If the event sequence is confirmed, then the terrorist attack in Kashmir has an even higher chance of being the handiwork of a US agency. The US return to Bagram airbase would be a thorn in the side of Russia, China, India, and Iran. Intuitively, the chance of this happening is low. But a suitcase of USD can have an incredible effect sometimes. Not all Muslims have the kind of discipline that the Houthis do.
Of course not. Trump cut a deal with them in February 2020 and staying in Bagram was the Deep State’s intention at least according to SecDef Miller…but Trump didn’t care about it. Btw, what happened to Miler and MacGregor?? They aren’t in this administration.
We understand it is impossible to argue with President Trump. Therefore, I will hand over this job to a poet by the name of Rudyard Kipling who published this poem in 1890. Kipling can explain this issue to Trump, but only God can give him the understanding.
The Young British Soldier
1
When the 'arf-made recruity goes out to the East
'E acts like a babe an' 'e drinks like a beast,
An' 'e wonders because 'e is frequent deceased
Ere 'e's fit for to serve as a soldier.
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
So-oldier of the Queen!
2
Now all you recruities what's drafted to-day,
You shut up your rag-box an' 'ark to my lay,
An' I'll sing you a soldier as far as I may:
A soldier what's fit for a soldier.
Fit, fit, fit for a soldier . . .
3
First mind you steer clear o' the grog-sellers' huts,
For they sell you Fixed Bay'nets that rots out your guts -
Ay, drink that 'ud eat the live steel from your butts -
An' it's bad for the young British soldier.
Bad, bad, bad for the soldier . . .
4
When the cholera comes - as it will past a doubt -
Keep out of the wet and don't go on the shout,
For the sickness gets in as the liquor dies out,
An' it crumples the young British soldier.
Crum-, crum-, crumples the soldier . . .
5
But the worst o' your foes is the sun over'ead:
You must wear your 'elmet for all that is said:
If 'e finds you uncovered 'e'll knock you down dead,
An' you'll die like a fool of a soldier.
Fool, fool, fool of a soldier . . .
6
If you're cast for fatigue by a sergeant unkind,
Don't grouse like a woman nor crack on nor blind;
Be handy and civil, and then you will find
That it's beer for the young British soldier.
Beer, beer, beer for the soldier . . .
7
Now, if you must marry, take care she is old -
A troop-sergeant's widow's the nicest I'm told,
For beauty won't help if your rations is cold,
Nor love ain't enough for a soldier.
'Nough, 'nough, 'nough for a soldier . . .
8
If the wife should go wrong with a comrade, be loath
To shoot when you catch 'em - you'll swing, on my oath! -
Make 'im take 'er and keep 'er: that's Hell for them both,
An' you're shut o' the curse of a soldier.
Curse, curse, curse of a soldier . . .
9
When first under fire an' you're wishful to duck,
Don't look nor take 'eed at the man that is struck,
Be thankful you're livin', and trust to your luck
And march to your front like a soldier.
Front, front, front like a soldier . . .
10
When 'arf of your bullets fly wide in the ditch,
Don't call your Martini a cross-eyed old bitch;
She's human as you are - you treat her as sich,
An' she'll fight for the young British soldier.
Fight, fight, fight for the soldier . . .
11
When shakin' their bustles like ladies so fine,
The guns o' the enemy wheel into line,
Shoot low at the limbers an' don't mind the shine,
For noise never startles the soldier.
Start-, start-, startles the soldier . . .
12
If your officer's dead and the sergeants look white,
Remember it's ruin to run from a fight:
So take open order, lie down, and sit tight,
And wait for supports like a soldier.
Wait, wait, wait like a soldier . . .
13
When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
“To restore US influence over Pakistan….??” — have you forgotten that US demanded CIA-organized “law-fare” that overthrew the most popular democratic president Khan that Pakistan ever head (who is with wife tortured and rotting in military prison).
That is precisely what I am saying - in view of the uncertainty created by DT on tariifs there could be more common ground in a BRICS type forum than thought of. Both China and India have similar stances on WTO, COP etc
You underestimate him, he is not the fool he plays. His actions are seemingly chaotic, but internally consistent. For instance, here is a good analysis of his economic policy: https://tsargrad.tv/slovo/o-torgovoj-vojne-trampa_1216613
Nah, he's just weak, stupid and easily manipulated. Those trying to ascribe higher meanings to his meananderings are engaged in the equivalent of looking at sheep livers to try to discern the will of the gods.
You write some interesting points but I think it's not realistic that the US is going to go in totally for CCP. DT is notoriously fickle but there are saner minds in his Administration who maynot be as gung- ho on alienating India as you seem to think
The sequence of events that I detailed, as based upon the existing facts, doesn't require going all-in for China. It can even happen if his "total reset" collapses. In fact, that's the most likely scenario and trigger event for expediting this, though the challenge of course would be to patch up Taliban-Pakistani problems, which is incredibly difficult due to the Taliban hosting the TTP and (reportedly) also the BLA.
I strongly doubt that China, of all parties, is going to again fall for the patently fake "snuggling up" of the West. They still remember the Opium War, and Kissinger's previous /divide et impera/ policy of driving a wedge between China and Russia. Trump has been obvious about his views of China as enemy number one; and now he is smiling, and figuratively patting Xi on the back, and proposing a deal?
But I also don't think this thawing of relations is meant to be a lasting policy. Trump is just putting China on the back burner while he quietly concentrates on the immediate goal, Iran. That is what Bagram is needed for; and that is why the inclusion of Pakistan is so crucial, that Trump is even willing to throw India out with the bathwater. In fact, I think that the India-Pakistan conflict was deliberately provoked, via CIA and MI6 terrorist ties, to bring Pakistan into the fold.
The coming war with the Iran has been delayed, because having been whipped by even the peripheral Houthis, Trump realized that waging war against Iran, even with Israeli nukes, would be a disaster. So he is embarking on an effort to assemble a coalition, not of European paper tigers, but of populous and well armed local players to supply the boots-on-the-ground that the US is itself incapable of sustaining.
The keystone of the coming anti-Iran alliance is Turkey. They have their own, very strong incentives for wanting to bring Iran down; Iran is the katechon, so as to speak, preventing the reanimation of the Ottoman empire. By taking part in defeating Iran, its main regional rival, Turkey would: 1. Grab hold of Iraq, with its agricultural resources in northern Mesopotamia, from time immemorial the key to dominating the Middle East; 2. Gain control of the Iraqi oilfields, and total domination of the Gulf, with its oil and its riches; 3. Be able to finally and decisively trample down on the Kurds, and on Armenia for good measure; 4. Link up with the Turkic 'stans in Central Asia, and vassalize them.
Now, Turkey, although strong and unspent (they haven't lifted a finger to supply the Ukrainian project, and still have all their tanks and ammunition) is still not quite a match, alone, against Iran. But a coalition with the US and Israel would dramatically alter the calculus. Turkey can supply the boots on the ground, especially the tank divisions needed for breezing through Iraq and smashing into Khuzestan. They also have cannon-fodder of their own, the Syrian jihadis, fanatically eager to kill Shiites. And the other allies would supply what Turkey lacks. America, the air superiority and (so they still think) the suppression of Iranian air force and AD. This is the kind of war the US likes, bombing from afar while proxies die on the ground. Israel, the nukes; the US would be loath to openly and offensively use nukes against Iran, not just because of the stigma, but because they are afraid that Russia would respond with nuclear armageddon. But Israel has no such hangups, and can nuke Iranian cities with accustomed impunity, exterminating the Iranian educated classes and destroying their industry and, of course, immediately reducing Iran to the status of a failed state; actual conquest of the highlands would not be necessary. And, as an icing on the cake, there would be no sanctions, no recriminations for Turkey's region-wide conquest; if you are on the hegemon's side you can do nothing wrong.
The only thing holding Turkey back (apart from basic fear) is the strength of the domestic Muslim opposition against teaming up with Israel. This reluctance has been reinforced by the idiotic behavior of Israel towards Syria, a Turkish vassal that they are bombing the stuffing out of, because they wanted a piece of it but missed the opportunity. It is that self-defeating and totally cretinous action that made Trump turn against bosom friend Bibi; he understands that unless there is a "new leaf" turned in Israel and a seemingly fresh regime takes over, no alliance with Turkey will be possible. Let us hope; but do not lose sight of what a snake Erdogan is, and an ambitious snake to boot.
Which brings us, at last, to Pakistan. If a coalition attack on Iran is to take place, anyone can see the strategic importance of including Pakistan in that alliance. It will completely surround Iran, and put a numerous and fairly well armed Sunni army at their back door. Even if that army hesitates to move up into the Iranian highlands (and they should have no qualms, it is just like their own countryside) they will still, as an Army-in-Being (to paraphrase Mahan) hobble Iran with just the potential of a massive backstab. Bagram airbase is just icing on the cake.
So that is the aim of Trump's policy: the temporary appeasement of China, the spurning of India and rapprochement with Pakistan, the return to Bagram, the courting of Erdogan and falling out with Netanyahu, all are logical, consistent steps when viewed within that framework.
And once all of South Asia, from the Caucasus to the border of China, is in the Golem Hegemon's hands, how long until the Turkic Central Asia caves in to Turkish and US domination? At this point Russia's only hope will lie in its nukes, and world Armageddon. Because if Russia falls, China will not hold; not when nukes start to fall and India, for survival's sake, becomes the West's proxy against what's left of China (and then is trampled itself in turn). Until the Talmudist and Mammonist Cabal rules the depopulated world and the ultimate dystopia is unveiled.
Interesting ideas. I do believe the ‘west’ tried to oust Erdogan in 2016 with Gulenists and that the real goal was to use pan-Turanism and unite the Turkic lands of Central Asia under a Gulenist Turkey, and use Turkic ethnicities to drive a wedge into north Russia and China… then I believe Russia rescued Erdogan… I believe CIA/MI6 were all in to use Turks to destabilise Russia and China from within and it was thwarted by Russia for self-preservation. Maybe I was wrong but…
Thank you, your comment gave me a deeper insight on the Turkish angle. While I know of their regional aspirations, I only have a superficial knowledge of internal politics there.
It is true, as you said, that the CIA was likely involved in the failed coup against Erdogan---the question is, is the memory of that enough to turn him against cooperating with the US now, when it seems in Turkey's interest? Let us hope that Erdogan realizes that allying with Israel and its Golem will only cause him trouble. I am afraid he thinks he can outsmart them all, and come out on top. And he is not a friend to Russia, personal debts notwithstanding.
As for the Gulenists, I am trying to read up now, that you mentioned them. Any good resources that you can recommend?
The "total reset" is just temporary, a sort of a Minsk moment. It is convenient for the US to put the escalation with China on the back burner, because they need to concentrate elsewhere (the Middle East). It is convenient for China to go along, because they still need time to strengthen and brace the economy for the inevitable confrontation. Neither is sincere in trusting the other, nor expecting the détente to last.
Like I said, DT is unpredictable. Moscow and Delhi can also take a stand against him in unison as can Iran. It's not so easy. Besides CCP has a lot of business in India which it wouldn't like to hazard.
That business still remains in spite of Galwan and continued Chinese support for Pakistan, both military and strategic (CPEC). Unless there's a major bilateral crisis, even worse than Galwan, I therefore don't think anything will happen to Chinese business in and with India all that much.
Russia is also actually trying to find ways to work with the US, including with Iran, with whom Russia offered to mediate if need be or play some role in any new nuclear deal that they might agree upon bilaterally. Afghans, unfortunately, have a reputation of going to the highest bidder, and Russia can't compete with the US for "loyalty" there if Trump starts raining down dollars.
Your last para is true only to an extent. Noone uniformly trusts the US and that includes the Kremlin as well as China, and India. Note that prior to the Pahalgam incident Beijing and Delhi were talking to restore greater normalcy. You seem to presume there will inevitably be a US China Russia axis with Pakistan as a sub- player. Not necessarily true as the India China Russia presence cements BRICS
I don't believe that there's any serious trust between the US and the major countries that it's engaging with right now (China, Russia, Iran, India).
I also didn't see any major upshots of the Sino-Indo thaw from last fall's BRICS Summit in Kazan.
I don't assume that there will be a US-China-Russia axis either, in fact, my work over the past half year has argued against that scenario.
Please familiarize yourself with it, beginning with my analyses on the Russian-US "New Detente" from right after the election.
The whole point from the US' perspective is to reduce Russia's disproportionate dependence on China, ditto Russia's motivations too.
Those calculations might change depending on the outcome of the Ukrainian peace process, but I don't take for granted that they will.
Rather, this single piece relies on several facts to forecast a scenario sequence based on several identified variables and also accounts for both possibilities.
To your last point about BRICS, it's nothing, really, the organization is just a talking club as I explained in detail here after the last summit:
I think you are wrong about the border talks between India and China. There was a dialogue which was gathering steam. Obviously these are not issues which can be solved overnight- but it was leading to the 1990s type situation.
Remember that China India business ties are far more stable than those China has with Pakistan.
You are unduly pessimistic about BRICS. Most Westerners are. It's a strong bloc which will only strengthen as the days go by and especially as with DT swinging between Scott Bessent and Navarro as economic advisers, noone can predict his next move. BRICS in such a time provides a cushion
I'm not pessimistic about BRICS, just realistic, since it's achieved nothing of tangible significance whatsoever apart from launching the New Development Bank however many years ago.
It's just a talking club for discussing ways to jointly accelerate financial multipolarity processes. The real work is carried out bilaterally or through "mini-laterals", not through BRICS as a whole.
There is a lot of trade going on between the inner members of BRICS, ie Russia, India and China. The other two are a bit perfunctory. The main problem for the RIC triangle is IIRC that India only accepts Rupees and USD. As far as I heard, Russia and China do do trade over gold, but I haven't heard it from India (or Brazil, for that matter).
Most other potential members - Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, Argentina (?) - run considerable trade deficits. So how is Russia or China going to secure any credit given through the New Development Bank?
Precisely because of Trumpian tariffs and the fact that no-one in China, Russia or India trusts him- BRICS is bound to get more of a trading bloc against the US
I don't like it when people joke about someone doing drugs just because they don't like their analysis so please don't do it again.
To briefly address your points:
1. The Central Asian Republics are mercurial and at times unreliable partners who tend to side with whoever pays them the most as recently proven by them throwing Northern Cyprus under the bus in a rejection of hitherto much-hyped "pan-Turkism" for €12 billion of investments from the EU:
Afghanistan has an even more infamous reputation for siding with the highest bidder as history attests on numerous occasions, from the British era to the present. Moreover, simple declarations mean nothing in practice since time and again words are contradicted by actions, with NATO statements for instance being a case in point.
2. What the US wields is tremendous influence over Pakistan, with whom Taliban-run Afghanistan is in a state of hybrid war, and it can also provide aid and weapons in exchange for returning to Bagram Airbase and/or profitable mineral extraction rights. Dismissing this is either dishonest or indicative of being a neophyte observer of the region.
As for China, Trump did indeed declare a "total reset" in their relations, this is an objectively existing and easily verifiable fact. They've also worked very closely before in the past on a host of issues and there remains sizeable American influence over elements of the Chinese government and sizeable Chinese influence over elements of the American one.
3. The aforesaid are already converging in Pakistan as proven by the US' neutral but Pakistani-leaning position during the latest Indo-Pak conflict, which is all the more surprising due to Pakistan hosting BRI's CPEC flagship, being accused of ties to regional and even global terrorist groups for decades, and recent concerns over its long-range missile program.
As it presently stands, the factually proven American position towards Pakistan isn't at odds with Chinese interests at all, in fact, it aligns with them. Pakistan even enthusiastically thanked the US for allegedly mediating with India. Once again, to dismiss this is either dishonest or indicative of being a neophyte observer of the region.
As a reminder, please don't toxify the conversation with accusations me being doped up while writing this analysis. It's extremely disrespectful and you'll be blocked the next time.
Like for real, do you REALLY think that I'm here in Moscow -- which has some of the strictest anti-drug laws outside of Asia and the Gulf -- taking psychedelics drugs in my home where my wife and two young kids live AND then writing a "trippy" analysis that I THEN still decide to publish the day after I sober up?
WTF, the more I think about it, the angrier I get. I don't need to tolerate this BS from people under my posts. You've been a useful contributor before so I don't know why the heck you'd all of a sudden transition into a troll, perhaps because I shared some insight and forecasts that completely contradict your expectations.
If you or anyone else does this again, they'll be blocked without a warning. I invest my limited and valuable free time in interacting with my audience when time and interest allow so it's even more disrespectful for you to take advantage of this to insult me knowing that I'll likely read it. I'm so disappointed, this is ridiculous.
I don't even think it was a "joke" now that I reread your post several times. You could have claimed it was a joke or feigned ignorance if you only had your first sentence about "tripping", which is also used colloquially, but then you referenced and expanded upon it in your last remark, thus doubling down on it.
No more, okay? I don't know who you are, maybe you're one of those trolls who pretend to be a friend or at least a useful contributor for some time before pulling off the mask and showing their true face. I've been doing this for 11,5 years already and it's happened several times before so I wouldn't be surprised.
If you give me any indication to suspect that you're doing the same thing, even if you no longer disrespect me with accusations of hard drug use, then you'll be blocked. You're skating on thin ice and there will be no second chance. I hope that you don't try to test my patience.
I respect you for being Polish, and having broken free of the pervasive Polish russophobic propaganda.
Even considering the massive MSM and Hollywood brainwashing campaign that has been going on in the West, Poland stands in a class of its own---the toxic, ostensibly "patriotic" indoctrination in Poland has been going on for centuries, so that most Poles thoroughly internalized it, and mothers brainwash it into their children. Bernays and Goebbels ought to have taken lessons there.. There is no political faction, left or right, catholic or woke, that does not eagerly sing in the chorus. But this alleged patriotism is totally deluded and bigoted, and has led Poland to a string of defeats and self-harm.
It can be traced ultimately to Bismarck's successful Kulturkampf efforts to condition Poles into hating Russia, so that they would form a self-sacrificial bulwark protecting Germany from the consequences of their meddling. And it still works like a charm---despite the heinous atrocities inflicted by Nazi Germany, the Poles still toady up to Germans, and hate the Russians who rescued them. Poles are not just resigned, but positively eager to pay with their lives for the safety of NATO---that still treats them like shit. Have you noticed that in the recent cocaine affair, the Polish PM Tusk, an eager germanophile shill for NATO and the EU, was nonetheless excluded from the party---it was just Starmer, Macron, and Merz partying together, the dog was not invited. Yet even the exemplary fate of sacrificial Ukraine does not light a light-bulb in Polish brains.
To see an individual rise above this monumental generations-deep brainwash is impressive. So there is hope. Keep up the good work, we are waiting for your lucid analyses.
I went back and read Trump’s comments about Bagram, I think he simply misspoke because almost 80. Trump surrendered to the Taliban but in August 2021 when the American people finally realized what had happened Republicans developed talking points such as Trump was going to keep Bagram and not leave behind equipment…all nonsense for their ignorant voters to devour.
If the event sequence is confirmed, then the terrorist attack in Kashmir has an even higher chance of being the handiwork of a US agency. The US return to Bagram airbase would be a thorn in the side of Russia, China, India, and Iran. Intuitively, the chance of this happening is low. But a suitcase of USD can have an incredible effect sometimes. Not all Muslims have the kind of discipline that the Houthis do.
Thanks for sharing your well informed views on these issues.
Is it a given that the Taliban government is open and welcoming of a renewed US military presence in Afghanistan?
Of course not. Trump cut a deal with them in February 2020 and staying in Bagram was the Deep State’s intention at least according to SecDef Miller…but Trump didn’t care about it. Btw, what happened to Miler and MacGregor?? They aren’t in this administration.
We understand it is impossible to argue with President Trump. Therefore, I will hand over this job to a poet by the name of Rudyard Kipling who published this poem in 1890. Kipling can explain this issue to Trump, but only God can give him the understanding.
The Young British Soldier
1
When the 'arf-made recruity goes out to the East
'E acts like a babe an' 'e drinks like a beast,
An' 'e wonders because 'e is frequent deceased
Ere 'e's fit for to serve as a soldier.
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
So-oldier of the Queen!
2
Now all you recruities what's drafted to-day,
You shut up your rag-box an' 'ark to my lay,
An' I'll sing you a soldier as far as I may:
A soldier what's fit for a soldier.
Fit, fit, fit for a soldier . . .
3
First mind you steer clear o' the grog-sellers' huts,
For they sell you Fixed Bay'nets that rots out your guts -
Ay, drink that 'ud eat the live steel from your butts -
An' it's bad for the young British soldier.
Bad, bad, bad for the soldier . . .
4
When the cholera comes - as it will past a doubt -
Keep out of the wet and don't go on the shout,
For the sickness gets in as the liquor dies out,
An' it crumples the young British soldier.
Crum-, crum-, crumples the soldier . . .
5
But the worst o' your foes is the sun over'ead:
You must wear your 'elmet for all that is said:
If 'e finds you uncovered 'e'll knock you down dead,
An' you'll die like a fool of a soldier.
Fool, fool, fool of a soldier . . .
6
If you're cast for fatigue by a sergeant unkind,
Don't grouse like a woman nor crack on nor blind;
Be handy and civil, and then you will find
That it's beer for the young British soldier.
Beer, beer, beer for the soldier . . .
7
Now, if you must marry, take care she is old -
A troop-sergeant's widow's the nicest I'm told,
For beauty won't help if your rations is cold,
Nor love ain't enough for a soldier.
'Nough, 'nough, 'nough for a soldier . . .
8
If the wife should go wrong with a comrade, be loath
To shoot when you catch 'em - you'll swing, on my oath! -
Make 'im take 'er and keep 'er: that's Hell for them both,
An' you're shut o' the curse of a soldier.
Curse, curse, curse of a soldier . . .
9
When first under fire an' you're wishful to duck,
Don't look nor take 'eed at the man that is struck,
Be thankful you're livin', and trust to your luck
And march to your front like a soldier.
Front, front, front like a soldier . . .
10
When 'arf of your bullets fly wide in the ditch,
Don't call your Martini a cross-eyed old bitch;
She's human as you are - you treat her as sich,
An' she'll fight for the young British soldier.
Fight, fight, fight for the soldier . . .
11
When shakin' their bustles like ladies so fine,
The guns o' the enemy wheel into line,
Shoot low at the limbers an' don't mind the shine,
For noise never startles the soldier.
Start-, start-, startles the soldier . . .
12
If your officer's dead and the sergeants look white,
Remember it's ruin to run from a fight:
So take open order, lie down, and sit tight,
And wait for supports like a soldier.
Wait, wait, wait like a soldier . . .
13
When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
So-oldier of the Queen!
“To restore US influence over Pakistan….??” — have you forgotten that US demanded CIA-organized “law-fare” that overthrew the most popular democratic president Khan that Pakistan ever head (who is with wife tortured and rotting in military prison).
That is precisely what I am saying - in view of the uncertainty created by DT on tariifs there could be more common ground in a BRICS type forum than thought of. Both China and India have similar stances on WTO, COP etc
I disagree that DT will go in for active involvement in Afghanistan. It runs counter to his entire campaign strategy
Thanks for your great work Andrew!
We've shared the link on our daily report.
A Skeptic War Reports
https://askeptic.substack.com/
Andrew - excellent update - I will cover this on my podcast.
Trump simply wants to erase the humiliation of the retreat from Afghanistan. Geopolitics have nothing to do with it.
I strongly disagree. The rapprochement with Pakistan, and the desire for Bagram, are all a part of the encirclement of Iran, geopolitics indeed.
I doubt Trump thinks that far ahead.
You underestimate him, he is not the fool he plays. His actions are seemingly chaotic, but internally consistent. For instance, here is a good analysis of his economic policy: https://tsargrad.tv/slovo/o-torgovoj-vojne-trampa_1216613
Nah, he's just weak, stupid and easily manipulated. Those trying to ascribe higher meanings to his meananderings are engaged in the equivalent of looking at sheep livers to try to discern the will of the gods.
All I can answer to that unsubstantiated expression of opinion is that it is almost invariably disastrous to underestimate the opponent.
None of that means that the opponent cannot be just stupid.
You write some interesting points but I think it's not realistic that the US is going to go in totally for CCP. DT is notoriously fickle but there are saner minds in his Administration who maynot be as gung- ho on alienating India as you seem to think
The sequence of events that I detailed, as based upon the existing facts, doesn't require going all-in for China. It can even happen if his "total reset" collapses. In fact, that's the most likely scenario and trigger event for expediting this, though the challenge of course would be to patch up Taliban-Pakistani problems, which is incredibly difficult due to the Taliban hosting the TTP and (reportedly) also the BLA.
I strongly doubt that China, of all parties, is going to again fall for the patently fake "snuggling up" of the West. They still remember the Opium War, and Kissinger's previous /divide et impera/ policy of driving a wedge between China and Russia. Trump has been obvious about his views of China as enemy number one; and now he is smiling, and figuratively patting Xi on the back, and proposing a deal?
But I also don't think this thawing of relations is meant to be a lasting policy. Trump is just putting China on the back burner while he quietly concentrates on the immediate goal, Iran. That is what Bagram is needed for; and that is why the inclusion of Pakistan is so crucial, that Trump is even willing to throw India out with the bathwater. In fact, I think that the India-Pakistan conflict was deliberately provoked, via CIA and MI6 terrorist ties, to bring Pakistan into the fold.
The coming war with the Iran has been delayed, because having been whipped by even the peripheral Houthis, Trump realized that waging war against Iran, even with Israeli nukes, would be a disaster. So he is embarking on an effort to assemble a coalition, not of European paper tigers, but of populous and well armed local players to supply the boots-on-the-ground that the US is itself incapable of sustaining.
The keystone of the coming anti-Iran alliance is Turkey. They have their own, very strong incentives for wanting to bring Iran down; Iran is the katechon, so as to speak, preventing the reanimation of the Ottoman empire. By taking part in defeating Iran, its main regional rival, Turkey would: 1. Grab hold of Iraq, with its agricultural resources in northern Mesopotamia, from time immemorial the key to dominating the Middle East; 2. Gain control of the Iraqi oilfields, and total domination of the Gulf, with its oil and its riches; 3. Be able to finally and decisively trample down on the Kurds, and on Armenia for good measure; 4. Link up with the Turkic 'stans in Central Asia, and vassalize them.
Now, Turkey, although strong and unspent (they haven't lifted a finger to supply the Ukrainian project, and still have all their tanks and ammunition) is still not quite a match, alone, against Iran. But a coalition with the US and Israel would dramatically alter the calculus. Turkey can supply the boots on the ground, especially the tank divisions needed for breezing through Iraq and smashing into Khuzestan. They also have cannon-fodder of their own, the Syrian jihadis, fanatically eager to kill Shiites. And the other allies would supply what Turkey lacks. America, the air superiority and (so they still think) the suppression of Iranian air force and AD. This is the kind of war the US likes, bombing from afar while proxies die on the ground. Israel, the nukes; the US would be loath to openly and offensively use nukes against Iran, not just because of the stigma, but because they are afraid that Russia would respond with nuclear armageddon. But Israel has no such hangups, and can nuke Iranian cities with accustomed impunity, exterminating the Iranian educated classes and destroying their industry and, of course, immediately reducing Iran to the status of a failed state; actual conquest of the highlands would not be necessary. And, as an icing on the cake, there would be no sanctions, no recriminations for Turkey's region-wide conquest; if you are on the hegemon's side you can do nothing wrong.
The only thing holding Turkey back (apart from basic fear) is the strength of the domestic Muslim opposition against teaming up with Israel. This reluctance has been reinforced by the idiotic behavior of Israel towards Syria, a Turkish vassal that they are bombing the stuffing out of, because they wanted a piece of it but missed the opportunity. It is that self-defeating and totally cretinous action that made Trump turn against bosom friend Bibi; he understands that unless there is a "new leaf" turned in Israel and a seemingly fresh regime takes over, no alliance with Turkey will be possible. Let us hope; but do not lose sight of what a snake Erdogan is, and an ambitious snake to boot.
Which brings us, at last, to Pakistan. If a coalition attack on Iran is to take place, anyone can see the strategic importance of including Pakistan in that alliance. It will completely surround Iran, and put a numerous and fairly well armed Sunni army at their back door. Even if that army hesitates to move up into the Iranian highlands (and they should have no qualms, it is just like their own countryside) they will still, as an Army-in-Being (to paraphrase Mahan) hobble Iran with just the potential of a massive backstab. Bagram airbase is just icing on the cake.
So that is the aim of Trump's policy: the temporary appeasement of China, the spurning of India and rapprochement with Pakistan, the return to Bagram, the courting of Erdogan and falling out with Netanyahu, all are logical, consistent steps when viewed within that framework.
And once all of South Asia, from the Caucasus to the border of China, is in the Golem Hegemon's hands, how long until the Turkic Central Asia caves in to Turkish and US domination? At this point Russia's only hope will lie in its nukes, and world Armageddon. Because if Russia falls, China will not hold; not when nukes start to fall and India, for survival's sake, becomes the West's proxy against what's left of China (and then is trampled itself in turn). Until the Talmudist and Mammonist Cabal rules the depopulated world and the ultimate dystopia is unveiled.
Unless Iran holds.
Interesting ideas. I do believe the ‘west’ tried to oust Erdogan in 2016 with Gulenists and that the real goal was to use pan-Turanism and unite the Turkic lands of Central Asia under a Gulenist Turkey, and use Turkic ethnicities to drive a wedge into north Russia and China… then I believe Russia rescued Erdogan… I believe CIA/MI6 were all in to use Turks to destabilise Russia and China from within and it was thwarted by Russia for self-preservation. Maybe I was wrong but…
Thank you, your comment gave me a deeper insight on the Turkish angle. While I know of their regional aspirations, I only have a superficial knowledge of internal politics there.
It is true, as you said, that the CIA was likely involved in the failed coup against Erdogan---the question is, is the memory of that enough to turn him against cooperating with the US now, when it seems in Turkey's interest? Let us hope that Erdogan realizes that allying with Israel and its Golem will only cause him trouble. I am afraid he thinks he can outsmart them all, and come out on top. And he is not a friend to Russia, personal debts notwithstanding.
As for the Gulenists, I am trying to read up now, that you mentioned them. Any good resources that you can recommend?
The "total reset" is just temporary, a sort of a Minsk moment. It is convenient for the US to put the escalation with China on the back burner, because they need to concentrate elsewhere (the Middle East). It is convenient for China to go along, because they still need time to strengthen and brace the economy for the inevitable confrontation. Neither is sincere in trusting the other, nor expecting the détente to last.
Like I said, DT is unpredictable. Moscow and Delhi can also take a stand against him in unison as can Iran. It's not so easy. Besides CCP has a lot of business in India which it wouldn't like to hazard.
That business still remains in spite of Galwan and continued Chinese support for Pakistan, both military and strategic (CPEC). Unless there's a major bilateral crisis, even worse than Galwan, I therefore don't think anything will happen to Chinese business in and with India all that much.
Russia is also actually trying to find ways to work with the US, including with Iran, with whom Russia offered to mediate if need be or play some role in any new nuclear deal that they might agree upon bilaterally. Afghans, unfortunately, have a reputation of going to the highest bidder, and Russia can't compete with the US for "loyalty" there if Trump starts raining down dollars.
Your last para is true only to an extent. Noone uniformly trusts the US and that includes the Kremlin as well as China, and India. Note that prior to the Pahalgam incident Beijing and Delhi were talking to restore greater normalcy. You seem to presume there will inevitably be a US China Russia axis with Pakistan as a sub- player. Not necessarily true as the India China Russia presence cements BRICS
I don't believe that there's any serious trust between the US and the major countries that it's engaging with right now (China, Russia, Iran, India).
I also didn't see any major upshots of the Sino-Indo thaw from last fall's BRICS Summit in Kazan.
I don't assume that there will be a US-China-Russia axis either, in fact, my work over the past half year has argued against that scenario.
Please familiarize yourself with it, beginning with my analyses on the Russian-US "New Detente" from right after the election.
The whole point from the US' perspective is to reduce Russia's disproportionate dependence on China, ditto Russia's motivations too.
Those calculations might change depending on the outcome of the Ukrainian peace process, but I don't take for granted that they will.
Rather, this single piece relies on several facts to forecast a scenario sequence based on several identified variables and also accounts for both possibilities.
To your last point about BRICS, it's nothing, really, the organization is just a talking club as I explained in detail here after the last summit:
https://korybko.substack.com/p/did-the-latest-brics-summit-achieve
It's extremely unlikely that BRICS will ever achieve anything tangible in a significance sense due to its members' extreme asymmetries.
I think you are wrong about the border talks between India and China. There was a dialogue which was gathering steam. Obviously these are not issues which can be solved overnight- but it was leading to the 1990s type situation.
Remember that China India business ties are far more stable than those China has with Pakistan.
You are unduly pessimistic about BRICS. Most Westerners are. It's a strong bloc which will only strengthen as the days go by and especially as with DT swinging between Scott Bessent and Navarro as economic advisers, noone can predict his next move. BRICS in such a time provides a cushion
I'm not pessimistic about BRICS, just realistic, since it's achieved nothing of tangible significance whatsoever apart from launching the New Development Bank however many years ago.
It's just a talking club for discussing ways to jointly accelerate financial multipolarity processes. The real work is carried out bilaterally or through "mini-laterals", not through BRICS as a whole.
There is a lot of trade going on between the inner members of BRICS, ie Russia, India and China. The other two are a bit perfunctory. The main problem for the RIC triangle is IIRC that India only accepts Rupees and USD. As far as I heard, Russia and China do do trade over gold, but I haven't heard it from India (or Brazil, for that matter).
Most other potential members - Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, Argentina (?) - run considerable trade deficits. So how is Russia or China going to secure any credit given through the New Development Bank?
Precisely because of Trumpian tariffs and the fact that no-one in China, Russia or India trusts him- BRICS is bound to get more of a trading bloc against the US
I don't like it when people joke about someone doing drugs just because they don't like their analysis so please don't do it again.
To briefly address your points:
1. The Central Asian Republics are mercurial and at times unreliable partners who tend to side with whoever pays them the most as recently proven by them throwing Northern Cyprus under the bus in a rejection of hitherto much-hyped "pan-Turkism" for €12 billion of investments from the EU:
https://korybko.substack.com/p/pan-turkism-was-dealt-a-blow-after
Afghanistan has an even more infamous reputation for siding with the highest bidder as history attests on numerous occasions, from the British era to the present. Moreover, simple declarations mean nothing in practice since time and again words are contradicted by actions, with NATO statements for instance being a case in point.
2. What the US wields is tremendous influence over Pakistan, with whom Taliban-run Afghanistan is in a state of hybrid war, and it can also provide aid and weapons in exchange for returning to Bagram Airbase and/or profitable mineral extraction rights. Dismissing this is either dishonest or indicative of being a neophyte observer of the region.
As for China, Trump did indeed declare a "total reset" in their relations, this is an objectively existing and easily verifiable fact. They've also worked very closely before in the past on a host of issues and there remains sizeable American influence over elements of the Chinese government and sizeable Chinese influence over elements of the American one.
3. The aforesaid are already converging in Pakistan as proven by the US' neutral but Pakistani-leaning position during the latest Indo-Pak conflict, which is all the more surprising due to Pakistan hosting BRI's CPEC flagship, being accused of ties to regional and even global terrorist groups for decades, and recent concerns over its long-range missile program.
As it presently stands, the factually proven American position towards Pakistan isn't at odds with Chinese interests at all, in fact, it aligns with them. Pakistan even enthusiastically thanked the US for allegedly mediating with India. Once again, to dismiss this is either dishonest or indicative of being a neophyte observer of the region.
As a reminder, please don't toxify the conversation with accusations me being doped up while writing this analysis. It's extremely disrespectful and you'll be blocked the next time.
Like for real, do you REALLY think that I'm here in Moscow -- which has some of the strictest anti-drug laws outside of Asia and the Gulf -- taking psychedelics drugs in my home where my wife and two young kids live AND then writing a "trippy" analysis that I THEN still decide to publish the day after I sober up?
WTF, the more I think about it, the angrier I get. I don't need to tolerate this BS from people under my posts. You've been a useful contributor before so I don't know why the heck you'd all of a sudden transition into a troll, perhaps because I shared some insight and forecasts that completely contradict your expectations.
If you or anyone else does this again, they'll be blocked without a warning. I invest my limited and valuable free time in interacting with my audience when time and interest allow so it's even more disrespectful for you to take advantage of this to insult me knowing that I'll likely read it. I'm so disappointed, this is ridiculous.
I don't even think it was a "joke" now that I reread your post several times. You could have claimed it was a joke or feigned ignorance if you only had your first sentence about "tripping", which is also used colloquially, but then you referenced and expanded upon it in your last remark, thus doubling down on it.
No more, okay? I don't know who you are, maybe you're one of those trolls who pretend to be a friend or at least a useful contributor for some time before pulling off the mask and showing their true face. I've been doing this for 11,5 years already and it's happened several times before so I wouldn't be surprised.
If you give me any indication to suspect that you're doing the same thing, even if you no longer disrespect me with accusations of hard drug use, then you'll be blocked. You're skating on thin ice and there will be no second chance. I hope that you don't try to test my patience.
You're banned for making a bigoted remark about my ethnicity (Polish), I have absolutely zero tolerance for that.
I respect you for being Polish, and having broken free of the pervasive Polish russophobic propaganda.
Even considering the massive MSM and Hollywood brainwashing campaign that has been going on in the West, Poland stands in a class of its own---the toxic, ostensibly "patriotic" indoctrination in Poland has been going on for centuries, so that most Poles thoroughly internalized it, and mothers brainwash it into their children. Bernays and Goebbels ought to have taken lessons there.. There is no political faction, left or right, catholic or woke, that does not eagerly sing in the chorus. But this alleged patriotism is totally deluded and bigoted, and has led Poland to a string of defeats and self-harm.
It can be traced ultimately to Bismarck's successful Kulturkampf efforts to condition Poles into hating Russia, so that they would form a self-sacrificial bulwark protecting Germany from the consequences of their meddling. And it still works like a charm---despite the heinous atrocities inflicted by Nazi Germany, the Poles still toady up to Germans, and hate the Russians who rescued them. Poles are not just resigned, but positively eager to pay with their lives for the safety of NATO---that still treats them like shit. Have you noticed that in the recent cocaine affair, the Polish PM Tusk, an eager germanophile shill for NATO and the EU, was nonetheless excluded from the party---it was just Starmer, Macron, and Merz partying together, the dog was not invited. Yet even the exemplary fate of sacrificial Ukraine does not light a light-bulb in Polish brains.
To see an individual rise above this monumental generations-deep brainwash is impressive. So there is hope. Keep up the good work, we are waiting for your lucid analyses.
I went back and read Trump’s comments about Bagram, I think he simply misspoke because almost 80. Trump surrendered to the Taliban but in August 2021 when the American people finally realized what had happened Republicans developed talking points such as Trump was going to keep Bagram and not leave behind equipment…all nonsense for their ignorant voters to devour.