China the global leader in advanced industrial, AI and bio-technologies. A resurgent China nationalist global hegemony was not the idea of the New World Order gang.

China:2025 combined with Xi’s strong advocacy of the Belt Road Initiative for global infrastructure linking China by land and sea to all Eurasia and beyond, likely suggested to the globalists that the only solution to the prospect of their losing their power to a China global hegemon would ultimately be war, a war that would destroy both nationalist powers, USA AND China. This is my conclusion and there is much to suggest this is now taking place.

Tit for Tat

If so, it will most likely be far different from the military contest of World War II. The USA and most of the Western industrial economies have “conveniently” imposed the worst economic depression since the 1930’s as a bizarre response to an alleged virus originating in Wuhan and spreading to the world. Despite the fact that the death toll, even with vastly inflated statistics, is at the level of a severe annual influenza, the insistence of politicians and the corrupt WHO to impose draconian lockdown and economic disruption has crippled the remaining industrial base in the US and most of the EU.

The eruption of well-organized riots and vandalism under the banner of racial protests across the USA has brought America’s cities to a state in many cases of war zones resembling the cities of the 2013 Matt Damon and Jodie Foster film, Elysium. In this context, anti-Washington rhetoric from Beijing has taken on a sharp tone in their use of so-called “Wolf Diplomacy.”

Now after Washington closed the China Consulate in Houston and China the US Consulate in Chengdu, both sides have stepped up rhetoric. High tech companies are being banned in the US, military displays of force from the US in the South China Sea and waters near Taiwan are increasing tensions and rhetoric on both sides. The White House accuses the WHO of being an agent of Beijing, while China accuses the US of deliberately creating a deadly virus and bringing it to Wuhan. Chinese state media supports the explosion of violent protests across America under the banner of Black Lives Matter. Step-wise events are escalating dramatically. Many of the US self-styled Marxists leading the protests across US cities have ties to Beijing such as the Maoist-origin Revolutionary Communist Party, USA of Bob Avakian.

Unrestricted Warfare”

Under these conditions, what kind of escalation is likely? In 1999 two colonels in the China PLA, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, published a book with the PLA Press titled Unrestricted Warfare. Qiao Liang was promoted to Major General in the PLA Air Force and became deputy secretary-general of the Council for National Security Policy Studies. The two updated their work in 2016. It gives a window on high-level China military strategy.

Reviewing published US military doctrine in the aftermath of the 1991 US Operation Desert Storm war against Iraq, the Chinese authors point out what they see as US over-dependence on brute military force and conventional military doctrine. They claim, “Observing, considering, and resolving problems from the point of view of technology is typical American thinking. Its advantages and disadvantages are both very apparent, just like the characters of Americans.” They add, “military threats are already often no longer the major factors affecting national security…these traditional factors are increasingly becoming more intertwined with grabbing resources, contending for markets, controlling capital, trade sanctions, and other economic factors, to the extent that they are even becoming secondary to these factors. They comprise a new pattern which threatens the political, economic and military security of a nation or nations The two authors define the new form of warfare as, “encompassing the political, economic, diplomatic, cultural, and psychological spheres, in addition to the land, sea, air, space, and electronics spheres.”

They suggest China could use hacking into websites, targeting financial institutions, terrorism, using the media, and conducting urban warfare among the methods proposed. Recent revelations that Chinese entities pay millions in ad revenues to the New York Times and other mainstream USA media to voice China-positive views is one example. Similarly, maneuvering a Chinese national to head the US’ largest public pension fund, CalPERS, which poured billions into risky China stocks, or persuading the New York Stock Exchange to list dozens of China companies without requiring adherence to US accounting transparency increase US financial vulnerability are others.

This all suggests the form that a war between China and the US could take. It can be termed asymmetrical warfare or unrestricted war, where nothing that disrupts the enemy is off limits. Qiao has that, “the first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, with nothing forbidden.” There are no Geneva Conventions.

The two Beijing authors add this irregular warfare could include assaults on the political security, economic security, cultural security, and information security of the nation. The dependence of the US economy on China supply chains for everything from basic antibiotics to militarily-vital rare earth minerals is but one domain of vulnerability.

On its side, China is vulnerable to trade sanctions, financial disruption, bioterror attacks and oil embargoes to name a few. Some have suggested the recent locust plague and African Swine Fever devastation to China’s core food supplies, was not merely an act of nature. If not, then we are likely deep into an undeclared form of US-China unrestricted warfare. Could it be that the recent extreme floods along the China Yangtze River that threaten the giant Three Gorges Dam and have flooded Wuhan and other major China cities and devastated millions of acres of key cropland was not entirely seasonal?

A full unrestricted war of China and the USA would be more than a tragedy. It could be the end of civilization as we know it. Is this what characters such as Bill Gates and his superiors are trying to bring about? Do they plan to introduce their draconian dystopian “Reset” on the ashes of such a conflict?

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Support SouthFront


Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Good read, thanks. This is why the issue of tech transfers is so important. Nations like Iran or Venezuela have way more than natural resources enough to pay China/Russia for tech transfers to develop their own military and industries rather than just being vulnerable oil exporters subject to sanctions and naval blockades. Turks are on the loop taking advantage of being NATO’s Achilles heel to get Russian military tech coming in.

But tech transfers goes against global Ziocorproate terrorist policy of pseudoliberal domination, that necessitates military superiority for the likes of filth like ISISrael which gets all the tech for free plus lotsa taxpayer aid$, or the Pentagon’s and British MIC’s best buyer Ziodi Wahhabia. China and Russia only reinforce the global Zioterrorists’ position by insisting on “partnership and bu$iness” with them, giving them a wide range of operation to influence any “multipolarity” outcome and staging global wars.

Lazy Gamer

China should reserve a few missiles to the PTB. lol If the world is going to reset might as well take out the string pullers who set them against each other so that the world gets a true reset.

johnny rotten

Maybe the Chinese got there late, these types of conflicts have been used by Anglo-Zionists for hundreds of years, remember the smallpox-infected blankets, the famines in India, the artfully cut confines in the Middle East to maintain perennial conflict, the real novelty is that before they hid behind the nation states while now they consider themselves to be of a higher measure, so they intend to use the same states where they thrived and became the power they are today to declare war on all humanity, assuming they no longer have need so many useless eaters, their first victims are the very bodies where they developed and how the butterfly destroys the cocoon that has become useless, this should be the first lesson for the west to learn before it is devoured, but it is possible that it is already too late.

peter mcloughlin

“A full unrestricted war of China and the USA would be more than a tragedy. It could be the end of civilization as we know it.” Since the dawn of the atomic age it has become impossible (or at least too dangerous) to fight world war. The superpowers knew that in the Cold War, and avoided nuclear annihilation. Those who are in this struggle for global hegemony today are leading us to destruction. They have forgotten the warnings of history. https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/


the more than dumb government in washington has forgotten what it’s supposed to be all about – the well being of its citizens combined with a measured and benign foreign policy. now it’s all about the standing of the country based on strength and arms and violence as directed by the jews, embedded/entrenched within the country and the jews illegally occupying palestine. they’re bound to come second and will turn into another zimbabwe with little or no hope of having a useful future, as long as the jews and the mic and wall street is allowed to orchestrate the future of the american people. the signs of the downfall are visible for anyone sufficiently interested in the future of the american fascist republic.

Trap Is Not Gay

The Jew’s game is very delusional.

Traiano Welcome

The Jews themselves are controlled by old anglo saxon families of England.

Zionism and israel was created entirely by the British for the purpose of controlling the middle east.

After zionism has been destroyed a second war will need to be waged against the anglo saxon cabal that operates beyond law in the City of London.

Trap Is Not Gay


Traiano Welcome

Time to build our bunkers …

S Melanson

I really liked this article and hope to see more. A reset on the ashes sounds about right. USA and China are fading and rising hegemonic powers. A war between the two take care of a few globalist problems – 1) prevent global hegemony by any single nation, 2) depopulation 3) shocks to the system upend established institutions so can be remolded to ones desire

Tommy Jensen

Nuclear war is not a problem. If that is what it takes and we can dream it, America can and will do it. No one is gonna decide what we must do or not do!! No one!

cechas vodobenikov

u r slave robots as Fromm observed—so submissive u sheep do anything you r told to do by your police state govt

Albert Pike

Some people are not sure that America can, and they project something different:

‘USA Now: World FiguresPopulation 327 million 7,385 million Surface 9.6 million sq. km. 133 million sq. km.Density 33 inhabitants / sq. km. 55 inhabitants / sq. km.Real GDP $19 trillion $125 trillionGDP $19 trillion $79 trillionPower Purchase Parity $59,500 $16,976Budget $6.3 trillion $26 trillion Defense Budget $637 billion $1.7 trillionExports $1.6 trillion $17 trillionImports $2.4 trillion $16 trillion

Forecast 2025 Population 100 million 6,870 millionReal GDP $1.6 trillion $80 trillionPower Purchase Parity $16,374 $11,634Defense Budget $32 billion $1.2 trillion’ https://www.deagel.com/country/United%20States%20of%20America

So they think United States will lose 227 Million people till 2025. Wonder how that could possibly happen – BLM ?

cechas vodobenikov

amerikan oligarchs will never challenge China directly—they do zero about Chinese bases in the Spratley’s Paracels—their impotent suctions merely destroy the own economy—everything in USA is manufactured in civilized nations, intentionally created to fail so the sheep can “keep up with the Jones”—amerikans r so stupefied, shallow and primitive that they believe their 3 chord manure is art

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x