Introduction:
Within the forthcoming essay I aim to explain foreign policy decisions made by governments -namely by the United States, United Kingdom, Russian Federation, and The Communist People's Republic of China (CPROC) mostly with a focus in the 21st century- and how they are interconnected. I will also attempt to analyse and critique such decisions, as I believe most of these geopolitical actions largely caused by governments are detrimental to the security, prosperity and freedom of humanity in an increasingly ever-changing world.
Expansionism itself includes ‘hard power’ play politics such as military invasions and overthrow of regimes, and ‘soft power’ which includes less military inclined yet just as effective forms such as financial warfare and cyber-hacking, diplomacy in drawing up bilateral agreements (e.g. Syrian ceasefire[5]), and blackmail (for example U.S. congresspeople Dennis Hastert[6], and Janis Schwokosky[7]) as the new battlegrounds of state confrontation this century.
CIA Involvement
Cyber-hacking is an increasingly growing geopolitical tool used by governments as a method of warfare. Hacking is the instance of exposing a network using penetration-testing and numerous other attacks to identify and monitor documents such as emails, calls and texts; for later distribution for a number of purposes -power by blackmail and withholding of info, leakages of information to foreign entities or for whistle-blowing, or simply for military purposes.
This occurrence was identified by the U.S. in its comprehensive evidence in late 2016 that Russia hacked the U.S. election, and referenced to how 17 agencies including the CIA, The State Department, among others circulated a document; referenced for news grabbing headlines that produces no concrete evidence to corroborate the claims[8][9]; despite that the U.S. has interfered in Russian elections[10][11].
The CIA has the capability with its UMBRAGE group of changing the forensics of a hack it has carried out to another nation, such as Russia.[12][13] Such is an example of soft power by shaping public opinion, a technique used throughout history.
This occurs in a world where the CIA’s (Central Intelligence Agency) Centre for Cyber Intelligence[14] can remotely hack and control popular mobile phones (over 1.15 billion for Android[15]) and smart TV’s[16] on a worldwide scale, to obtain the users geolocation, audio and text communications, and to activate a phone's camera and microphone.[17]
The CIA can hack phones to collect audio and message traffic before encryption is applied (e.g. WhatsApp), which include political candidates and parties[18], can use 24 ‘zero day’ exploits for Android phones in collusion with GCHQ[19], whose hackers are given diplomatic ‘black’ passports[20][21]and may be able to infect vehicle control systems in cars and trucks (as of 2014), which would allow for undetectable assassinations.[22] This extent of surveillance and hacking (where blackmail of foreign leaders appears inevitable) includes to monitor and silence anyone worldwide.
Ukraine-Crimea-Chechyna
It is important to link these new frontiers in warfare to a historically relevant published work in 2003 by Zbigniew Brzezinski; (a long standing advisor to U.S. presidents[23]): Second Chance, a Collection of Three Exceptional Presidents; illustrates the nature of how U.S. foreign policy has deteriorated its standing within the years 1984 -2008, under George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush. Brzezinski notes the U.S. role by the CIA to support violent independence movements in numerous countries.[24][25][26]
This same formula of fermenting an opposition was applied to Ukraine in 2013, through support for the neo-nazi Right Sector movement, leading to the ‘most blatant coup in history’[27], of which involved an infamous phone call involving former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Victoria Nuland’s role discussing to replace the elected president Yanukovych with Yatsenyuk ‘he’s the guy’, with concerns made to ‘how to midwife this thing’.[28]
There is extensive evidence that Yatsenesuk was pre-selected 22 days before being appointed to parliament[29]by a U.S. planned coup[30]whose foundations began decades earlier through CIA affiliated ‘nonprofit’ NGO’s that allowed for the coup to occur[31]and whose previous attempts for Ukrainian revolution are documented.[32]
These plans, whom EU investigators reported as a coup[33], involved the U.S. embassy in Kiev almost a year before the coup itself.[34] The overthrow itself grew extremely violent,[35][36][37], culminating to a point where snipers on rooftops controlled by Right Sector and other protest groups were shooting protesters -whom the red star movement had fermented- and government security forces, killing at least 50 protesters and 15 police.[38]
As a result Yanokovich had to flee as the Ukrainian Parliament had been stormed and he would likely have been killed, and the new government itself was immediately recognized as legitimate by the U.K., U.S. and EU.[39][40] As the Russian Federation’s bordering neighbour, Ukraine’s growing body count would contribute to destabilizing relationship between the two, whose populations East of Kiev are much more Russia friendly.
This is despite Western public opinion has been told by ‘mainstream media’ sources that Russia had annexed Crimea in a conquest[43][44] as it routinely ignores information that goes against the current anti-Russian hysteria[45], and whose U.K. government serves D notices if any print media publishes information would jeopardize national security[46], although this information is known from alternative sources.
Mainstream sources largely look at the Crimean situation as the first point in a timeline while forgetting that some areas of Southern and Eastern Ukraine were former Soviet territories that were formally given away in (Lenin in first years of the Soviet Union, Crimea in 1954 later on by Khrushchev) although in reality were still part of the Soviet Union, ever since Ukraine was incorporated in the Soviet Union after WW2 from Germany[47]; hence the vote to join Russia.
Two other Russian speaking regions, Donetsk also Luhansk declared independence from Ukraine[48] which produced the conflict between these regions and Ukraine, causing almost 10,000 deaths.[49] Russia has not accepted their claim to join the motherland, contradicting the allegations of Russian annexation, but also suggesting blame can fall on both sides for the conflict.
Within second chance Brzezinski states in the case of Chechyna 'A small non Russian nation located in the central Caucasus, Chechyna was long repressed but had persistently sought its freedom... shortly after the Soviet union dissolved in 1991, the Chechens declared national independence... [Vladimir Putin] resumed the war with greater ferocity for the next several years. In the process, upward of 25 percent of the Chechen population perished, with both sides resorting to terror tactics'.[50] This piece is critically important to understand that governments throughout history have attempted to brutally suppress populations declaring independence, often with the conflict not concluding definitively, and violence caused by both sides.
Notwithstanding NATO has expanded towards Russia in particular, deploying thousands of troops to border nations with Russia, and violating previous promises[53], which is increasing tensions.
A pragmatic approach would be to contest NATO expansion through keeping a ‘neutral belt in the heart of Europe’[54],removing the Right To Protect[55] clause which guarantees future warfare, and disband NATO itself, which acts in opposition to peace.[56][57]
You have reached the end of the first part of my critique of modern interventionist foreign policy! Leave a comment below on any insights you learned or want to impart! I originally wrote this in Spring this year, which took me months, to write [and now to markdown onto Steemit!]
References 1. Brandon Turbeville, Southfront, Independent Analytic Journalistic Organisation, Published 10.01.17, https://southfront.org/peace-prize-nominated-humanitarian-white-helmets-stand-with-al-qaeda-hold-citizens-hostage-in-damascus-without-water/ 2. Patrick Henningsen, 21st Century Wire, Published 10.12.2016, http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/12/10/exclusive-president-raed-salehs-terrorist-connections-within-white-helmet-leadership/ 3. The White Helmets Official Website, http://www.whitehelmets.org/ 4. Robert Perry, Consortium News, published 24.02.17 & 03.03.17, https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/24/syrian-war-propaganda-at-the-oscars/ https://consortiumnews.com/2017/03/03/an-oscar-for-a-propaganda-flick/ 5. Russian Federation Final Draft, Voltaire News Network, published 1 Jan 2017, https://www.voltairenet.org/article194803.html 6. Sibel Edmonds, Author Of Classified Woman, Multiple Sources Published Since 06.01.08, https://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/2008/01/sibel-names-names-in-pictures.html 7. Sibel Edmonds, Author Of Classified Woman, Multiple Sources Published Since 06.01.08, https://www.newsbud.com/2017/02/17/newsbud-special-report-state-secrets-sibel-edmonds-uncovers-the-untouchables/ 8. The Daily Beast, Published 06.01.17, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/06/u-s-spy-report-blames-putin-for-hacks-but-doesn-t-back-it-up.html 9. NewYorker, ‘the declassified report provides more assertion than evidence’ http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/world-war-three-by-mistake 10. National Endowment for Democracy Funding of NGO’s in Russia, http://www.ned.org/region/eurasia/russia-2011/ 11. Time Magazine Cover 1996: Yanks to the Rescue, The Secret Story of how American Advisers Helped Yeltsin Win, https://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19960715,00.html 12. Quotes ‘[The U.S.] took warranted criticism for trying to pin a high-profile 2014 cyberattack on North Korea,’; “WikiLeaks said there’s an entire department within the CIA whose job it is to ‘misdirect attribution by leaving behind the fingerprints’ of others, such as hackers in Russia,” https://theintercept.com/2017/03/08/wikileaks-files-show-the-cia-repurposing-foreign-hacking-code-to-save-time-not-to-frame-russia/ 13. Kaspersky lab has demonstrated the capability that hackers can have of leaving traces of software to implicate another party http://usa.kaspersky.com/about-us/press-center/press-releases/2016/Threat-Actors-Master-False-Flags-Tactics-to-Deceive-Victims-and-Security-Teams 14. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files,
15. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files, https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_11763721.html
16. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files, https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_753667.html
17. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files, https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_3276804.html
18. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files, https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012
19. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_11629096.html
20. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files, https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_20251151.html
21. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files, https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_26607630.html
22. Wikileaks ‘Vault 7’ release of public files, https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13763790.html
23. Zbigniew Brzezinski Biography http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/zbigniew-brzezinski/
24. Jason Burke, The Guardian, Frankenstein The CIA Created, published 17.01.1999,
‘12,500 foreigners were trained in bomb-making, sabotage and urban guerrilla warfare in Afghan camps the CIA helped to set up.’
‘$500 million the CIA poured into Afghanistan reached [the Egyptian Al-Jihad terrorist] group.’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam
25. Bergen, Peter, Holy War Inc., Free Press, (2001), p.68, (Operation Cyclone)
26. Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001.
‘The US role was to provide logistics and technological support as well as money.’ https://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/10/ghost_wars_how_reagan_armed_the
27. Wahingtons Blog, published 2014,
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/12/head-stratfor-private-cia-says-overthrow-yanukovych-blatant-coup-history.html
28. Youtube Video, published 2015, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=WV9J6sxCs5k
29. Youtube Video, published 2015, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=MSxaa-67yGM
30. Youtube Video, published 2015, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=8-RyOaFwcEw
31. Sott.net article, http://www.sott.net/article/292842-Euromaidan-Anatomy-of-a-Washington-backed-coup-d-etat
32. ActivistPost, published 2015, http://www.activistpost.com/2015/04/us-backed-techcamp-color-revolution.html
33. Fort Russ, published 2015, http://www.fort-russ.com/2015/02/the-paet-ashton-transcript.html
34. Washingtons Blog, published 2015, http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/new-video-evidence-americas-coup-ukraine-means.html
35. Youtube Video, Footage of Euromaidan, published 21.01.14, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=h22oHs3eiLg
36. Youtube Video, Footage of Euromaidan, published 22.01.14, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=w8KeUOBKfgQ
37. Youtube Video, Footage of Euromaidan, published 25.01.14, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=stK3YPz6WTc
38. Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D., The Snipers Massacre on the Maidan in Ukraine, Published 3rd September 2015, https://www.academia.edu/8776021/The_Snipers_Massacre_on_the_Maidan_in_Ukraine
39. Mark Grant, Foreign & Commonwealth Office, 4th March 2014, "Government in Kiev is legitimate and has been overwhelmingly endorsed by the Ukrainian parliament"
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/government-in-kiev-is-legitimate-and-has-been-overwhelmingly-endorsed-by-the-ukrainian-parliament
40. # Barack Obama, published 06.03.14,
‘Any discussion about the future of Ukraine must include the legitimate government of Ukraine. In 2014, we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders.’
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/03/06/statement-president-ukraine
41. Venice Commission Declaration, published 21.03.14, http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD%282014%29002-e
42. NATO Bombing in Kosovo, published 20.01.2012, https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2000/nato/Natbm200-01.htm
43. ‘Putin ready to invade Ukraine, Kiev warns of war’, published 1st March 2014, http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/01/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSBREA1Q1E82014030
44. The New York Times, published 16.04.14, https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/17/world/europe/in-ukraine-russia-plays-a-weighted-word-game.html?_r=0
45. Joe Quinn, Euromaidan Anatomy of a Washington Backed Coup-d-etat, published 19.02.15, https://www.sott.net/article/292842-Euromaidan-Anatomy-of-a-Washington-backed-coup-d-etat
46. Standing DSMA notices http://www.dsma.uk/danotices/index.htm
47. Massimo Arico, Ordnungspolizei - Encyclopedia of the German police battalions September 1939-July 1942, p. 144-145.
48. Kviv Post, Published 06.05.2014, http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/luhansk-regional-council-backs-referendum-on-regions-status-346356.html
49. OCHA, published 15.03.17, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21383&LangID=E
50. Brzezinski, Zbigniew, Second chance: a Collection of Three Exceptional Presidents, pages 119, 120, published 2003
51. Youtube Video, Alleged Apartment Bombings by FSB Investigation https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=y9cRoXgawVA
52. RT, Putin signs controversial new anti-terror bill into law, published 07.07.16, https://www.rt.com/politics/349875-putin-signs-fresh-russian-anti/
53. DeSpiegel Magazine, Promise to Gorbachev not to expand NATO past Germany in return for German Reunification, published 26.11.09, www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html
54. Brzezinski, Zbigniew, Second Chance a Collection of Three Exceptional Presidents, page 105, published 2003, ‘It [NATO expansion] was increasingly contested by a cluster of former U.S. diplomats, scholars, and pundits who [make up] some sort of neutral belt in the heart of Europe'.
55. NATO Charter, Article 5, Right to Protect, http://web.archive.org/20001023175050/www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/bt-a1.htm#Art02
56. Roth, Richard, NATO helps to establish no-fly zone over Libya, published 18.03.11, http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/17/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T2
57. Human Rights Watch, Over 500 Civilians Killed in Kosovo by NATO Bombing, published 2000, https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2000/nato/Natbm200-01.htm
You seemed to focus a lot on Ukraine in this post so I'm going to assume you know a lot about it. What do you think the correct answer to the "Ukrainian question" of the ussr was?
Ukraine was the focus for this one, as it is more difficult to constantly change between interventions when creating a thesis, as a recent concerted independence effort from the US and others. I know much more about the more recent events (circa 21st) as this was the focus for my research.
As for a correct answer, I can't say that any position would have been close to positive, although deaths certainly would be minimized if the lust for power by both sides (and involvement of secret services) was nonexistent, or again to have a neutral belt. Times back in the 20th century and still now does not produce any moral rationality, ideally USSR and NATO shouldn't have existed. There were attempts by some with enough power to be heard yet not enough to make any impact.
Cultural and ethnic ties between Ukraine and the USSR clearly complicates the issue, Ukraine due to its location has always been used as a toy by the major power players of the US and Russia.
However independence I think is positive, if the independence is actually true in reality (Ukraine's economic dependence on other nations) is another question. Especially if you think that Ukraine was incorporated into the large military prowess of the USSR, only now to again be incorporated into the EU (probably will happen, causing possibly direct military action as Russia would no longer have any buffer).
the ussr shouldn't have existed? Why?
In a broad sense due to what can be stated as complexity theory, when a system of power coalesces in a smaller minority who can make decisions, unplanned and disastrous results do and did occur in the 20th century for anyone living in the USSR at the time.
Yes, the ideals were somewhat respectable however pragmatically this doesn't work if you want to have a semi-moral system for the individuals living there.
so you support anarchism?
In many ways the USSR was far better in many different ways than capitalist countries at the same time. From what I've read about the democracy it was better than the system we have even today in the United States (even ignoring the fact that capitalism and democracy are incompatible)
"However independence I think is positive"
Independence of the people or independence of the government?
Independence of the government is one step closer if you have a value system towards less violence, more prosperity (freedom in how to act and say what you wish); however the dictates of the said government is still too far odious.
I cannot argue that the USSR was in any way better, with the lack of the ability to do anything stated above. I don't know where you read that. Looking at your posts I can see you support marxism? If I'm not mistaken marxism doesn't equate to anarchism, unless you mean anarcho-syndicalism or anarcho-communism.
I do support anarchism, however as voluntarism, capitalism and communism are long past buzz words with conflicting meanings of what 'true capitalism' is. Both terms should be relegated to the 20th century.
capitalism needs a government to exist, it can not be anarchist
from what I've read, anybody who silenced criticism in the USSR was jailed, not the opposite
"If I'm not mistaken marxism doesn't equate to anarchism, unless you mean anarcho-syndicalism or anarcho-communism."
Marxism still doesn't equate to anarchist communism or syndicalism. I support marxism only so far, past a point in the revolution states are no longer needed to fight the capitalists.
"conflicting meanings of what 'true capitalism' is"
True capitalism is private ownership of the means of production, capital.
"Independence of the government is one step closer if you have a value system towards less violence, more prosperity (freedom in how to act and say what you wish)"
you can not be independent of government (or the ruling class) under capitalism and capitalism always tends towards violence, in fact it needs it to survive
First, you could compare GDP between the Soviet Union vs the US as an example, just because GDP per capita in the USSR increased doesn't automatically result in being more prosperous. The following gives the change in GDP per capita for the U.S. in the similar period, which is higher than the figures given for the USSR. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A939RX0Q048SBEA
Ask yourself why are you trying to fight capitalists? What do you want to achieve? Unfortunately fighting in any literal sense will not produce greater prosperity, again capitalism has lost any real meaning.
If you are using federal reserve notes circulated by a capitalist system, and claim to be fighting it unfortunately you cannot and will not win.
A ruling class in some sense always wins, 1% of individuals eventually control a majority of resources over time, this has been established in nature. I do not evangelise or agree with much of what Jordan Peterson says but he gives an explanation here.
https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=6Q0PCDEJWek
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_J.de_Solla_Price
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule(Internet_culture)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
That said, with the critique of interventionism I am not using a political angle in these posts. We both have certain perspectives that I don't think can be altered in this discussion, although I appreciate this.
Hopefully you will still want to read the next parts of my essay despite these differences :D
"First, you could compare GDP between the Soviet Union vs the US as an example, just because GDP per capita in the USSR increased doesn't automatically result in being more prosperous. The following gives the change in GDP per capita for the U.S. in the similar period, which is higher than the figures given for the USSR. "
The problem is you are comparing two different countries with different levels of industry, technology, and natural resources. The USSR was also able to go into far less trade with other countries because of embargoes. The best comparison is between a country and itself under a different system. Even though it had more advanced technology, industry, better trade, and the same natural resources it did far worse.
If you really want to compare, at least compare growth. It took the USSR 44 years to go from a backwards agricultural society into the first to put a man into space, how fast was the progress in the usa at that time?
"Ask yourself why are you trying to fight capitalists? What do you want to achieve? Unfortunately fighting in any literal sense will not produce greater prosperity, again capitalism has lost any real meaning."
Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production. The meaning still stands and will always stand with meaning as a type of economic system until post-scarcity.
Actually looking at the golden age of capitalism, fighting does help it. Capitalism needs to expand to produce greater technology innovation and prosperity. When there is nothing left to expand into it grinds into a halt and the only thing the ruling class can do is hold a monopoly or start wars so that they can rebuild the means of production again as another temporary expansion.
Again cannot win? A weakened russia won against the entire world, castro started a revolution with 100 people, Rojava is an ongoing (winning) revolution today.
"1% of individuals eventually control a majority of resources over time, this has been established in nature."
No society without a government has ever had that happen. Worker control of the means of production will easily prevent that. Also the human nature argument is stupid.
https://theredphoenixapl.org/2011/06/02/the-human-nature-argument/
"We both have certain perspectives that I don't think can be altered in this discussion, although I appreciate this."
Are you sure about that? I was not boring with these opinions and ideals, I learned them through speaking with others. Eventually I started debating. There was one group of people I just couldn't beat, they had all the facts that proved all of my ideas wrong. Eventually I decided that I could not hold ideals I could not defend.
Dude
Haha thanks there is still two parts more to come :)
@outtayourbox So much information thanks for sharing.
Thank-you! :)
Thank-you