Obama’s changes may have to wait

FULL ARTICLE HERE

Barack Obama ran on a platform of change, and it has come swiftly after his inauguration. The U.S. population is so excited about Obama taking office that they are forgetting that he is a politician and that his way to the White House was not all that clean.

He has come from Illinois – the most corrupt state in America. In just four years he has risen to be the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth, a journey that has taken many before him far longer to achieve.

Nevertheless, Obama has been inaugurated to the office of the President of the United States, and now the American nation will look at everything he does, for he has promised a lot. Primarily – change. Most likely the bulk of Obama’s first 100 days will be focused on showing Americans that he is really going to present them with the things he promised. Nevertheless, most of it will probably be all talk, for sudden change is never good and he will create many enemies even among those that have supported him throughout his campaign.

Still bringing up McCain

Obama ran against John McCain. Both men obviously did not like each other. One look at any of the debates between the two and especially McCain’s rallies show that the two were complete opposites. Yet, on the eve of the inauguration Obama and McCain stood together at a dinner promoting bipartisanship. Obama openly praised McCain for his efforts and praised him for being a worthy adversary in the race to the White House.

It is nothing but talk, however. Obama does not need McCain in his political life. The 2008 election has created such a big divide between the McCain and Obama supporters that the new President simply needs to make the Republican Party supporters feel that he is working in their favor as well. By praising McCain’s efforts and by acknowledging that McCain was motivated by “a pure and deeply felt love for his country” he has established himself as a President that will bring about more bipartisanship, or at least attempt to do it. Obama knows that most of the nation is behind him, he simply needs to keep up with his image that he created during his campaign. People expect him to be a leader that does something great, and most people appreciate that he has acknowledged his former opponent. President Obama is simply giving people what they want at the moment, and that is to feel that he represents every single person living in the U.S.

Distancing Himself from Bush

George W. Bush may well be the most disliked President in the history of the United States. War in Iraq and Afghanistan, a huge budget deficit, huge private profits for him and his close friends, and deregulation that ended his presidency with a financial crisis of epic proportions.

Barack Obama spent a lot of time preparing to take office. Some even say that he may have been preparing his inauguration speech and his cabinet way before he actually won the election. Regardless of what may be said or what theories may circulate, the White House web-page was changed a few hours following Obama’s inaugural address to the American people. It takes longer than a few hours to create such a functional and well-designed web-page.

Clearly the website is intended to be a first-hand news agency covering the events and daily operations of the President. Obama’s campaign focused on bringing the simpler…FULL ARTICLE HERE

Washington’s Ambitions in Crimea

FULL ARTICLE AT RUSSIATODAY.COM

Crimea is the current target of Washington’s campaign in Ukraine. Overall, the United States is after lucrative business opportunities in Ukraine, aside from becoming a bigger thorn in Russia’s side. A recent announcement by the U.S. Department of State stating that U.S. may open a diplomatic post in Simferopol in Crimea is another step toward escalation of tensions between Washington and Moscow over Ukraine.
 
Washington’s goals are fairly simple – business opportunities galore coupled with putting more pressure on Russia. Most importantly, if U.S. influence in Ukraine grows, it will be able to keep Russian gas companies in check by becoming the direct negotiator representing Ukraine on the issues regarding gas. In addition, it will be able to play its role in the politics of Europe regarding gas, thus increasing pressure on Russia.

Ukraine’s president is already a Washington supporter. Yushchenko’s …FULL ARTICLE AT RUSSIATODAY.COM

Energy Wars: Diversify or Die

FULL ARTICLE HERE on Russia Today.

It would be very naïve to think that oil producing countries would all come together during the financial crisis in order to adjust prices to suit all the parties involved. Even more naïve would be to think that Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Iran and other oil economies are good friends. Well, Russia, Iran, and Venezuela are definitely closer than, for example, Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Nevertheless, competition drives prices lower and also takes away market share from other competitors in a given industry. According to the New York Times, Iran and Venezuela both need US $95/barrel in order to maintain balanced budgets. Russia’s ideal oil price is US $70/barrel. Saudi Arabia needs a price of US $55/barrel in order to meet … FULL ARTICLE HERE

NATO membership: Bush’s goodbye gift to Ukraine?

The US suggestion that Kiev could bypass NATO’S membership rules and join the alliance anyway has shocked the world’s diplomatic community. Freelance writer Alexey Sazonov reports for RT on what’s behind the surprise move.

On December 1, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Ukraine and Georgia will eventually join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, but they have a “long road” ahead to meet the entry criteria.

The Bush administration has begun the final push to accomplish one of its most important goals in Europe, that of encircling Russia with NATO countries. According to the New York Times, “the United States has started an unexpected diplomatic initiative in Europe, urging NATO allies to offer … Ukraine membership in the alliance without going through a lengthy process and fulfilling a long list of requirements.” Now, the question is whether it would make sense for NATO to take such an action, and would this produce a split in NATO.

Any measure to bypass the requirements through which all NATO countries had to go may cause an outrage in the ranks of the organisation as well as set a dangerous precedent.

NATO unity

The purpose of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is not to create a coalition and to wage war, but rather to avoid it. Condoleezza Rice’s proposal to accept Ukraine in NATO’s ranks seems to be putting the organization’s unity and the security of its members at risk. Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treat Organization signed in Washington D.C. in 1949 states the following on enlargement of the organisation: ”The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European state in a position to further the principles of this treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this treaty. (…)“

Ukraine’s involvement in the war in Georgia in August of 2008 has not helped Ukraine’s chances of getting the approval of top ranking European members of NATO. European nations, although condemning Russia’s actions, have stayed away from committing their forces to the conflict, and would like to avoid doing so if possible. In addition, Kiev’s outcry about a possible Russian attack on Crimea has made some members scratch their heads and ask themselves whether they really want to put themselves at risk of an open conflict with Russia.

Unlike the Western European nations, the Baltic States, along with Poland and the Czech Republic have expressed support for Washington’s…

FULL ARTICLE

America Owns Georgia

Full article can be viewed on RussiaToday site and I would appreciate any comments to be made on this page.

Washington is holding on to everything it has in Georgia, and for a reason. It needs a platform of allies surrounding Russia, which is nothing new. In addition, the fact that has purposefully been overlooked in the mainstream media is that the U.S. is more interested in the economy of Georgia, which will ensure their alliance. The system that America uses to keep hold of Georgia and its President is an elaborate scheme that will ensure political cooperation of Georgia and big profits for U.S. companies.

Making the Rich Even Richer

United States’ “private” companies have long been working in favor of their government abroad. Their actions are commendable as they show patriotism and a belief in both the capitalist system and the American way of life. Nevertheless, working in favor of your country, more often than not, means making citizens of a country worse off than before the investments came into that country’s economy.

The system is fairly simple – bring in U.S. companies to build up energy production, infrastructure, and re-arm the military. The financing of the projects is done through loans made to Tbilisi by the World Bank or similar financial institutions. The loans are given in such large amounts that Georgia will most likely default in the near future. Defaulting will in turn mean that the U.S. will have a firm hold on Georgia’s politics and its system of government as a whole.

The projects that the loans will be issued for will make the rich that own the power plants, dams, and other industrial investments richer. These are the same individuals that sit in the Georgian parliament and run the country. The people, on the other hand, whose land is used for the projects and whose labor is used to make the whole industry work, will be getting a below-acceptable wage and most will likely be out of work as a whole.

Reports indicate that in Georgia’s capital, Tbilisi, the unemployment rate is close to 30%. In 1991, after gaining independence, Georgia reported a 17% unemployment rate. Today, although Georgia reports economic growth and higher per-capita income, people are actually worse off now than before America took an interest in the small Caucasus nation.

It is true that Georgia is growing economically, producing more power, and that more industries are working. However, most of the income earned from the industries goes to paying off the huge loans taken out for the projects. In addition, the wealth of the rich has grown, which produces a higher statistic for the country’s economy. It’s a case of simple math – the more overall wealth divided by the approximately the same number of people in the country produces a higher per-capita statistic.

Georgia Owes America

The people in the Georgian government owe their increase in wealth completely to America. If the U.S. had not offered to help build up the country and lend them the money, Georgia would’ve been struggling just as much today as it had in the 1990s. What does this mean for Washington? It means that they can utilize Georgia’s military, UN votes, WTO membership, and many other tools of politics in their favor.

Tbilisi owes Washington for setting up the Rose Revolution. It is a simple fact that no one in Georgia had the money to set up such a well-funded and well organized action. Not too surprising that in 1999, Georgia’s GDP grew at 3%. The following year, with the introduction of new investors from the West, their GDP grew at 2%, 4.5%, and 5% in 2000, 2001, and 2002 respectively. Right after the Rose Revolution, the GDP growth nearly doubled in 2003 to 8.3%.

In addition to investing in the Georgian political and economic welfare, America and a row of its allies invested heavily in rearming the Georgian military. It was a necessary measure in ensuring that the Georgian army is under their control. If Georgia would side with Russia once again, the project of reequipping the military again would be a costly affair. It is a headache which Tbilisi is not willing to go through again in the near future.

What’s Going to Happen Next?

America has a firm hold on Georgia. Tbilisi is bound by the “friendly” gesture of the Western states to be their allies and to side with America on its foreign policy. Georgia has already become a firm base for the American military. In case of an armed conflict with Russia, Georgia will provide a buffer zone that will be able to hold out for the necessary time needed to bring U.S. troops to the region.

Economically, it benefits the U.S. industries and the few that hold the wealth of Georgia. The U.S. and European companies reap good profits off the projects in the region. On the flip side, the Georgian elite get their share of income that keeps them out of meddling with U.S. interests. The platform has been prepared in case of a potential threat from the Russian Bear.

Financing the Georgian Army – Foreign Investment Galore

Following the annihilation of the Georgian Army during the South Ossetian War, NATO and other allies of Georgia have promised Georgia to help rebuild its full military potential. Having Western say in the Caucasus region seems to be the priority of the Western world.

Captured Georgian Military Equipment

The Russian military officials have reported that they captured around 150 military units, 65 of them are tanks. 44 tanks have been brought back to Russia, the rest were destroyed because they were either unfit for use or of old modifications. Georgian Armed Forces had 230-240 tanks in use before the conflict was started. Most of those tanks were modified by an Israeli firm Elbit Systems into T-72-SIM-1. During the fighting, the Russian troops also captured 5 anti-aircraft missile systems 9K33 “Osa”, 15 BMP-2, numerous 122-mm towed howitzers D-30, American armored personnel carriers, HUMVEE’s, and artillery systems of Czech design. According to Lieutenant-General Golovchenko of the North Caucasus Military District, one of the captured anti-aircraft systems registered 3 launches.

Military Bases in Gori, Senaki, and Poti

The West has condemned the Russian military for moving into Georgian territory, primarily into the port of Poti and towns of Senaki and Gori. the Georgian military completely abandoned their military bases in all of those cities. Saakashvili raised panic and evacuated civilians out of those areas, saying that the Russian and Ossetian forces will kill the civilians as a form of revenge for what the Georgian military has done to Tskhinval (Tskhinvali with an “i” at the end is a Georgian renamed city. After Medvedev declared the republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia independent, the “i” was dropped, to return the city its rightful ancient name”).

The goal of the Russian military operation was not to destroy the Georgian economy, which was not good before the war already. The goal was to demilitarize the Georgian Army and to thwart Georgian military potential in the region. A lot of the captured military equipment the Russians took from Gori. 15 T-72-SIM-1 tanks, dozens of armored fighting vehicles, and artillery systems along with their ammo were captured. Part of the arsenal found in Gori was destroyed, part was taken to Russia. The explosions that the Saakashvili said were Russian bombings of Gori were actually Russian engineers destroying Georgian military equipment.

From the military bases in Senaki, Russian troops captured 1728 assault weapons. 764 American M4 carbines, 28 M-40 machine guns, and 754 various modifications of the AK. Western Media sources also say that Russian military has also captured 15 Georgian vessels, among them torpedo boats.

According to the representative of the Russian Peacekeeping Force in the Caucasus, there was enough high-caliber ammunition in Senaki to level all of Caucasus. On the base at Senaki, for the time of the conflict, the Georgian 2nd Infantry Brigade was stationed. Georgian forces left Senaki after the Russian Air Force carried out air strikes against the air field by the base.

Anatoliy Nagovitsin, the commanding General of the Russian Forces in the conflict said that 4000 assault weapons were captured, that’s not counting the ones destroyed and other military equipment captured. The American and Georgian governments have requested Russia to return the captured weapons. The Russian officials have said that they have no intent on returning the weapons, as they are captured during military operations.

Foreign Investment in the Georgian Military

According to the official statement presented by Lieutenant-General Golovchenko, there is written documentation captured by the Russian Forces that the tanks of the 1st Georgian Infantry Brigade (played biggest part in the storming of Tskhinval) underwent partial modifications in 2002 and complete modernizations in 2007 in Lvov and and other cities in Ukraine. Same thing with the BMP-2’s.

From official statements and reports to the U.N. from Ukraine, since 1999 Kiev has delivered 150 units of heavy tanks and equipment of Georgia. In the first report in 1999, among 11 other nations, Georgia was also listed as a buyer of a Rocket-Cruiser “Konotop” from Ukraine. Then, there was a four year gap in military eqiupment sales from Ukraine to Georgia. In 2004, Georgia received 6 self-propelled howitzers 2S3 “Akatsiya”. In 2005, after Yuschenko came to power and board of directors of UkrSpetsExport changed(responsible for Ukrainian weapons export), military equipment sales from Ukraine to Georgia increased dramatically. In 2005 alone, Georgia bought 15 T-72 MBTs, 12 BMP-2s, 10 BTR-80 APCs, 6 self-propelled howitzers 2S3s, 6 MI-24 “Hind” attack helicopters, and 2 MI-8 transport helicopters. In 2006 no sales were made from Ukraine to Georgia. However, Georgia still received 2 air-radar vehicles 36D6-M to control the air space around Tbilisi.

In 2007, Georgia Ukraine sold 74 T-72 MBTs, 6 BTS-5B heavy armored tracked towing vehicles, 2 self-propelled howitzers 2S7 “Pion”, 8 training aircraft L-39 (can be fitted to serve as regualr ground-attack planes). Ina Georgian official statement to the U.N., it says that it bought 5 units of the self-propelled howitzers 2S7 “Pion”, not 2, like Ukraine states.  Also, according to the Georgian version of the document, they also acquired one Anti-Air Mobile System “Buk” and 48 Anti-Tank Guided Missiles “Kombat”. Also in 2007 Tbilisi said that it bought assault weapons from Ukraine.

Looking at this statistic, how Georgia financed all of this. Georgian GDP for 2003 was 3.91 billion dollars. It’s external debt being 1.8 billion, or 40% of its GDP. Per capita income averages $700 per year. So how can Georgia buy these weapons? Simple – financial help from the West.

The biggest contributor to Georgia’s military build up was the United States. During the period of 2004 – 2007, Washington officially gave Tbilisi nearly $600 million dollars. In addition to this, Tbilisi made a special fund in 2004, that accepted donations to develop its national armed forces. Donations can be made in full anonymity from private and government organizations, as well as NGO’s and non-profit organization.

The German Controversy

Recently, the German news channel ARD released a statement saying that Georgian soldiers were photographed and noted as using the German G36 assault rifle. Western reporters were actually the ones that took pictures of the Georgian Special Forces holding G36 rifles, made by the German weapons company Heckler und Koch. The director of the informational bureau in Freiburg – Jurgen Gresslin – stated that he had no doubt that the rifles in the pictures were the H&K G36 with the shortened barrel for the special forces.

The German Minister of Economics denied Germany selling the weapons to the Georgians, as special documentation that is required for export is not on file and never has been filed. No permission has been given to Heckler und Koch to sell the guns to Tbilisi. Channel ARD, quoting the British Jane’s Defence Weekly, Heckler und Koch directed a request to the German government for sale of 230 G36 rifles to Georgia (200 of them shortened special forces versions, and 30 compact-assault versions). However, H&K’s request was denied. Although no permission was given, because it violates the German policy of not selling weapons to countries involved in territorial conflict, the G36 rifles appeared on the battlefield in South Ossetia. H&K could’ve as easily sold the weapons to a third country, who could in turn sell the weapons to Georgia.

Most Recent Confrontation

On the 19th of August, an incident took place that undermined Washington’s statements that it was delivering humanitarian help to the people of Georgia. In the Georgian town of Poti, Russian troops arrested 22 Georgian uniformed men. After interrogation, the men said that they were supposed to receive humanitarian help from the U.S. ships. As it turns out, their packages included assault weapons, rocket launchers, and plastic explosives. The Georgian soldiers were driving nearly brand new HUMVEE’s, whose odometer showed not even 400 miles. On the windows of the vehicles there were still stickers with “U.S. Property” printed on them. This incident sparked the Pentagon’s official request made by Brian Wittman to the Russian government to return “US property” to the rightful owners.

Elections ‘08, Economics, and Recent Events in the Caucasus

Win-Win for the GOP

United States in general had a win-win situation in Georgia. If Russia took no action, or anything short of intervening in force in South Ossetia, the republican party was going to take credit for putting Saakashvili in power, promoting democracy that was fighting to for its right to exist, and so on and so forth. In case of Georgia losing the war, Republicans still benefit, because in the 1980’s Reagan, who was a Republican, kept the Soviets at bay, called it an “Empire of Evil”, and took credit for toppling the Soviet government and defeating the Soviet Union. Isn’t that just great, seeing as how Obama threatens to shake the Republicans up and bring about a lot of changes, against which all of G.O.P. is fighting so hard? Obamacan only do one thing in this situation, and that is to side with McCain’s reaction to the war in Georgia. Republicans are scared of Obama, and they know that the American people do not really care about Georgia or the South Ossetians. So at the expense of thousands of dead, and hundreds of thousands left without homes, the G.O.P. decided to better their falling chances of winning the elections.

It is understandable why the Republican party simply “has to” win these elections. Their businesses in the Middle East and all of the time and money invested in planning an attack on oil rich Iran would be wasted, for Obama is looking to openly talk with Tehran, and actually make progress towards stabilizing the U.S. relations with unfriendly countries in the region.

Oil, Once Again

Anyone that knows anything about economics, if a war is erupted ina  region, usually prices of goods increase. The goods coming from Middle East are *drum roll* OIL. Ever since the wars in the Middle East started, price of oil has steadily increased and those that trade the commodity – all politicians invest their money – have made good buck on the situation. Even better, politicians are on the “inside”, meaning, they know preemptively, what the official Washington will do, thus knowing, not speculating, on whether prices of commodities increase or drop.

In addition, the BP oil pipeline runs around Russia, through Georgia. If the constant supply of oil through the region is threatened, prices will increase, as speculators in the market will anticipate a drop in the supply. The price of oil in the recent months has been steadily fluttering around $120-$130/barrel. If the prices has more or less been constant, then no one makes money. A decrease or increase is needed for those that have a lot invested in the commodity.

Putting the Two Together

George W. Bush and many other politicians are reaping the fruits (cash) of the recent events in in Georgia. Bush is a lame duck and now he is using all the power and information he has to make a buck. You can’t blame him, his approval ratings are down, his party has virtually turned on him, so now he is trying to get as much benefit from this as he can retire and live in peace.

The GOP, knowing that their credibility has been damaged is trying to use their Cold War reputation to keep its representation in the White House – basically have a Republican President. To do so, it only makes sense that if democracy is threatened (anywhere in the world) by an old nemesis (Russia), then it can say, “We’ve toppled their regime before, and we’ll do it again!”. Which is exactly what is happening. Republicans do not want change, which is the platform on which Obama is running. Obama is not ignorant, he knows that this war in the Caucasus is damaging his chances of winning the Presidential race. After all, McCain is considered to have military experience, although questionable, and Obama is just young, black Senator from Illinois.

The New Politics of the XXI Century

The New “Iron Curtain”

The United States has been accusing Russia of fueling a new Cold War and wanting to set up a new “Iron Curtain”. It is, however, the United States that is setting up a new type of a “curtain”. Let’s call it the “blinds”. It is a good analogy, for whenever Washington does not want to their citizens to know something, they simply close them, and open them whenever it is safe for them to receive harmless information from their Eastern counter parts. The Iron Curtain during the Soviet Era was basically the border between the West and the East. Politicians today are children of the Cold War. No matter what happens in the political arena, Western political leaders will still see Moscow as a threat to the “free world” and Russians as drunk, bear-wrestling people with think accents. U.S.S.R. had satellite nations, which were basically a buffer zone in case of an attack from the West. Today, that buffer zone has been eliminated, and Washington could not be happier. American troops can actually be on the border of Russia in broad daylight. the Baltic States, Ukraine, Georgia, are all lead by former or current American citizens. There are hundreds of “political” and Pentagon-employed advisors in those countries “helping” make decisions. United States accusing Russia of making a new Iron Curtain is absurd, due to the fact that the United States has been slowly creeping up to Russian borders. The “blinds” are set between Russia and the United States, running through the borders of the Baltic States, Ukraine, and Georgia.

The E.U.

The European Union is a great idea, and has worked out well so far, for the most part. The Europeans have been doing nothing but mediating talks and conflicts, and most countries of the E.U. have avoided getting involved in conflicts in the Middle East and other places around the globe. The E.U. will always side with Washington, for Europe has never liked that Russia has so much control over the resource market. The only way to keep the “Russian Bear” at bay, is to have a big power have some leverage. That big power with leverage is the United States. E.U.’s has and oil, at least most it, comes from Russia. Europeans don’t have many resources left on their land, so they really depend on the eastern neighbor. Their politics are purely business. Although its citizens make fun of Americans and their politics, E.U. and U.S. need each other. E.U. needs the United States for pressure on Russia, and United States needs E.U. to have the power that it has. If E.U. become indifferent to U.S. politics and decides to be nutural, U.S. will stop being a big power. Nevertheless, the commercial markets and interdependency on financial and capital exchange will keep the two sides of the Atlantic bound for a long time.

Modern Political Drive

Today politicians are driven not by ideologies (Communism vs. Democracy during the Cold War), but by money. So, today’s political world should be analyzed just like a business is, but on a much bigger scale. Biggest of them all, actually. Almost every leader of any country makes decisions based on his potential financial gains, and utilizes tax payers’ money to do his dirty work. In essence using someone else’s funds to pay for business intelligence and research. President George W. Bush has stake in United Defense, Carlyle Group, and numerous other industries that relate directly to his administration’s agenda and goals. Vladimir Putin, just like most of Russian politicians have stake in Gazprom, Rosneft, and other companies that are ultimately in charge of natural resources. So, no matter what these or any other leaders say about “noble” motives for the actions (i.e. territorial integrity, anti-ethnic genocide, human rights, bringing down dictatorships, etc.), the underlying motives are always business. And if any good for the people is actually achieved, it is simply something done along the way to the ultimate goal of personal financial gain. Ideologies no matter govern political decisions. It is business, and just as was mentioned previously in this blog, resources are the sole reason for any major armed conflict. Morris 108 laid out the last major armed conflict motive very well,

“The BP run BTC pipeline is the only valuable item in Georgia, the only thing to fight over, and just 2 weeks ago, the promise of it being filled with Kazakh oil disappeared. And it disappeared into Russia’s hands. Within a week the pipeline was blown up, and the Georgian offensive started.” Full Article Here

Another example is Sudan. United States politicians, to keep citizens of the U.S. happy, have been criticizing the events in Darfur. However, no direct action has been taken. None of the world really has, and that is because Sudan doesn’t have enough resources in it’s land to have interest of big businesses. Today, ethics have nothing to do with big political decisions of any player of the Big Game.

China and the Rest of Asia

China has been knocking on Siberia’s door for decades. Starting with earliest provocations along Amur and Ussuri rivers, biggest of them all being on Damanskiy Island in 1969 with tens of Russian border troops killed in open armed conflict and hundreds of Chinese soldiers killed (thanks to introduction of the new “Grad” system, which was also used by Georgians in the South Ossetian War). China, although has a lot of sparsely settled land the West, has most of the populations living along the Pacific Coast, because a lot of its resources and jobs are in major cities, all of which are along the Eastern Coast. Once again, resources come into play. China, today, imports a lot of resources. It’s exports are slowing down (read China Today’s trade section, and you will notice this trend as well). It’s population is growing. Russia is the target of the People’s Republic because of the abundance of resources. The abundance of living space, resources, and business opportunity drives the Chinese to keep disputing over Russian territories and they actually send people into Russia to live, to drive out the Russian population, so some time in the future, they will have no problem having population support of historically Russian regions wanting to join PRC (smart, you have to admit).

The rest of Asia is simply living in their own world. They have enough problems of their own, and their leaders have no problem being corrupt and making cash. If anything, leaders of most Asian countries don’t want to be involved in the politics on the world scale, for it will bring too much attention to their corrupt governments.

The Conclusion

Smartest political players have already transitions into the 21st century mentality, that business runs everything. Expect events to heat up from here on in. The South Ossetia War in Georgia has started a new crack between the East and the West. Sides are going to be chosen, and the alliances made within the next few years will remain such for decades on. A new Cold War, more ferocious and dangerous has begun. This one, however, is not of ideologies between the West and the East, it is a war of business interests between resource rich, and resource needy.