Page 1 of 2
America planning war drive against China
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 11:33
by Lord Beria3
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/08 ... s-a02.html
On July 10–11, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) held a two-day conference on the South China Sea, from which they published a 22-page report entitled “Recent Trends in the South China Sea and US Policy.”
The CSIS has played a key role in the Obama administration’s ‘pivot’ to Asia. Their concrete recommendations for the provocative escalation of the US military encirclement and diplomatic isolation of China have been consistently carried out. A report on US policy in the South China Sea from the CSIS should be regarded as having semi-official status.
The report opens with a contrived history of the events of the past year in the South China Sea, at every turn blaming escalating regional tensions on the aggressiveness and intransigence of Beijing. The truth is that the drive to war in the region has been pushed at every turn by Washington, with the CSIS playing a leading role.
In the past six months there have been repeated armed standoffs in the South China Sea between Beijing and both Manila and Hanoi. Manila has filed a legal case—drawn up by Washington—disputing China’s claims to the sea before the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). And Washington has signed a deal—the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA)—with Manila, allowing for the basing of unlimited numbers of US forces anywhere in the country.
In the new report, the CSIS is laying out an even more aggressive agenda for Washington, with two basic thrusts: establishing the legal pretext for rejecting Beijing’s claim to the South China Sea, and escalating the US military presence in the region.
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/07 ... s-j10.html
Two significant shifts in geopolitics emerged from Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to Australia this week and his address to its national parliament.
The first is the escalation of pressure against China and the implicit threat that the three major imperialist powers in the region, the US, Japan and Australia, will undertake military action against it, as part of US imperialism’s anti-China “pivot” to Asia.
The second, and no less important development—independent of the US pivot—is the re-emergence on the world arena of Japanese imperialism, following the Abe government’s decision earlier this month to “reinterpret” the country’s constitution to allow Japan to take part in joint military action with its designated allies.
George Bush once said that Iraq would be the 1st of the 21st century wars.
Its fairly obvious that the great powers of the world as engaging in a increasingly cut-throat 'cold war', eerily similar to the years before WW1, for global resources, markets and alliance systems.
Russia and China, despite tensions between these nuclear superpowers, are increasingly become closer as the United States, driven by a profound economic crisis, a plutocratic, authoritarian and massively unequal social crisis at home is driven to use militaristic means to maintain its dominance over the international system.
At the same time, a deeply divided EU, is being put under huge pressure by America and its wholly owns subsidiary the UK to isolate Russia, China (soon) and their allies in the Middle East. Germany, the de facto leader of the EU, is slowly but surely starting to carve out its own geopolitical agenda, with long-term consequences for the future of the EU.
Despite huge pressure from the US, the German ruling class are slowly moving into a alliance with Russia. Will the EU collapse under these internal contradictions? Who knows.
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 11:58
by vtsnowedin
The CSIS has played a key role in the Obama administration’s ‘pivot’ to Asia. Their concrete recommendations for the provocative escalation of the US military encirclement and diplomatic isolation of China have been consistently carried out. A report on US policy in the South China Sea from the CSIS should be regarded as having semi-official status.
Your WSWS places a lot more faith in the competence of the Obama administration, at actually having a plan ,evil or not, and carrying it out, then I do.
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 15:55
by another_exlurker
vtsnowedin wrote:Your WSWS places a lot more faith in the competence of the Obama administration, at actually having a plan ,evil or not, and carrying it out, then I do.
That's putting a lot of faith in the President (regardless of flavour) being the one who is in charge.
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 16:33
by vtsnowedin
another_exlurker wrote:vtsnowedin wrote:Your WSWS places a lot more faith in the competence of the Obama administration, at actually having a plan ,evil or not, and carrying it out, then I do.
That's putting a lot of faith in the President (regardless of flavour) being the one who is in charge.
Oh are you one of those that think there is someone in a tower on K street that actually makes all the decisions for the US toward their own malicious ends?
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 17:09
by clv101
vtsnowedin wrote:Your WSWS places a lot more faith in the competence of the Obama administration, at actually having a plan ,evil or not, and carrying it out, then I do.
I'm three quarters through
Command and Control. Fascinating read. One message I'm getting is that despite external appearances civilian politicians and military leaders really don't have a plan, or at least not one particularly well evidenced or thought through.
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 18:51
by another_exlurker
vtsnowedin wrote:another_exlurker wrote:vtsnowedin wrote:Your WSWS places a lot more faith in the competence of the Obama administration, at actually having a plan ,evil or not, and carrying it out, then I do.
That's putting a lot of faith in the President (regardless of flavour) being the one who is in charge.
Oh are you one of those that think there is someone in a tower on K street that actually makes all the decisions for the US toward their own malicious ends?
Nope.
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 19:09
by another_exlurker
clv101 wrote:vtsnowedin wrote:Your WSWS places a lot more faith in the competence of the Obama administration, at actually having a plan ,evil or not, and carrying it out, then I do.
I'm three quarters through
Command and Control. Fascinating read. One message I'm getting is that despite external appearances civilian politicians and military leaders really don't have a plan, or at least not one particularly well evidenced or thought through.
The plans never seem to take into consideration the most important question of all: "What happens if it doesn't work?"
Posted: 02 Aug 2014, 23:35
by biffvernon
clv101 wrote:One message I'm getting is that despite external appearances civilian politicians and military leaders really don't have a plan, or at least not one particularly well evidenced or thought through.
I think that has been the situation through much of human history. Stuff just happens.
Posted: 03 Aug 2014, 00:27
by Little John
vtsnowedin wrote:
The CSIS has played a key role in the Obama administration’s ‘pivot’ to Asia. Their concrete recommendations for the provocative escalation of the US military encirclement and diplomatic isolation of China have been consistently carried out. A report on US policy in the South China Sea from the CSIS should be regarded as having semi-official status.
Your WSWS places a lot more faith in the competence of the Obama administration, at actually having a plan ,evil or not, and carrying it out, then I do.
Nobody is suggesting they are competent. And nobody is suggesting that what they do is based on anything more than short term reactions to events within a framework of long term aims. However, what is clear is that those long term aims exist and they are more or less based on who is funding the political parties in power and have little to do with
real consultation of the people until and unless they have been appropriately culturally/politically conditioned to give the "correct" response beforehand.
Posted: 03 Aug 2014, 00:34
by vtsnowedin
Long term aims for the rich and powerful are little different then for the poor and middle class. Sure they want to be on the top of the heap, but they want that heap to be a pile of economic treasure not a pile of ashes.
Posted: 03 Aug 2014, 03:36
by Little John
vtsnowedin wrote:Long term aims for the rich and powerful are little different then for the poor and middle class. Sure they want to be on the top of the heap, but they want that heap to be a pile of economic treasure not a pile of ashes.
So, in the space of two nearly consecutive posts, you've argued that the rich and powerful are too incompetent to formulate any kind of a plan and yet are competent enough to consider the long term implications of their actions. So, which is it, incompetent or competent?
You really do display the mindset of a compliant Uncle Tom slave who has been conditioned to justify and excuse his masters at all costs. It's pathetic to behold.
Posted: 03 Aug 2014, 17:34
by vtsnowedin
stevecook172001 wrote:So, in the space of two nearly consecutive posts, you've argued that the rich and powerful are too incompetent to formulate any kind of a plan and yet are competent enough to consider the long term implications of their actions. So, which is it, incompetent or competent?
The Obama administration is not the sum total of the rich and powerful so to point out Obama's incompetence does not indite the entire group.
You on the other hand assert that the rich and powerful are both evil in their plans for the masses and incompetent. Why not have faith in their incompetence and look to a prosperous and fair future after their ill laid plans fail?
Posted: 03 Aug 2014, 17:56
by Little John
vtsnowedin wrote:stevecook172001 wrote:So, in the space of two nearly consecutive posts, you've argued that the rich and powerful are too incompetent to formulate any kind of a plan and yet are competent enough to consider the long term implications of their actions. So, which is it, incompetent or competent?
The Obama administration is not the sum total of the rich and powerful so to point out Obama's incompetence does not indite the entire group.
You on the other hand assert that the rich and powerful are both evil in their plans for the masses and incompetent. Why not have faith in their incompetence and look to a prosperous and fair future after their ill laid plans fail?
Obama is just the latest face to be put in front of the masses. His only relevance is as a mouthpiece just like any of the other faces that have been before.
Posted: 03 Aug 2014, 18:26
by vtsnowedin
stevecook172001 wrote:Obama is just the latest face to be put in front of the masses. His only relevance is as a mouthpiece just like any of the other faces that have been before.
He is hardly irrelevant. The incompetence of his administration will take years to rectify. No master behind the curtain would have him blunder as he has.
Posted: 03 Aug 2014, 18:31
by clv101
This really isn't about Obama! Or any president. They just aren't anywhere near as influential and they and the media would have us believe. Anyone who still thinks there's a significant difference between Democrats and Republicans or Labour and Conservatives in the UK really hasn't been paying attention for the last few decades... or has only been paying attention to what our politicians want us to.