William Engdahl on US/China conflict

The Black Flag Cafe is the place travelers come to share stories and advice. Moderated by Robert Young Pelton the author of The World's Most Dangerous Places.

Moderator: coldharvest

William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby MJK » Sat Aug 15, 2020 12:59 am

By William Engdahl


If we step back from the details of daily headlines around the world and try to make sense of larger patterns, the dominant dynamic defining world geopolitics in the past three years or more is the appearance of a genuine irregular conflict between the two most formidable powers on the planet—The Peoples’ Republic of China and the United States of America. Increasingly it’s beginning to look as if some very dark global networks are orchestrating what looks to be an updated rerun of their 1939-1945 World War. Only this time the stakes are total, and aim at creation a universal global totalitarian system, what David Rockefeller once called a “one world government.” The powers that be periodically use war to gain major policy shifts.

On behalf of the Powers That Be (PTB), World War II was orchestrated by the circles of the City of London and of Wall Street to maneuver two great obstacles—Russia and Germany—to wage a war to the death against each other, in order that those Anglo-Saxon PTB could reorganize the world geopolitical chess board to their advantage. It largely succeeded, but for the small detail that after 1945, Wall Street and the Rockefeller brothers were determined that England play the junior partner to Washington. London and Washington then entered the period of their global domination known as the Cold War.

That Anglo-American global condominium ended, by design, in 1989 with the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union by 1991.

Around this time, with the onset of the Bill Clinton presidency in 1992, the next phase– financial and industrial globalization– was inaugurated. With that, began the hollowing out of the industrial base of not only the United States, but also of Germany and the EU. The cheap labor outsourcing enabled by the new WTO drove wages down and destroyed one industry after the next in the industrial West after the 1990s. It was a necessary step on the path to what G.H.W. Bush in 1990 called the New World Order. The next step would be destruction of national sovereignty everywhere. Here the USA was the major obstacle.

“A little help from our friends…”

For the PTB, who owe no allegiance to nations, only to their power which is across borders, the birth of the World Trade Organization and their bringing China in as a full member in 2001 was intended as the key next step. At that point the PTB facilitated in China the greatest industrial growth by any nation in history, possibly excepting Germany from 1871-1914 and USA after 1866. WTO membership allowed Western multinationals from Apple to Nike to KFC to Ford and VW to pour billions into China to make their products at dirt-cheap wage levels for re-export to the West.

One of the great mysteries of that China growth is the fact that China was allowed to become the “workshop of the world” after 2001, first in lower-skill industries such as textiles or toys, later in pharmaceuticals and most recently in electronics assembly and production. The mystery clears up when we look at the idea that the PTB and their financial houses, using China, want to weaken strong industrial powers, especially the United States, to push their global agenda. Brzezinski often wrote that the nation state was to be eliminated, as did his patron, David Rockefeller. By allowing China to become a rival to Washington in economy and increasingly in technology, they created the means to destroy the superpower hegemony of the US.

By the onset of the Presidency of Xi Jinping in 2012, China was an economic colossus second in weight only to the United States. Clearly this could never have happened–not under the eye of the same Anglo-American old families who launched the Opium Wars after 1840 to bring China to heel and open their economy to Western financial looting–unless the Anglo-Americans had wanted it.

The same British-owned bank involved in the China opium trade, Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank (HSBC), founded by a Scotsman, Thomas Sutherland in 1865 in the then-British colony of Hong Kong, today is the largest non-Chinese bank in Hong Kong. HSBC has become so well-connected to China in recent years that it has since 2011 had as Board member and Deputy HSBC Chairman, Laura Cha. Cha was formerly Vice Chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, being the first person outside mainland China to join the Beijing Central Government of the People’s Republic of China at vice-ministerial rank. In other words the largest bank in the UK has a board member who was a member of the Chinese Communist Party and a China government official. China needed access to Western money and HSBC and other select banks such as JP MorganChase, Barclays, Goldman Sachs were clearly more than happy to assist.

“Socialism with Xi Jinping Characteristics…”

All told until 2012 when Xi took charge of the CCP in Beijing, China seemed to be willing to be a globalist “team player,” though with “Chinese characteristics.” However, in 2015 after little more than two years in office, Xi Jinping endorsed a comprehensive national industrial strategy, Made in China: 2025. China 2025 replaced an earlier Western globalist document that had been formulated with the World Bank and the USA, the China 2030 report under Robert Zoellick. That shift to a China strategy for global tech domination might well have triggered a decision by the globalist PTB that China could no longer be relied on to play by the rules of the globalists, but rather that the CCP under Xi were determined to make China the global leader in advanced industrial, AI and bio-technologies. A resurgent China nationalist global hegemony was not the idea of the New World Order gang.

China:2025 combined with Xi’s strong advocacy of the Belt Road Initiative for global infrastructure linking China by land and sea to all Eurasia and beyond, likely suggested to the globalists that the only solution to the prospect of their losing their power to a China global hegemon would ultimately be war, a war that would destroy both nationalist powers, USA AND China. This is my conclusion and there is much to suggest this is now taking place.

Tit for Tat

If so, it will most likely be far different from the military contest of World War II. The USA and most of the Western industrial economies have “conveniently” imposed the worst economic depression since the 1930’s as a bizarre response to an alleged virus originating in Wuhan and spreading to the world. Despite the fact that the death toll, even with vastly inflated statistics, is at the level of a severe annual influenza, the insistence of politicians and the corrupt WHO to impose draconian lockdown and economic disruption has crippled the remaining industrial base in the US and most of the EU.

The eruption of well-organized riots and vandalism under the banner of racial protests across the USA has brought America’s cities to a state in many cases of war zones resembling the cities of the 2013 Matt Damon and Jodie Foster film, Elysium. In this context, anti-Washington rhetoric from Beijing has taken on a sharp tone in their use of so-called “Wolf Diplomacy.”

Now after Washington closed the China Consulate in Houston and China the US Consulate in Chengdu, both sides have stepped up rhetoric. High tech companies are being banned in the US, military displays of force from the US in the South China Sea and waters near Taiwan are increasing tensions and rhetoric on both sides. The White House accuses the WHO of being an agent of Beijing, while China accuses the US of deliberately creating a deadly virus and bringing it to Wuhan. Chinese state media supports the explosion of violent protests across America under the banner of Black Lives Matter. Step-wise events are escalating dramatically. Many of the US self-styled Marxists leading the protests across US cities have ties to Beijing such as the Maoist-origin Revolutionary Communist Party, USA of Bob Avakian.

“Unrestricted Warfare”

Under these conditions, what kind of escalation is likely? In 1999 two colonels in the China PLA, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, published a book with the PLA Press titled Unrestricted Warfare. Qiao Liang was promoted to Major General in the PLA Air Force and became deputy secretary-general of the Council for National Security Policy Studies. The two updated their work in 2016. It gives a window on high-level China military strategy.

Reviewing published US military doctrine in the aftermath of the 1991 US Operation Desert Storm war against Iraq, the Chinese authors point out what they see as US over-dependence on brute military force and conventional military doctrine. They claim, “Observing, considering, and resolving problems from the point of view of technology is typical American thinking. Its advantages and disadvantages are both very apparent, just like the characters of Americans.” They add, “military threats are already often no longer the major factors affecting national security…these traditional factors are increasingly becoming more intertwined with grabbing resources, contending for markets, controlling capital, trade sanctions, and other economic factors, to the extent that they are even becoming secondary to these factors. They comprise a new pattern which threatens the political, economic and military security of a nation or nations… The two authors define the new form of warfare as, “encompassing the political, economic, diplomatic, cultural, and psychological spheres, in addition to the land, sea, air, space, and electronics spheres.”

They suggest China could use hacking into websites, targeting financial institutions, terrorism, using the media, and conducting urban warfare among the methods proposed. Recent revelations that Chinese entities pay millions in ad revenues to the New York Times and other mainstream USA media to voice China-positive views is one example. Similarly, maneuvering a Chinese national to head the US’ largest public pension fund, CalPERS, which poured billions into risky China stocks, or persuading the New York Stock Exchange to list dozens of China companies without requiring adherence to US accounting transparency increase US financial vulnerability are others.

This all suggests the form that a war between China and the US could take. It can be termed asymmetrical warfare or unrestricted war, where nothing that disrupts the enemy is off limits. Qiao has that, “the first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, with nothing forbidden.” There are no Geneva Conventions.

The two Beijing authors add this irregular warfare could include assaults on the political security, economic security, cultural security, and information security of the nation. The dependence of the US economy on China supply chains for everything from basic antibiotics to militarily-vital rare earth minerals is but one domain of vulnerability.

On its side, China is vulnerable to trade sanctions, financial disruption, bioterror attacks and oil embargoes to name a few. Some have suggested the recent locust plague and African Swine Fever devastation to China’s core food supplies, was not merely an act of nature. If not, then we are likely deep into an undeclared form of US-China unrestricted warfare. Could it be that the recent extreme floods along the China Yangtze River that threaten the giant Three Gorges Dam and have flooded Wuhan and other major China cities and devastated millions of acres of key cropland was not entirely seasonal?

A full unrestricted war of China and the USA would be more than a tragedy. It could be the end of civilization as we know it. Is this what characters such as Bill Gates or George Soros and their superiors are trying to bring about? Do they plan to introduce their draconian dystopian “Reset” on the ashes of such a conflict?

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
User avatar
MJK
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:59 am
Location: Fairbanks

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby ROB » Sun Aug 16, 2020 1:11 am

Frederick William Engdahl is an American writer and conspiracy theorist based in Germany. He identifies himself as a "economic researcher, historian and freelance journalist."

Try harder.
User avatar
ROB
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:49 am

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby MJK » Sun Aug 16, 2020 7:27 am

Always glad of your participation in any thread.
User avatar
MJK
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:59 am
Location: Fairbanks

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby ROB » Sun Aug 16, 2020 2:08 pm

I think you’re half-witted.
User avatar
ROB
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:49 am

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby MJK » Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:19 pm

Here again, your concise presentation of opinion makes your position and the knowledge base it extends from quite clear. I feel that we are in agreement on this and many topics.
User avatar
MJK
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:59 am
Location: Fairbanks

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby Kurt » Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:49 pm

I love these little gems:

On behalf of the Powers That Be (PTB), World War II was orchestrated by the circles of the City of London and of Wall Street to maneuver two great obstacles—Russia and Germany—to wage a war to the death against each other, in order that those Anglo-Saxon PTB could reorganize the world geopolitical chess board to their advantage. It largely succeeded, but for the small detail that after 1945, Wall Street and the Rockefeller brothers were determined that England play the junior partner to Washington. London and Washington then entered the period of their global domination known as the Cold War.


What circles? Who was in those circles?
Did these Circles break the Molotov Ribentrop pact? If so, how? Who did it?

Wall Street and The Rockefellers brothers did what? I mean what were the steps that they took? Who was involved? Who on Wall St? Wall St. is not just "Wall St." it is made up of entities, those entities are run by people, those people have names. Who made this arrangement? When? Who in the UK agreed with them?

To me this sounds like that KGB file from the Mitrotkhin archives where the Soviets believed that the Rockefellers dictated financial plans to the West so the Center wanted to infiltrate these plans and both corrupt them and adopt "the real" plans for the Eastern Bloc to use so they could catch up to the West. So, instead of being content with actual assets in the West that could provide decent intelligence and maybe even allow them to sabotage whatever system they infiltrated, instead they were most excited about having an agent get hired as David Rockefeller's piano tuner.

It is very odd to see 60's era Soviet delusions re-hashed as a Deep State like conspiracy theory.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 20131
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby MJK » Mon Aug 17, 2020 2:46 am

I do not have a deep enough historical background on this material to say anything other than I found it to be an interesting take on the subject. I came to Engdahl by way of his book, 'The Seeds of Destruction' which is about Monsanto and its cohorts. Time will tell if his prediction of unrestricted warfare between the US and China is accurate.
User avatar
MJK
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:59 am
Location: Fairbanks

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby ROB » Mon Aug 17, 2020 3:35 am

MJK wrote:I do not have a deep enough historical background on this material to say anything


FTFY
User avatar
ROB
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:49 am

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby MJK » Mon Aug 17, 2020 5:31 am

Your participation will always be expected and will always highlight the depth of your intellect. Looking forward to your clockwork like responses! I so enjoy your input. Your diligent efforts to be a part of all my posts is flattering.
User avatar
MJK
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:59 am
Location: Fairbanks

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby Kurt » Mon Aug 17, 2020 2:28 pm

MJK wrote:I do not have a deep enough historical background on this material to say anything other than I found it to be an interesting take on the subject. I came to Engdahl by way of his book, 'The Seeds of Destruction' which is about Monsanto and its cohorts. Time will tell if his prediction of unrestricted warfare between the US and China is accurate.


I understand that but did you find it odd he did not provide an explanation to those questions as a background for his statement? I mean, the truth of his position would depend on the background being true.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 20131
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby Kurt » Mon Aug 17, 2020 2:39 pm

This guy is interesting:

Engdahl stated in an interview that the 2011 Egyptian Revolution was orchestrated by the Pentagon to facilitate Barack Obama's Middle East foreign policy and that the situation in Egypt has deteriorated since former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was overthrown.[10] According to Engdahl, the ultimate goal of the US is to take the resources of Africa and Middle East under military control to block economic growth in China and Russia.


That is from Wikipedia.

He seems to believe in the concept of "Totalitarian Democracy" while not mentioning things like "Mubarak was a dictator" or "China is a single party government with a strong man as a leader" or "Russia is controlled by a consortium of Vladimir Putin and Oligarch's and Crime Syndicates friendly to Putin"

The focus instead is on the many flaws of the West while either ignoring or presenting the Authoritarian East as a better ideal.

...an alleged virus


Alleged?
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 20131
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby MJK » Tue Aug 18, 2020 6:50 am

I think Engdahl is referring to the implementation of the Cebrowski Doctrine, also known as the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski Doctrine. My understanding is that this plan divides the world into the developed nations and everybody else, with the US working to destroy/destabilize the developing countries' state structures and positioning itself to oversee who gets the resources from those places. Not take them outright, but to direct traffic so to speak. My guess is that your evil empires of Russia and China would not be club members and would have to shop elsewhere.
As for the alleged virus, we don't enjoy each others' company when that is on a front burner so let's stick with the flawed west/bossy east portion of the subject. Could Arthur Cebrowski's white paper be what Engdahl is alluding to? Plenty of evidence of that plan being in play when you look at Libya, Iraq, Lebanon, the Sudan and other places gagging on the democracy being exported to them. Also Venezuela and Syria, where things didn't go so well. I believe Cebrowski's paper also called for carving up Saudi Arabia into 5 or so smaller countries. If this is what is going down you can be sure that Russia and China can see it and will step up their games with China pushing back the hardest as they are in the most trouble.
User avatar
MJK
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:59 am
Location: Fairbanks

Re: William Engdahl on US/China conflict

Postby Kurt » Tue Aug 18, 2020 4:48 pm

I thought the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski Doctrine was an internal one, designed to challenge US military Status Quo. I was under the impression that Docrine was counter to the Powell Doctrine (and Schwartzkopf) of massive, overwhelming force + larger than likely reserves. His official position was in the Office of Force Transformation and not foreign policy.

Do you have a link to this White Paper that you mentioned? I am curious.

As far as the alleged COVID-19 virus goes, this thing has killed 130k+ Americans so far. My tolerance for being polite while discussing it it over. Anyone who doubts it is a dangerous idiot as far as I am concerned.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 20131
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City


Return to Black Flag Cafe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron