Conflict or compromise?

About that, that the United States may lose its role of economic, political and military hegemon, many analysts have warned since the middle of the last century. But that, how quickly China began to "step on the heels" of the United States, came as an unpleasant surprise for the American establishment. Attempts to maintain global leadership are common, what united, actually, and the Obama Democratic Administration, and Trump's Republican team. Obama was simply trying to put together an economic bloc of states in the Pacific region as a counterweight to China., and Trump acted with tough methods of direct government protectionism, wringing Beijing's hands with tariff increases and targeted sanctions. Hard to say, what would Obama have done with his project, if Trump hadn't buried him, but Trump's policy can be considered only partially successful. Yes, he forced the Chinese to soften the trade imbalance, forcing to take commitments to purchase American products. But this did not have a significant impact on the overall alignment.. The trends are still the same - China in the military, economic, technologically continues to develop at an alarming rate, and spends a quiet, but persistent foreign policy expansion, gaining a foothold not only in the Asia-Pacific region, but also in Africa, and even in Europe (Belarus).

In these conditions, the issue of maintaining the world hegemony of the United States continues to be extremely acute for the new Biden administration., although its severity may seem obscured by current domestic American problems. But the global theme of the confrontation with the "Red Dragon" will definitely return to the top of the foreign policy tasks of the new president.. Especially in light of the unprecedented experiment of the Chinese communists, which Western media describe as an electronic concentration camp. We are talking about the "Social Rating" system, designed to take absolute, total control of the population of the most populous country in the world.

What methods can be used to counter the multilateral Chinese threat?? The first, what comes to mind is a technological breakthrough. Really, America not only has its own excellent educational, scientific and technological base. With colossal financial capabilities and being a country, providing the highest comfort and certain civil liberties, it will remain an "intelligent vacuum cleaner" for the entire world scientific and technical community for a long time to come. There's no doubt, that the American scientific portfolio contains a huge number of breakthrough, revolutionary, technologies ahead of their time, who can be given the green light in terms of financing and state support. but, this way of making America great again has a couple of weaknesses. At first, scientific research and the organization of new industries require not only huge investments, but also time. But technical espionage is not. China, as everyone knows, the undisputed leader in the theft of American (and not only) technologies. And so far, the American authorities have not been able to shut up this desperately current "barrel" of scientific and industrial secrets.. Secondly, serious, an outstripping technological breakthrough will require radical robotization of production and transport infrastructure. And this, in its turn, will lead to a sharp surge in the already considerable unemployment. What to do with such a mass of unemployed, located, as recent riots have shown, under the destructive influence of radical leftist ideology, nobody knows yet. In China, this problem is easily solved by low wages and state control over the population.. And for stability, accustomed to a high level of consumption in a democratic country, this is a serious challenge.

Thus, Washington will not be able to retain its undisputed leadership by just one technological leap. What to do? There is only one answer - to look for strong allies in the international arena.. Allies, who are not satisfied with the growing role of the totalitarian communist empire. Allies, which, with all the differences in lifestyle and views on some internal and external problems, would be, Nevertheless, within the same paradigm. Paradigms of total rejection, some, almost physiological idiosyncrasy to the unlimited absolutism of the next incarnation of Qin Shi Huang at the current stage of scientific and technological progress. It would seem that, The United States already has such allies - this is Great Britain, European Union and Japan. but, the story of the tech espionage giant Huawei clearly demonstrated, to what extent representatives of European political elites are corrupted by Beijing. Japan is, staying, generally, loyal, too weak militarily, to exert any pressure on the PRC.

Only two major players remain in the global geopolitical confrontation, potential trump, or, if you like, baseball "bases", which with a smart approach, maybe Washington is India and Russia.

These two so different countries are united not only by the fear of the territorial expansion of a growing China., but also an openly dismissive attitude towards them on the part of the United States. Older boys from Washington DC are so used to unconditional domination on a global scale, that even seeing the approach of a Chinese bully with a bloody cleaver, keep trying to deal with potential allies, like cowboys with unbroken stallions. Complete disregard for the fact that Moscow and Delhi have their own national and regional interests, an attempt to roughly "push" its line exclusively by the whip method, lead to obvious results. Especially surprising is this truly donkey diplomatic idiocy towards Russia.. India, with all due respect, is not a high technology country. After years of hard work, its national military-industrial complex has not been able to create a successful tank., no competitive fighter even 4 generations. Russia is, in addition to owning the second nuclear arsenal in the world, developed the latest, unparalleled in the world, tank, fighter 5 generation and demonstrates tremendous success in the creation of hypersonic missiles, overtaking even the USA in this area.

So it is more profitable for Washington to have such a country in the strategic confrontation with China, like Russia, ally (partner, least), or enemy? See, how pompous idiots from the Clinton administration pushed Russia into the arms of China (SCO), realist and pragmatist Donald Trump tried to answer the question from the standpoint of elementary common sense. it, as we know, ended badly for him. And that, what has already been announced by Biden's new democratic team regarding Russia, there is a direct continuation of Clinton's idiocy. However, is it idiocy? One gets the feeling, that a corrupt "defeat party" has been formed among the American political elite. At one time, communist Vietnam inflicted a similar defeat on the United States not on the battlefield., and in the rear, forming a negative attitude towards the war with the help of loud leftist media. Now the new US vice president sympathizes with the views of manic communist killers – Trotsky and Mao. Is it possible that in the competition of civilizations, Chinese Mordor can celebrate victory?

 

0
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pathfinder
1 month ago

Russia – US ally in the confrontation with the PRC or enemy? Obviously situational, depending on the global and regional situation at a particular point in time. Pure pragmatism, supremacy of national political-military-economic interests. And this applies to all sides of the US-PRC-Russia triangle.

0
Caiman
1 month ago

There is one circumstance, preventing fusion in the ecstasy of Washington and Moscow. China – world factory for the production of everything and everyone. And the USA – their main market. What can the Russian Federation offer in this regard?? Degradation of production capacity and low labor productivity?

0
Pathfinder
1 month ago
Reply to  Caiman

eg, support the United States in confronting China

0
marko bolo
1 month ago

One “military” not included in the number of high-tech countries. New production is needed, high technologies are not like Skolkovo abstractions, but as real businesses. But in the context of traditional Russian state hypercentralization a la Nikolai the First, nothing of this will happen.

0
Pavel Murov
1 month ago
Reply to  marko bolo

Well, never economically support, and politically, morally, informational, in words, so to speak

0
Authorization
*
*
Registration
*
*
*
A password has not been entered
*
Password generation
5
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x