Prediction

FULL ARTICLE From the way the world is going, the region where a cataclysmic event may happen is in the Middle East. There are too many sides fighting for power and dominance of the region, and each is pushing the envelope further and further, currently testing the other sides’ patience and diplomatic ability.

The world today does not want to see war, necessarily. However, the veterans of World War II are dying out. They are the ones that have seen how devastating and brutal a world war can be, and how even the most civilized countries are ready to indiscriminately kill civilians and demolish whole cities in order to gain a simple ability to sell something that is located in a different land.

Commerce is the name of the game, and those that have the most resources have the best commercial ability. Commerce is power and leverage. It is control of whole economies. The United States has been very discreet about imperial aspirations. The basics of empire expansion are control of resources for a purpose of selling them. Not everyone has the power to expand in such a manner, and most take the old-school route — that is, guns blazing and bombs flying, with tanks sweeping in and destruction in the armies’ path.

The most important resource allocation in the world right now is located in the Middle East. Also, the biggest rivalries are in the Middle East. The interesting thing is that it was Europe and the United States that created the reason for there to be conflict in this area. They sparked old rivalries anew in the Middle East by creating Israel as a state. It was a gesture of good will from the Allies and the USSR. However, dislocating a large portion of people and telling them that their rivals are now the owners of the soil is bound to get one side pissed off.

And guess who that side is: the whole Arab world. Now, I am not against the State of Israel, but it is the reason for instability in the Middle East today. With European and mainly America’s backing and support, Israel was able to muster up one of the…FULL ARTICLE

Russia Taking Over US’ Central Asia

FULL ARTICLE HERE The political game is all about having leverage. Russia, currently, is doing all it can to gain leverage against the American presence in Central Asia. This is a vital time to do so because the new US President has not yet established himself as a hardliner and has not made any bold foreign policy moves. The Bush administration fought hard on every level to keep anyone else from meddling in Washington’s affairs in the region. The US provided a lot of support for numerous former Soviet republics in Central Asia in order to secure their political dominance in the region.

One of the most important reasons for having friendly nations in Central Asia, especially Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, was because they provided vital supply bases for US operations in Afghanistan. The majority of US personnel, ordnance, and supplies were channeled through the US Air Force base in Kyrgyzstan. Now, however, the United States has lost that base and Moscow has acted upon an opportunity to provide a counterweight to US policies abroad.

First, Kyrgyzstan stated that the US base that was virtually sold to Russia for $2 billion can be used to still transport humanitarian supplies to US forces in Afghanistan. However, it means that Washington will have to find another base to use for directing supplies to their forces fighting the Taliban. The strategic advantage of the base in Kyrgyzstan was that it was only 1,5 hours of flight time away from the US airfield in Bagram.

Second, Moscow recently offered NATO the opportunity to use their Air Force to transport supplies to US forces in Afghanistan, since they were close to Afghanistan and it would take the burden off NATO to maintain active bases in the region. For Russia this means a lesser NATO and American presence in the region. It also gives Moscow an opportunity to control the flow of supplies intended for the war in Afghanistan. This is the most important factor in the ordeal over Central Asia, having leverage against American policies abroad. If NATO agrees to use the Russian Air Force to bring …CONTINUE READING HERE

Fighting for Resources – True Causes of Today’s Wars

FULL ARTICLE HERE

The way wars are fought has changed over time, but the reason for the wars hasn’t. It is not about religion, it is not about simply acquiring new territory. It is about acquiring resources and protecting their flow into the nation that is currently controlling those resources. Currently, not all “takeovers” have been militarily achieved.  Nations that risk too much in an open conflict will bend to the requests from more powerful nations in return for more wealth from those that are already in control. The more powerful nations or blocs are the US, China, Russia, and the EU. All the others that are on a less resource-based economic “diet” do not meddle in affairs of resource acquisition. At least not to the extent that the afore mentioned nations do.

However, armed conflicts are what this article will be about. Nations that are not developed, that are unstable, are the most probable targets for an invasion by more powerful countries in order to control the resources and vital trade routes.  Most nations that are considered as developing already “willingly” share their resources. African nations, certain Middle Eastern… FULL ARTICLE HERE

Determining Borders – Creating Internal Stability

Dear readers – please use this link to the original source of the article

In 2008 there have been numerous disputes, peaceful and not, with regard to borders. In some cases these disputes turned violent. The biggest border conflicts and disputes have resulted in tensions between Israel and Gaza, Russia and Georgia, India and Pakistan, Turkey and Iraq, and Afghanistan and Pakistan. The peaceful border tensions are between the U.S. and Mexico and the ongoing debate about the status of Cyprus. Aside from the geographical border disputes and tensions, the economic crisis has shown the world that economic borders are not that safe as well.

In 2009, many nations that have border disputes will try to settle them. After the fall of the USSR, borders of many countries have destabilised and there are many regions and territories in the world that would like to see independence. After having numerous countries engage in open and political conflicts in 2008 with regard to borders, leaders of some nations look like they have realised that borders need to be set and finalised once and for all, preferably without the use of force.

Geographical

There is an argument that, in order to have a stable regime, whatever it may be, inside a country, that nation needs to have stable borders. Support for this argument is abundant, and there are few that would disagree. However, it seems that only now is this argument really finding its place in the global arena. Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev has assigned an advisory commission to present solutions to Russian border disputes, to map those borders, and to finalise them, so everyone knows where the nation’s borders are drawn.

As Israel has had numerous clashes with its neighbours, it has become evident that it needs to start working towards more stable and accurate borders in order to avoid conflicts such as the one in Gaza. Therefore it could definitely say that a rocket attack, or any attack, over that particular given line will automatically result in an open conflict.

Gaza’s borders are not stable. Israel set up a wall, literally and figuratively that isolates the people inside the Gaza strip. Israel even goes as far as to not allow international aid workers to bring in supplies and medication to Palestinians living in the Gaza strip. During Israel’s short campaign in the Gaza strip, the Israeli Navy went as far as ramming a ship full of humanitarian aid intended for the Palestinian civilians. Israel’s conflicts have been coupled by political instability. Not that the regime has changed or has any intention to do so, it is that the Israeli government has largely been unstable and its leaders and prominent politicians have been at the center of attention for shady activities on numerous occasions.

Another country with unstable borders and even more unstable relations with its neighbours is Pakistan. It has been in the spotlight quite often recently. First of all, its borders with Afghanistan are nearly unguarded, to say the least. Secondly, after the events in Mumbai, Indian-Pakistani borders have become as tense as ever because of India’s accusations that Islamabad had trained and even organised the attack in Mumbai.

Northern Waziristan, according to U.S. sources, is a base of operations for Al-Qaeda. The U.S. military has been launching raids into Pakistan on many occasion, stating the fact that Pakistan’s military has nearly no control over the province and lets insurgents roam freely over the Afghan-Pakistan border.

Evidence of instability in Pakistan is seen through the change of power in August of 2008, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, and many other events. All of this can be linked to the fact that the borders of Pakistan are very insecure.

The United States, although most stable out of the above mentioned countries, has their own instability to deal with. The U.S. erected a fence going between Mexico and the U.S. The illegal immigration of Mexicans to their northern neighbour has stirred up a lot of controversy. The fence was erected exactly for the reasons of stabilising the inside of the country, rather than the illegal immigration situation. The Bush administration was already speeding downhill at the time of the decision to erect the fence. Its hope did not do anything to stabilise their situation and slow down their descent in public approval. Nevertheless, it was an attempt at getting the situation under control.

Now, Barack Obama will try and secure the border with means other than physically trying to get in the way of the illegal migrant inflow into the U.S. Whatever the means are, they are aimed primarily at stabilising the order primarily in the Southern and Southwestern United States. Whatever the arguments may be for and against, it is a fact that illegal immigration destabilises the order in places that illegal migrants go to because they are willing to work for below the minimum wage and thus cost jobs that actually create tax revenue. This is the issue with border stabilisation between the U.S. and Mexico.

Cyprus and Turkey have another border issue to deal with on the international arena, primarily due to Turkish aspirations to join the EU. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is only recognised by Turkey, and thus Turkey will need to determine what is more important: a small area that has been disputed since the British colonial rule, or the current issue of joining the EU. It will have to draw its border sooner or later and finalise the issue eventually.

Turkey, although more stable than most other Middle Eastern countries, still has problems developing a more stable democracy, to which they aspire. Its relationship with the Kurds and the Iraqi border is another issue at stake. Until those issues are finalised, it will be hard to focus more on internal issues because they are an immediate security risk.

Geographical borders will need to be covered first in order to stabilise regimes and political situations within many countries. It looks like more and more countries are recognising the correlation between stable borders and stable governments. Nevertheless, the economic expansion of many multinational corporations from all over the world brings instability as well (to be discussed in part 2 later this week).

Conclusion

There are many unresolved border and territorial disputes all over the world. After seeing many conflicts spring up between neighbours in recent years after the fall of the Soviet Union, borders have become key issues in certain regions. In recent years many conflicts and disputes have escalated to new levels primarily because many nations are not willing to look into the issues and would rather just keep at proving that they are right. Although it seems logical, nations need to compromise and resolve these issues because unstable borders nearly always lead to unstable governments and internal politics.

It is a benefit to all to find solutions to these problems in order to bring about more order within a nation. 2009 will be the founding year for nation defining their national borders and securing them in order to bring about order with regard to domestic politics.

Dear readers – please use this link to the original source of the article

Why Europe will not be the next superpower

FULL ARTICLE HERE

Many political analysts and observers have predicted that the EU will rise up to be the next power, stronger and more unified than the United States. Nevertheless, there are many reasons why this may not happen and it is important to note this in order to understand the reasons for Europe lagging behind its scheduled growth and why the EU, with its bigger markets and greater population, has not risen above America yet.

Although today Europe is a multinational union that has integrated …

FULL ARTICLE HERE

…indication enough that Europe is not sovereign enough. Western Europe is fairly independent of the US, considering the fact that they’ve blocked most major US companies from becoming major players in Europe’s economy (GE, Microsoft, Boeing to name a few). Nevertheless, Eastern Europe is not needed for the market share. It is needed for political leverage and for presence close to Russia.

Although the EU knows this, it also knows that getting in the way of US global aspirations will end up hurting them in the end. After all, it was the American Marshall Plan that rebuilt Western Europe after World War Two. It was the Americans that helped Europe keep the “evil” USSR from attacking the weakened Europe throughout the Cold War. Most of all, it was the Americans that helped Europe, including Germany, to get back up after being destroyed by war.

To reiterate – Europe will not be more powerful than the United States. It is closely tied to America economically and by past “favors”. Moreover, the fact that the EU is not socially integrated is still a problem. Eastern and Western Europe are still different and even some Western European nations are still unfriendly towards some of their partners and neighbors. Most of all, the fact that the US has some control over Eastern Europe is an indication that Brussels is still not the one in control over the whole EU. Once someone is in the US’s pocket (IMF, World Bank loans), then it will most likely not get out of it. Eastern Europe is in and thus half of the EU is under American influence. It is essential to understand this to understand relationships within Europe and of Europe to the rest of the world.

FULL ARTICLE HERE

American Bailouts – Keeping Europeans Away

READ FULL ARTICLE

News about U.S. bailout packages have been on every newsstand and news website in the past months. There is talk constantly of American companies being bailed out and discussions about the topic are abundant. The stir is caused not because America is considered a superpower and not because United States economy is the symbol of economics success that many nations are aspiring for. It makes news because America is becoming less and less American. With the U.S. economy being the weakest that it has been since the Great Depression, many Europeans and Asians are taking advantage of this and buying out American companies and their assets.

The bailout packages that are being considered and hundreds of billions of dollars that have already been committed are aimed at buying up failing U.S. companies for one reason – to keep the U.S. economy dependant on itself and its own workforce rather than European parent companies and…

READ FULL ARTICLE

Gas Tug-o-War

FULL ARTICLE HERE Aside from being an essential element in heating homes during the coldest time of the year, Russian gas is a political tool. It is a tool for the U.S.-sponsored Ukrainian government as well as Moscow. However, what are the goals being pursued? It is not just to show might and power over Europe. That actually would hurt Russia in the long run with no real short term benefits either. The current gas dispute between Moscow and Kiev is actually a continuation and a move forward in trying to discredit each other and win over the majority support of the population.

Just to recap, President Yuschenko and his government tried to discredit the Russian Black Sea Fleet and taint Russia’s reputation in Ukraine during and after the conflict in the Caucasus between Russia and Georgia in August 2008. Yuschenko was not successful in getting the Fleet out of Sevastopol and did not change the population’s outlook on Russia. One thing did become evident – Ukraine is split into East and West, Eastern Ukraine being pro-Russian and Western part being more pro-Western. Also, Yuschenko’s government is not as popular as some, especially in Washington, had hoped for.

Transit of gas is one of the best trumps in Russia’s hands. If the observers that are supposed to monitor the flow of gas through Ukraine find any disruptions that can potentially damage Ukraine’s credibility, Moscow will score a big win in this tug-o-war on many levels. First, the credibility of President Yuschenko’s government will be dealt a big blow. Second, Moscow would score an indirect win against the U.S. in global politics. Lastly, the EU will be more reluctant to consider Ukraine for membership.

If Russia is successful in discrediting Yuschenko’s government, Washington will suffer the biggest loss. Having put a lot of effort into getting the current Ukrainian government in place and putting even more…FULL ARTICLE HERE

Effects of Israel’s Operations in Gaza

READ THE FULL ARTICLE Israel’s military operation in Gaza is in full swing. The current situation in the Gaza strip puts to the test world leaders’ abilities to protect peace and to bring about a resolution before a calamity strikes. Implications of Israel’s military operations are already becoming evident.
Israel Proves a Point

Israel’s operations proved that none of the radical Islamist organizations want to fight an open all-out war with Israel. The eagerness of radical Islamists to wage war on Israel has been more than evident and has grown in recent years. However, when the fight has been brought to them, they are not ready to face an enemy that is as ruthless as them and one that has its forces up to 21st century standards.

Israel has been striking targets with precision, bombing not random buildings, but those that have had top ranking Hamas officials or have been of strategic value to the organization. Israel obviously has prepared well for the operations because they are carrying out precision strikes and their every move looks to be well thought through. Although there are casualties among civilians, it is only because Islamists use civilians as cover. Evidently, Israel has made a choice to engage Hamas where they are. This is a good strategy because this will hopefully make Palestinians reject Hamas and leave them out to dry on their own, without popular support. It will not take long before Hamas’ use of civilians for cover will be condemned by the Palestinians themselves.

Implications

Tel-Aviv’s operation in Gaza could also spell disaster of global proportions. Most likely, Hamas and other radical organizations will spin this situation to their advantage claiming that this is a crusade. Iran’s Ayatollah already stated that anyone that dies in this fight against Israel will become a martyr. Moreover, Israel’s actions could READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Ukraine and Georgia – When the Body Doesn’t Listen to the Head

The leaders in Ukraine and Georgia – Yuschenko and Saakashvili respectively – seem to be losing hold of their governments and their public support is falling each day. News are coming out quite frequently hinting at tensions between the Presidents of the two countries and their governments. Oppositions are using this chance to bring forth their ideas and show what they have to offer their countrymen.

Ukraine

Newspapers from Russia and Ukraine are reporting that Yuschenko and the Rada (Verhovnaya Rada is Kiev’s Upper House) are more tense than ever. The Ukrainian parliamentariansare introducing a new bill that calls for renaming the Ukrainian Internal Forces to the National Ukrainian Guard. In essence, this gives the control of the military to the Rada, and takes it away from Yuschenko. Nikolai Dzhiga, a Ukrainian parliamentarian, pointed out that in this way, Yuschenko will not be able to use the military to pursue his political goals.

In 2007, during the Ukrainian political crisis, Yuschenko tried to issue an order for the military to step in when the special police units loyal to the head of the Ministry of Interior took control of the building of the Secretary of State’s building. No one followed the order as they did not agree with it and Ukrainian parliamentarians shot down the order, deeming it unconstitutional.

This shows, that Yuschenko is the only one who is backing his political goals. Ukraine is virtually split, the East and the South regions supporting Russia and pro-Russian parties, while the West and the North are supporting the complete opposites. It is important to note that one that thing that everyone in Ukraine has in common, is lack of support for Yuschenko.

Events around Yuliya Timoshenko, a leader of an opossition party to Yuschenko, has been the center of media attention for the past week.She has taken a pro-Russia stance, as Yuschenkoputs it, with repsect to Georgia and Crimea. Timoshenko said that Yuschenko is only putting the Ukrainian people in danger by tensing the situation in the Black Sea and supporting Georgia, events around which have become a political turmoil. Timoshenko also said that she has noticed a “tail” behind her wherever she goes. Most likely from the Ukrainian Secret Service at the request of Yuschenko. Because of her stance on Georgia and Crimea, she has been called a traitor to Ukraine by Yuschenko, however, no one else seems to echo his thoughts on the matter.

Georgia

Opposition leaders in Georgia are calling for Saakashvili’s resignation. The opposition leader of the party called “New Right” David Gemkrelidze said that is was “irresponsible of Saakashvili to bomb Tkhinvali, it was a trap, whichw as set for Georgia, against which the U.S., Europe, and the Georgia people have warned.” He also added, that now NATO does not know within which borders to accept Georgia into it’s organization. It is true, though, South Ossetian War has truly backed up Tbilisi’s attempts to join NATO.

The leader of the opposition also stated that he will meet with other opposition leaders to work out a plan of action of how to act in situations such as the one on hand. Soon, they will release their own, independent analysis of the short war in South Ossetia and will presented to the world.

Although the opposition is condemning Saakashvili, they are not taking a pro-Russia stance. Knowing, that the Georgian citizens have only been fed Saakashvili’s take on the war and read only the stories published by state controlled media, they have to take a stance which shows them as saying that this conflict was wrong and that the territorial sovereignty of Georgia has been destroyed. Nevertheless, they are not blaming Russia for the actions and are placing all of the blame on Saakashvili.

The Conclusion

United States is losing the grip on the “friends” in Tbilisi and Kiev. The oppositions in the countries are becoming more and more popular, as the current administrations do not give the Ukrainian and Georgian people what they want, and that is security (as seen in the South Ossetian War and the tensions in Crimea), and stable economies (spending a lot on military, while not paying attention to important domestic issues). It will be interesting to see how the elections in Ukraine and Georgia will be affected by the wave of current events, what role the U.S. will play.

Hightened Tensions in the Black Sea

The Overall Picture

The United States has sent ships to the Black Sea to give humanitarian aid to Georgia. This missions, knowing todays politics, most likely has a darker side to it – delivery of weapons and U.S. military specialists to organize diversions and to bring weapons to whatever remains of the Georgian Army. The story is still unfolding and most likely, the details won’t be that well known. However, it is a very shady operation by the United States.

Washington seems to be trying to build a fence around Russia, getting as close to it possible, for it once again, has control of many resources, on which American businessmen a.k.a. politicians want to get their hands on. Oil and other natural resources are more and more controlled by nations and people considered by Washington as “unfriendly”, and if United States can shake the feeling of Russia’s security, then it can start dictating terms and getting Moscow to allow business to come in and take advantage of the abundance of resources.

U.S. Naval presence in the Black Sea is simply another plank in the fence. U.S. destroyers and cruisers carry up to 8 Tomahawk missiles on board, which can carry nuclear warheads. In addition, U.S. setting up missile defenses in Poland and other European countries close to Russia borders is an indication of U.S. getting ready for something major. Speculations abound, but true reasons are known only to intelligence services. It could range from invasion of Iran to U.S. bringing troops into Ukraine and Georgia, bringing U.S. and Russia closer to war than the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, which looks suspiciously familiar, but in a mirror-reflection. U.S. is bringing it’s troops and equipment ever closer to Russian borders, which should really worry the rational thinking people of even Western countries.

The Black Sea Fleet and the Black Sea Itself

The Black Sea Fleet, since the break up of the Soviet Union, has lost most of it’s strategic value. However, as evident in recent events of the South Ossetian War, Black Sea Fleet can still be of a lot of importance to Russia. the Russian Navy can play a crucial role in cooling some heads in Georgia, for the Russian fleet is no match for the few demoralized Georgian ships left in the navy. Nevertheless, it has to be taken into account, that Russian ships were face with two small Georgian ships equipped with nothing more than big caliber machine guns. So, in essence, Russian Navy has nothing to brag about. Nevertheless, Russian Black Sea Fleet is able to be of important political value to Moscow, as it can keep the U.S. ships at bay, listen to the radio frequencies and decipher U.S. codes. They are of more intelligence value than confrontational. If the United States is really delivering weapons and military advisers to Tbilisi, then it is a trump in the pocket of the Russian politicians, as they most likely will quietly hint to the U.S. that they know what Washington is up to, and are ready to release this information to the public, indicating that NATO is not there for peacekeeping purposes and is in fact violating agreements, which the West constantly accuses Russia of violating.

Map of the Black Sea

The Ships in the Black Sea

The situation in the Black Sea remains tense. The United States has sent, as a show of good will and friendship, has sent it’s naval ships to the coast of Georgia with humanitarian help: U.S. Navy destroyer USS McFaul, U.S. Coast Guard cruiser USS Dallas, and the flagship of the sixth supply fleet USS Mount Whitney. Moscow has expressed concern for this, accusing Washington of supplying weapons and other military equipment to Georgia. Other sources have also informed the media that the U.S. warships carry Tomahawk and Harpoon missiles, able to strike land and sea targets. On the other hand, some of the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s ships remain near the coast of Abkhazia, protecting the withdrawal of its troops. On August 25th, Russian Flagship Moskva has left port at Sevastopol with its purpose described by Moscow officials as “testing of it’s systems and radio communications”.

Russian destroyer “Pitliviy”

Small Russian rocket cruiser “Mirage”

Russian Black Sea Fleet Flagship “Moskva”

“USS McFaul” anchored in the port of Batumi

Launch of the American Harpoon missile

Launch of a Tomahawk missile

Flagship of the 6th Supply Fleet “USS Mount Whitney”

U.S. Coast Guard’s “USS Dallas”

U.S. Navy’s destroyer USS McFaul