Tweet
Targets Of New World Order
Confrontation Is a Means of Observing Balance
The impression growing into confidence is that the new meaning of
foreign policies of the world powers is embedded in the combined
application of brutal processes, and escalation of confrontation in
parallel to them. The apologists of the new world order have recently
proposed a certain controllable stability but the representatives of
both the left and partly the right conservative projects preferred
rejecting this paradigm and ran into the less predictable perspective
of local wars which transform into a permanent world confrontation.
Certain groups that continue, despite financial challenges, to
initiate promotion of the global project of Atlantism are trying to
save the former format of the Western community by creating the North
Atlantic market and probably the currency. The issues of world's major
currencies have not been resolved, the geopolitical prospects of the
West, as well as fight with terrorism which is acquiring new
approaches and ideologies in every new stage have not been defined.
Relations with Arab and other Islamist states remain obscure. NATO
does not propose new enlargement programs but plans development of
cooperation with the countries of Asia Pacific. Apparently, somewhere
behind the curtain of activities of George Bush administration, some
think tanks have concluded that the possible approaches of reloading
may be viewed as timeout on the eve of a new global attack on the Old
World supported by different and unexpected partners who will be
offered certain guarantees of security in return for partial loyalty.
Hence, brutality as such is supported and initiated, and confrontation
is used as a means of observing balance of forces in the world and in
separate regions.
At the same time, there occur doubts that the `new confrontation' is
just a tactics, and there is a new paradigm of chaos management. Is a
global policy based on total but controllable brutality possible at
all? Apparently, there is confidence that it is possible or this is
presented as signs of something inapprehensible. In addition, attempts
are made to instill in mass consciousness perceptions that either a
nuclear war or total fight with world terror is an alternative to
global brutality and confrontation.
So who is the target of global brutality? Everyone but China. China is
a special point, and this line of behavior is pending. For its part,
China is not rushing into a global discussion on rejection of former
perceptions of the new world order.
The targets are Turkey, Russia, the France-Germany tandem, possibly
India and Israel, as well as Brazil. The geography of targets is
rather vast but a vast area within the borders of West-East-South is
outlining which will get different approaches, and different goals
will be set. This area with its resistance and false expansion will
constantly disturb vast regions while the future of these states
cannot be predicted.
The current ruling elites in Turkey and Russia are optimal for their
involvement in brutal confrontational processes. These elites believe
themselves to be a legitimate part of the global elite but in reality
they are on a leash and share the same cluster of problems.
Ostensibly, this should lead to close cooperation between these
states, and their elites believe that they are doing quite well.
Global brutality and confrontation cannot develop successfully without
the participation of strong regional powers in the space enlargement
in different forms. Who are these counter-partners? They are Turkey,
Russia, Saudi, Pakistan and, strange though it may seem, Poland and
Romania (this is conditional). However, in order not to go for
political exotics it should be noted that this policy is impossible
without combination of interests of leading banks, oil, raw material
and defense companies. However, there are signs that this alliance has
already been created. These economic entities have started behaving
strangely, and the motives and interests have not been defined.
One may hope that certain marginal areas are getting more preferential
terms and more apprehensible prospects. (The valley of the Nile has
always been fertile but it undergoes cataclysms while an oasis in a
desert is always stable though it remains an area of steady extinction
of history.) Everyone chooses something.
19:23 09/01/2014
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/politics/view/31692
Confrontation Is a Means of Observing Balance
The impression growing into confidence is that the new meaning of
foreign policies of the world powers is embedded in the combined
application of brutal processes, and escalation of confrontation in
parallel to them. The apologists of the new world order have recently
proposed a certain controllable stability but the representatives of
both the left and partly the right conservative projects preferred
rejecting this paradigm and ran into the less predictable perspective
of local wars which transform into a permanent world confrontation.
Certain groups that continue, despite financial challenges, to
initiate promotion of the global project of Atlantism are trying to
save the former format of the Western community by creating the North
Atlantic market and probably the currency. The issues of world's major
currencies have not been resolved, the geopolitical prospects of the
West, as well as fight with terrorism which is acquiring new
approaches and ideologies in every new stage have not been defined.
Relations with Arab and other Islamist states remain obscure. NATO
does not propose new enlargement programs but plans development of
cooperation with the countries of Asia Pacific. Apparently, somewhere
behind the curtain of activities of George Bush administration, some
think tanks have concluded that the possible approaches of reloading
may be viewed as timeout on the eve of a new global attack on the Old
World supported by different and unexpected partners who will be
offered certain guarantees of security in return for partial loyalty.
Hence, brutality as such is supported and initiated, and confrontation
is used as a means of observing balance of forces in the world and in
separate regions.
At the same time, there occur doubts that the `new confrontation' is
just a tactics, and there is a new paradigm of chaos management. Is a
global policy based on total but controllable brutality possible at
all? Apparently, there is confidence that it is possible or this is
presented as signs of something inapprehensible. In addition, attempts
are made to instill in mass consciousness perceptions that either a
nuclear war or total fight with world terror is an alternative to
global brutality and confrontation.
So who is the target of global brutality? Everyone but China. China is
a special point, and this line of behavior is pending. For its part,
China is not rushing into a global discussion on rejection of former
perceptions of the new world order.
The targets are Turkey, Russia, the France-Germany tandem, possibly
India and Israel, as well as Brazil. The geography of targets is
rather vast but a vast area within the borders of West-East-South is
outlining which will get different approaches, and different goals
will be set. This area with its resistance and false expansion will
constantly disturb vast regions while the future of these states
cannot be predicted.
The current ruling elites in Turkey and Russia are optimal for their
involvement in brutal confrontational processes. These elites believe
themselves to be a legitimate part of the global elite but in reality
they are on a leash and share the same cluster of problems.
Ostensibly, this should lead to close cooperation between these
states, and their elites believe that they are doing quite well.
Global brutality and confrontation cannot develop successfully without
the participation of strong regional powers in the space enlargement
in different forms. Who are these counter-partners? They are Turkey,
Russia, Saudi, Pakistan and, strange though it may seem, Poland and
Romania (this is conditional). However, in order not to go for
political exotics it should be noted that this policy is impossible
without combination of interests of leading banks, oil, raw material
and defense companies. However, there are signs that this alliance has
already been created. These economic entities have started behaving
strangely, and the motives and interests have not been defined.
One may hope that certain marginal areas are getting more preferential
terms and more apprehensible prospects. (The valley of the Nile has
always been fertile but it undergoes cataclysms while an oasis in a
desert is always stable though it remains an area of steady extinction
of history.) Everyone chooses something.
19:23 09/01/2014
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/politics/view/31692