Tweet
MAPPING A NEW WORLD ORDER
[ Part 2.2: "Attached Text" ]
The World After World War III?
By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
September 11, 2014 "ICH" - "SCF" - The end goal of the US and NATO
is to divide (balkanize) and pacify (finlandize) the world’s
biggest country, the Russian Federation, and to even establish a
blanket of perpetual disorder (somalization) over its vast territory
or, at a minimum, over a portion of Russia and the post-Soviet space,
similarly to what is being done to the Middle East and North Africa.
The future Russia or the many future Russias, a plurality of weakened
and divided states, that Washington and its NATO allies see is/are
demographically in decline, de-industrialized, poor, without any
defensive capabilities, and hinterlands that will exploited for
their resources.
The Plans of the Empire of Chaos for Russia
Breaking the Soviet Union has not been enough for Washington and
NATO. The ultimate goal of the US is to prevent any alternatives from
emerging in Europe and Eurasia to Euro-Atlantic integration. This is
why the destruction of Russia is one of its strategic objectives.
Washington’s goals were alive and at work during the fighting
in Chechnya. They were also seen in the crisis that erupted with
EuroMaidan in Ukraine. In fact, the first step of the divorce between
Ukraine and Russia was a catalyst for the dissolution of the entire
Soviet Union and any attempts at reorganizing it.
The Polish-American intellectual Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was US
President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor and an
architect behind the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, has actually
advocated for the destruction of Russia through gradual disintegration
and devolution. He has stipulated that . [1] In other
words, if the US divides Russia up, Moscow would not be able to
challenge Washington. In this context, he states the following:
. [2]
These views are not merely constrained to some academic’s ivory
tower or to detached think-tanks. They have the backing of governments
and have even cultivated adherents. One reflection of them is below.
US State-Owned Media Forecasts the Balkanization of Russia
Dmytro Sinchenko published an article on September 8, 2014 about
dividing Russia. His article titled . [3] Sinchenko was involved in EuroMaidan and
his organization, the Ukrainian Initiative
(÷ÓÅÕËÒÁ§ÎÓØËϧ ¦Î¦Ã¦ÁÔE×E ), advocates for
an ethnic nationalism, the territorial expansion of Ukraine at the
expense of most the bordering countries, reinvigorating the pro-US
Georgia-Ukraine-Azerbaijan-Moldova (GUAM) Organization for Democracy
and Economic Development, joining NATO, and launching an offensive
to defeat Russia as part of its foreign policy goals. [4] As a note,
the inclusion of the word democracy in GUAM should not fool anyone;
GUAM, as the inclusion of the Republic of Azerbaijan proves, has
nothing to do with democracy, but with counter-balancing Russia in
the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
Sinchenko’s article starts by talking about the history of the
phrase that the US has used to vilify its enemies.
It talks about how George W. Bush Jr. coined the phrase in 2002 by
grouping Iraq, Iran, and North Korea together, how John Bolton expanded
the Axis of Evil to include Cuba, Libya, and Syria, how Condoleezza
Rice include Belarus, Zimbabwe, and Myanmar (Burma), and then finally
he proposes that Russia be added to the list as the world’s main
pariah state. He even argues that the Kremlin is involved in all the
conflicts in the Balkans, Caucasus, Middle East, North Africa, Ukraine,
and Southeast Asia. He goes on to accuse Russia of planning to invade
the Baltic States, the Caucasus, Moldova, Finland, Poland, and, even
more ridiculously, two of its own close military and political allies,
Belarus and Kazakhstan. As the article’s title implies, he even
claims that Moscow is intentionally pushing for a third world war.
This fiction is not something that has been reported in the US-aligned
corporate networks, but is something that has been published directly
by US government-owned media. The forecast was published by the
Ukrainian service of Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, which has
been a US propaganda tool in Europe and the Middle East that has
helped topple governments.
Chillingly, the article tries to sanitize the possibilities of a
new world war. Disgustingly ignoring the use of nuclear weapons and
the massive destruction that would erupt for Ukraine and the world,
the article misleadingly paints a cozy image of a world that will
be corrected by a major global war. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
and the author are essentially saying that
to the Ukrainian people and that some type of utopian paradise will
emerge after a war with Russia.
The article also fits very nicely into the contours of
Brzezinski’s forecast for Russia, Ukraine, and the Eurasian
landmass. It forecasts the division of Russia whereas Ukraine is
a part of an expanded European Union, which includes Georgia,
Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, Belarus, Israel, Lebanon,
and Denmark’s North American dependency of Greenland, and
also controls a confederation of states in the Caucasus and the
Mediterranean Sea-the latter could be the Union of the Mediterranean,
which would encompass Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria,
Morocco, and the Moroccan-occupied Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic
or Western Sahara. Ukraine is presented as an integral component
of the European Union. In this regard, Ukraine appears to be
situated in a US-aligned Franco-German-Polish-Ukrainian corridor and
Paris-Berlin-Warsaw-Kiev axis that Brzezinski advocated for creating
in 1997, which Washington would use to challenge the Russian Federation
and its allies in the CIS. [5]
Redrawing Eurasia: Washington’s Maps of a Divided Russia
With the division of the Russian Federation, Radio Free
Europe’s/Radio Liberty’s article claims that any bipolar
rivalry between Moscow and Washington would end after World War III.
In a stark contradiction, it claims that only when Russia is destroyed
will there be a genuine multipolar world, but also implies that the
US will be the most dominant global power even though Washington and
the European Union will be weakened from the anticipated major war
with the Russians.
[0_8a050_7df5da85_L.jpg]
Accompanying the article are also two maps that outline the redrawn
Eurasian space and the shape of the world after the destruction of
Russia. Moreover, neither the author nor his two maps recognize the
boundary change in the Crimean Peninsula and depict it as a part
of Ukraine and not the Russian Federation. From west to east, the
following changes are made to Russia’s geography:
* The Russian oblast of Kaliningrad will be annexed by Lithuania,
Poland, or Germany. One way or another it will become a part of an
enlarged European Union.
* East Karelia (Russian Karelia) and what is currently the federal
subject of the Republic of Karelia inside Russia’s Northwestern
Federal District, along with the Federal City of St. Petersburg,
Leningrad Oblast, Novgorod Oblast, the northern two-thirds of
Pskov Oblast, and Murmansk Oblast are split from Russia to form
a Finnish-aligned country. This area could even be absorbed by
Finland to create a Greater Finland. Although the oblast of Archangel
(Arkhangelsk) is listed as a part of this partitioned area in the
article, it is not included in the map (probably due to a mistake in
the map).
* The southern administrative districts of Sebezhsky, Pustoshkinsky,
Nevelsky, and Usvyatsky in Pskov Oblast from the Northwestern Federal
District and the westernmost administrative districts of Demidovsky,
Desnogorsk, Dukhovshchinsky, Kardymovsky, Khislavichsky, Krasninsky,
Monastyrshchinsky, Pochinkovsky, Roslavlsky, Rudnyansky, Shumyachsky,
Smolensky, Velizhsky, Yartsevsky, and Yershichsky, as well as the
cities of Smolensk and Roslavl, in Smolensk Oblast from the Central
Federal District are joined to Belarus. The Smolensk Oblast’s
Dorogobuzhsky, Kholm-Zhirkovsky, Safonovsky, Ugransky, and Yelninsky
districts appear to be portioned further in the map as the new border
between Belarus and the proposed amputated Russia.
* The North Caucasian Federal District of Russia, which is comprised
of the Republic of Ingushetia, the Kabardino-Balkar Republic, the
Karachay-Cherkess Republic, the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania,
Stavropol Krai, and Chechnya, is separated from Russia as a European
Union-influenced Caucasian confederation
* The South Federal District of Russia, which is constituted by the
Republic of Adygea, Astrakhan Oblast, Volgograd Oblast, Republic of
Kalmykia, Krasnodar Krai, and Rostov Oblast, is completely annexed by
Ukraine; this leads to a shared border between Ukraine and Kazakhstan
and cuts Russia off from the energy-rich Caspian Sea and a direct
southern frontier with Iran.
* Ukraine also annexes the oblasts of Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk, and
Voronezh from Russia’s most heavily populated federal district
and area, the Central Federal District.
* Siberia and the Russian Far East, specifically the Siberian Federal
District and the Far Eastern Federal District, are torn off from
Russia.
* The text states that all of the territory in Siberia and most of
the territory in the Russian Far East, which are comprised of the
Altai Republic, Altai Krai, Amur Oblast, the Republic of Buryatia,
Chukotka, the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, Irkutsk Oblast, Kamchatka
Krai, Kemerovo Oblast, Khabarovsk Krai, the Republic of Khakassia,
Krasnoyarsk Krai, Magadan Oblast, Novosibirsk Oblast, Omsk Oblast,
Primorsky Krai, Sakha Republic, Tomsk Oblast, the Tuva Republic,
and Zabaykalsky Krai either turn into several Chinese-dominated
independent states or, alongside Mongolia, become new territories
of the People’s Republic of China. The map categorically
draws Siberia, most the Russian Far East, and Mongolia as Chinese
territory. The exception to this is Sakhalin Oblast.
* Russia loses Sakhalin Island (called Saharin and Karafuto in
Japanese) and the Kurile Islands, which constitute Sakhalin Oblast.
These islands are annexed by Japan.
On his own webpage, Sinchenko posted his Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty article days earlier, on September 2, 2014. The same
maps, which are accredited to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty,
are also present. [6] There, however, is an additional picture on
Sinchenko’s personal webpage that is worth noting; this is a
picture of Russia being cheerfully carved out for consumption as a
large meal by all the bordering countries. [7]
Mapping a New World Order: The World After World War III?
The second map is of a post-World War III globe that is divided into
several supranational states. Japan is the only exception. The second
map and its supranational states can be described as follows:
* As mentioned earlier, the European Union is expanded and has control
over its peripheries in the Caucasus, Southwest Asia, and North
Africa. This is the realization of NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue
and Partnership for Peace at the political and military levels and
the European Union’s Eastern Partnership and Euro-Mediterranean
Partnership (the Union of the Mediterranean) at the political and
economic levels.
* The United States forms a North American-based supranational
entity that includes Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador,
Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador,
the Guianas (Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana), and the entire
Caribbean.
* All the countries that are not swallowed by the US in South America
will form their own supranational entity in a lesser South America,
which will be dominated by Brazil.
* Some type of Southwest Asian bloc or supranational entity will be
formed out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Yemen.
* Some type of a supranational entity will be formed in the Indian
sub-continent or South Asia out of India, Sri Lanka (Ceylon), Nepal,
Bhutan, Bangladesh, Myanmar (Burma), and Thailand.
* There will be a supranational entity in Australasia and Oceania
that will include the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei,
Indonesia, East Timor, Papa New Guinea, New Zealand, and the islands
of the Pacific. This entity will include Australia and be dominated
by Canberra.
* Aside from North Africa, which will be controlled by the European
Union, the rest of Africa will unify under the leadership of South
Africa.
* An East Asian supranational entity will include most of the Russian
Federation, Indo-China, China, the Korean Peninsula, Mongolia,
and post-Soviet Central Asia. This entity will be dominated by the
Chinese and dominated from Beijing.
[0_8a051_25620ea7_L.jpg]
Although Radio Free Europe’s article and two post-World War III
maps can be dismissed as fanciful notions, some important questions
have to be asked. Firstly, where did the author pick up these ideas?
Were they transmitted through any workshops supported by the US and the
European Union indirectly? Secondly, what informs the author’s
visions of a post-World War III political landscape?
The author has essentially catered to Brzezinski’s outline of
a divided Russia. The text and the maps have even included the areas
of North Africa, the Middle East, and the Caucasus that the European
Union views as a secondary periphery or layer to itself. These areas
are even shaded with a lighter blue than the darker blue used to
identify the European Union.
Even if Radio Free Europe is dismissed; no one should lose sight
of the fact that Japan still lays claim to Sakhalin Oblast and the
US, European Union, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia have been supporting
separatist movements in both the Federal Southern District and the
North Caucasian District of the Russian Federation.
Ukrainianism
The Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty article radiates with traces of
Ukrainianism, which is worth briefly mentioning.
Nations are constructed, because they are all dynamic communities
that, in one way or another, are constructed and kept together by
the collective of individuals that make societies. In this regard
they can be called imagined communities.
There are machinations at play to deconstruct and reconstruct
nations and groups in the post-Soviet space and Middle East. This
can be called the manipulation of tribalism in sociological and
anthropological jargon or, in political jargon, the playing out of
the Great Game. In this context, Ukrainianism has particularly been
supportive of anti-government elements and anti-Russian nationalist
feelings in Ukraine for more than one hundred years, firstly under
the Austrians and Germans, later through the Poles and British,
and now under the US and NATO.
Ukrainianism is an ideology that seeks to reify and enforce a new
collective imagining or false historic memory among the Ukrainian
people about them always being a separate nation and people, in both
ethnic and civic terms, from the Russian people. Ukrainianism is a
political projection that seeks to deny the historic unity of the
Eastern Slavs and the geographic roots and historic context behind
the distinction between Ukrainians and Russians. In other words,
Ukrainianism seeks to de-contextual and to forget the process that
has led to the distinction of Ukrainians from Russians.
***
Russia has always arisen from the ashes. History can testify to this.
Come what may, Russia will be standing. Whenever all the diverse
people of Russia are united under one banner for their homeland,
they have shattered empires. They have survived catastrophic wars
and invasions and have outlived their enemies. Maps and borders may
change, but Russia will remain.
Award-winning author, sociologist and geopolitical analyst, Mahdi
Darius Nazemroaza is the author of The Globalization of NATO
(Clarity Press) and a forthcoming book The War on Libya and the
Re-Colonization of Africa. He is Research Associate at the Centre
for Research on Globalization (CRG), a contributor at the Strategic
Cultural Foundation (SCF), Moscow, and a member of the Scientific
Committee of Geopolitica, Italy.
NOTES
[1] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and
Its Geo-strategic Imperatives (NYC: Basic Books, 1997), p.202.
[2] Ibid.
[3] aÍEÔÒÏ o¦ÎÞÅÎËÏ [Dmytro Sinchenko], [], òÁÄ¦Ï ÷¦ÌØÎÁ ´×ÒÏÐÁ/òÁÄ¦Ï o×ÏÂÏÄÁ
[Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty], September 8, 2014.
[4] ÷ÓÅÕËÒÁ§ÎÓØËϧ ¦Î¦Ã¦ÁÔE×E [Ukrainian
Initiative ]
[Foreign Policy Strategy] òÕÈ aÅÒOÁ×ÏÔ×ÏÒæ×: ×Ô¦ÌEÍÏ ÍÒ¦§ × OEÔÔÑ
[Statesman Movement: Chasing Dreams/Visions]. Accessed September 9,
2014: .
[5] Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, op. cit., pp.85-86
[6] aÍEÔÒÏ o¦ÎÞÅÎËÏ [Dmytro Sinchenko], [], aÍEÔÒÏ o¦ÎÞÅÎËÏ (âÌÏ) [Dmytro Sinchenko
{blog}], September 2, 2014, Accessed September 3, 2014: .
[7] Ibid.
From: Baghdasarian
[ Part 2.2: "Attached Text" ]
The World After World War III?
By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
September 11, 2014 "ICH" - "SCF" - The end goal of the US and NATO
is to divide (balkanize) and pacify (finlandize) the world’s
biggest country, the Russian Federation, and to even establish a
blanket of perpetual disorder (somalization) over its vast territory
or, at a minimum, over a portion of Russia and the post-Soviet space,
similarly to what is being done to the Middle East and North Africa.
The future Russia or the many future Russias, a plurality of weakened
and divided states, that Washington and its NATO allies see is/are
demographically in decline, de-industrialized, poor, without any
defensive capabilities, and hinterlands that will exploited for
their resources.
The Plans of the Empire of Chaos for Russia
Breaking the Soviet Union has not been enough for Washington and
NATO. The ultimate goal of the US is to prevent any alternatives from
emerging in Europe and Eurasia to Euro-Atlantic integration. This is
why the destruction of Russia is one of its strategic objectives.
Washington’s goals were alive and at work during the fighting
in Chechnya. They were also seen in the crisis that erupted with
EuroMaidan in Ukraine. In fact, the first step of the divorce between
Ukraine and Russia was a catalyst for the dissolution of the entire
Soviet Union and any attempts at reorganizing it.
The Polish-American intellectual Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was US
President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor and an
architect behind the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, has actually
advocated for the destruction of Russia through gradual disintegration
and devolution. He has stipulated that . [1] In other
words, if the US divides Russia up, Moscow would not be able to
challenge Washington. In this context, he states the following:
. [2]
These views are not merely constrained to some academic’s ivory
tower or to detached think-tanks. They have the backing of governments
and have even cultivated adherents. One reflection of them is below.
US State-Owned Media Forecasts the Balkanization of Russia
Dmytro Sinchenko published an article on September 8, 2014 about
dividing Russia. His article titled . [3] Sinchenko was involved in EuroMaidan and
his organization, the Ukrainian Initiative
(÷ÓÅÕËÒÁ§ÎÓØËϧ ¦Î¦Ã¦ÁÔE×E ), advocates for
an ethnic nationalism, the territorial expansion of Ukraine at the
expense of most the bordering countries, reinvigorating the pro-US
Georgia-Ukraine-Azerbaijan-Moldova (GUAM) Organization for Democracy
and Economic Development, joining NATO, and launching an offensive
to defeat Russia as part of its foreign policy goals. [4] As a note,
the inclusion of the word democracy in GUAM should not fool anyone;
GUAM, as the inclusion of the Republic of Azerbaijan proves, has
nothing to do with democracy, but with counter-balancing Russia in
the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
Sinchenko’s article starts by talking about the history of the
phrase that the US has used to vilify its enemies.
It talks about how George W. Bush Jr. coined the phrase in 2002 by
grouping Iraq, Iran, and North Korea together, how John Bolton expanded
the Axis of Evil to include Cuba, Libya, and Syria, how Condoleezza
Rice include Belarus, Zimbabwe, and Myanmar (Burma), and then finally
he proposes that Russia be added to the list as the world’s main
pariah state. He even argues that the Kremlin is involved in all the
conflicts in the Balkans, Caucasus, Middle East, North Africa, Ukraine,
and Southeast Asia. He goes on to accuse Russia of planning to invade
the Baltic States, the Caucasus, Moldova, Finland, Poland, and, even
more ridiculously, two of its own close military and political allies,
Belarus and Kazakhstan. As the article’s title implies, he even
claims that Moscow is intentionally pushing for a third world war.
This fiction is not something that has been reported in the US-aligned
corporate networks, but is something that has been published directly
by US government-owned media. The forecast was published by the
Ukrainian service of Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, which has
been a US propaganda tool in Europe and the Middle East that has
helped topple governments.
Chillingly, the article tries to sanitize the possibilities of a
new world war. Disgustingly ignoring the use of nuclear weapons and
the massive destruction that would erupt for Ukraine and the world,
the article misleadingly paints a cozy image of a world that will
be corrected by a major global war. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
and the author are essentially saying that
to the Ukrainian people and that some type of utopian paradise will
emerge after a war with Russia.
The article also fits very nicely into the contours of
Brzezinski’s forecast for Russia, Ukraine, and the Eurasian
landmass. It forecasts the division of Russia whereas Ukraine is
a part of an expanded European Union, which includes Georgia,
Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, Belarus, Israel, Lebanon,
and Denmark’s North American dependency of Greenland, and
also controls a confederation of states in the Caucasus and the
Mediterranean Sea-the latter could be the Union of the Mediterranean,
which would encompass Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria,
Morocco, and the Moroccan-occupied Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic
or Western Sahara. Ukraine is presented as an integral component
of the European Union. In this regard, Ukraine appears to be
situated in a US-aligned Franco-German-Polish-Ukrainian corridor and
Paris-Berlin-Warsaw-Kiev axis that Brzezinski advocated for creating
in 1997, which Washington would use to challenge the Russian Federation
and its allies in the CIS. [5]
Redrawing Eurasia: Washington’s Maps of a Divided Russia
With the division of the Russian Federation, Radio Free
Europe’s/Radio Liberty’s article claims that any bipolar
rivalry between Moscow and Washington would end after World War III.
In a stark contradiction, it claims that only when Russia is destroyed
will there be a genuine multipolar world, but also implies that the
US will be the most dominant global power even though Washington and
the European Union will be weakened from the anticipated major war
with the Russians.
[0_8a050_7df5da85_L.jpg]
Accompanying the article are also two maps that outline the redrawn
Eurasian space and the shape of the world after the destruction of
Russia. Moreover, neither the author nor his two maps recognize the
boundary change in the Crimean Peninsula and depict it as a part
of Ukraine and not the Russian Federation. From west to east, the
following changes are made to Russia’s geography:
* The Russian oblast of Kaliningrad will be annexed by Lithuania,
Poland, or Germany. One way or another it will become a part of an
enlarged European Union.
* East Karelia (Russian Karelia) and what is currently the federal
subject of the Republic of Karelia inside Russia’s Northwestern
Federal District, along with the Federal City of St. Petersburg,
Leningrad Oblast, Novgorod Oblast, the northern two-thirds of
Pskov Oblast, and Murmansk Oblast are split from Russia to form
a Finnish-aligned country. This area could even be absorbed by
Finland to create a Greater Finland. Although the oblast of Archangel
(Arkhangelsk) is listed as a part of this partitioned area in the
article, it is not included in the map (probably due to a mistake in
the map).
* The southern administrative districts of Sebezhsky, Pustoshkinsky,
Nevelsky, and Usvyatsky in Pskov Oblast from the Northwestern Federal
District and the westernmost administrative districts of Demidovsky,
Desnogorsk, Dukhovshchinsky, Kardymovsky, Khislavichsky, Krasninsky,
Monastyrshchinsky, Pochinkovsky, Roslavlsky, Rudnyansky, Shumyachsky,
Smolensky, Velizhsky, Yartsevsky, and Yershichsky, as well as the
cities of Smolensk and Roslavl, in Smolensk Oblast from the Central
Federal District are joined to Belarus. The Smolensk Oblast’s
Dorogobuzhsky, Kholm-Zhirkovsky, Safonovsky, Ugransky, and Yelninsky
districts appear to be portioned further in the map as the new border
between Belarus and the proposed amputated Russia.
* The North Caucasian Federal District of Russia, which is comprised
of the Republic of Ingushetia, the Kabardino-Balkar Republic, the
Karachay-Cherkess Republic, the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania,
Stavropol Krai, and Chechnya, is separated from Russia as a European
Union-influenced Caucasian confederation
* The South Federal District of Russia, which is constituted by the
Republic of Adygea, Astrakhan Oblast, Volgograd Oblast, Republic of
Kalmykia, Krasnodar Krai, and Rostov Oblast, is completely annexed by
Ukraine; this leads to a shared border between Ukraine and Kazakhstan
and cuts Russia off from the energy-rich Caspian Sea and a direct
southern frontier with Iran.
* Ukraine also annexes the oblasts of Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk, and
Voronezh from Russia’s most heavily populated federal district
and area, the Central Federal District.
* Siberia and the Russian Far East, specifically the Siberian Federal
District and the Far Eastern Federal District, are torn off from
Russia.
* The text states that all of the territory in Siberia and most of
the territory in the Russian Far East, which are comprised of the
Altai Republic, Altai Krai, Amur Oblast, the Republic of Buryatia,
Chukotka, the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, Irkutsk Oblast, Kamchatka
Krai, Kemerovo Oblast, Khabarovsk Krai, the Republic of Khakassia,
Krasnoyarsk Krai, Magadan Oblast, Novosibirsk Oblast, Omsk Oblast,
Primorsky Krai, Sakha Republic, Tomsk Oblast, the Tuva Republic,
and Zabaykalsky Krai either turn into several Chinese-dominated
independent states or, alongside Mongolia, become new territories
of the People’s Republic of China. The map categorically
draws Siberia, most the Russian Far East, and Mongolia as Chinese
territory. The exception to this is Sakhalin Oblast.
* Russia loses Sakhalin Island (called Saharin and Karafuto in
Japanese) and the Kurile Islands, which constitute Sakhalin Oblast.
These islands are annexed by Japan.
On his own webpage, Sinchenko posted his Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty article days earlier, on September 2, 2014. The same
maps, which are accredited to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty,
are also present. [6] There, however, is an additional picture on
Sinchenko’s personal webpage that is worth noting; this is a
picture of Russia being cheerfully carved out for consumption as a
large meal by all the bordering countries. [7]
Mapping a New World Order: The World After World War III?
The second map is of a post-World War III globe that is divided into
several supranational states. Japan is the only exception. The second
map and its supranational states can be described as follows:
* As mentioned earlier, the European Union is expanded and has control
over its peripheries in the Caucasus, Southwest Asia, and North
Africa. This is the realization of NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue
and Partnership for Peace at the political and military levels and
the European Union’s Eastern Partnership and Euro-Mediterranean
Partnership (the Union of the Mediterranean) at the political and
economic levels.
* The United States forms a North American-based supranational
entity that includes Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador,
Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador,
the Guianas (Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana), and the entire
Caribbean.
* All the countries that are not swallowed by the US in South America
will form their own supranational entity in a lesser South America,
which will be dominated by Brazil.
* Some type of Southwest Asian bloc or supranational entity will be
formed out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Yemen.
* Some type of a supranational entity will be formed in the Indian
sub-continent or South Asia out of India, Sri Lanka (Ceylon), Nepal,
Bhutan, Bangladesh, Myanmar (Burma), and Thailand.
* There will be a supranational entity in Australasia and Oceania
that will include the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei,
Indonesia, East Timor, Papa New Guinea, New Zealand, and the islands
of the Pacific. This entity will include Australia and be dominated
by Canberra.
* Aside from North Africa, which will be controlled by the European
Union, the rest of Africa will unify under the leadership of South
Africa.
* An East Asian supranational entity will include most of the Russian
Federation, Indo-China, China, the Korean Peninsula, Mongolia,
and post-Soviet Central Asia. This entity will be dominated by the
Chinese and dominated from Beijing.
[0_8a051_25620ea7_L.jpg]
Although Radio Free Europe’s article and two post-World War III
maps can be dismissed as fanciful notions, some important questions
have to be asked. Firstly, where did the author pick up these ideas?
Were they transmitted through any workshops supported by the US and the
European Union indirectly? Secondly, what informs the author’s
visions of a post-World War III political landscape?
The author has essentially catered to Brzezinski’s outline of
a divided Russia. The text and the maps have even included the areas
of North Africa, the Middle East, and the Caucasus that the European
Union views as a secondary periphery or layer to itself. These areas
are even shaded with a lighter blue than the darker blue used to
identify the European Union.
Even if Radio Free Europe is dismissed; no one should lose sight
of the fact that Japan still lays claim to Sakhalin Oblast and the
US, European Union, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia have been supporting
separatist movements in both the Federal Southern District and the
North Caucasian District of the Russian Federation.
Ukrainianism
The Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty article radiates with traces of
Ukrainianism, which is worth briefly mentioning.
Nations are constructed, because they are all dynamic communities
that, in one way or another, are constructed and kept together by
the collective of individuals that make societies. In this regard
they can be called imagined communities.
There are machinations at play to deconstruct and reconstruct
nations and groups in the post-Soviet space and Middle East. This
can be called the manipulation of tribalism in sociological and
anthropological jargon or, in political jargon, the playing out of
the Great Game. In this context, Ukrainianism has particularly been
supportive of anti-government elements and anti-Russian nationalist
feelings in Ukraine for more than one hundred years, firstly under
the Austrians and Germans, later through the Poles and British,
and now under the US and NATO.
Ukrainianism is an ideology that seeks to reify and enforce a new
collective imagining or false historic memory among the Ukrainian
people about them always being a separate nation and people, in both
ethnic and civic terms, from the Russian people. Ukrainianism is a
political projection that seeks to deny the historic unity of the
Eastern Slavs and the geographic roots and historic context behind
the distinction between Ukrainians and Russians. In other words,
Ukrainianism seeks to de-contextual and to forget the process that
has led to the distinction of Ukrainians from Russians.
***
Russia has always arisen from the ashes. History can testify to this.
Come what may, Russia will be standing. Whenever all the diverse
people of Russia are united under one banner for their homeland,
they have shattered empires. They have survived catastrophic wars
and invasions and have outlived their enemies. Maps and borders may
change, but Russia will remain.
Award-winning author, sociologist and geopolitical analyst, Mahdi
Darius Nazemroaza is the author of The Globalization of NATO
(Clarity Press) and a forthcoming book The War on Libya and the
Re-Colonization of Africa. He is Research Associate at the Centre
for Research on Globalization (CRG), a contributor at the Strategic
Cultural Foundation (SCF), Moscow, and a member of the Scientific
Committee of Geopolitica, Italy.
NOTES
[1] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and
Its Geo-strategic Imperatives (NYC: Basic Books, 1997), p.202.
[2] Ibid.
[3] aÍEÔÒÏ o¦ÎÞÅÎËÏ [Dmytro Sinchenko], [], òÁÄ¦Ï ÷¦ÌØÎÁ ´×ÒÏÐÁ/òÁÄ¦Ï o×ÏÂÏÄÁ
[Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty], September 8, 2014.
[4] ÷ÓÅÕËÒÁ§ÎÓØËϧ ¦Î¦Ã¦ÁÔE×E [Ukrainian
Initiative ]
[Foreign Policy Strategy] òÕÈ aÅÒOÁ×ÏÔ×ÏÒæ×: ×Ô¦ÌEÍÏ ÍÒ¦§ × OEÔÔÑ
[Statesman Movement: Chasing Dreams/Visions]. Accessed September 9,
2014: .
[5] Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, op. cit., pp.85-86
[6] aÍEÔÒÏ o¦ÎÞÅÎËÏ [Dmytro Sinchenko], [], aÍEÔÒÏ o¦ÎÞÅÎËÏ (âÌÏ) [Dmytro Sinchenko
{blog}], September 2, 2014, Accessed September 3, 2014: .
[7] Ibid.
From: Baghdasarian