Categorized | Economy, Politics

One continent: Europe’s future goes through Eurasia

This article was contributed by Thierry Vanroy. 

Recently, Russian Prime Minister Putin made some interesting comments on American geopolitical ambitions.

The U.S. “wants to control everything” and takes decisions unilaterally on key questions, Putin said on a campaign stop yesterday in the Siberian city of Tomsk, 3,100 kilometers (1,900 miles) east of Moscow. “Sometimes I get the impression the U.S. doesn’t need allies, it needs vassals.” [Source]

One can call this rhetoric or ‘electionspeak’, but at the root of things, such remarks represent the death-knell for Fukushima’s “End of History”.   Ever since everything would be “end” from 1992 onward (the ‘point of no return’ for the Soviet Union), the USA has started countless wars (with and within Europe), has blown up its financial hegemony, has delocalized its industry to China and has lost most of South America.

Twenty years later, it seems the USA has achieved history’s bane, certainly not its ‘end.’

With the knowledge that at least 6.7 billion people are not American in this world, in the light of these evolutions one can only wonder whether the Western sphere of influence isn’t pushing itself into isolation. Indeed, the supposed hegemony of the West resembles a colonial empire in decay, where a titular American ‘Emperor’ retains power through viceroys who hold zero legitimacy with the inlanders.  The main vassals the USA can still count on are the Arab League (petrodollars) and the European Union (interwoven with Wall Street and NATO), but even this is starting to fall apart.

The interests of this global empire are contrary to those of the up and coming continental powers such as China and Russia. Human capital, resources, military and financial dominance of the continental periphery are at stake and the proxy wars have been on for far too long. Zombified as the US economy may be, their interest in retaining/conquering these regions is tantamount.

With the Sino-Russian veto in the UN Security Council, we now see the official start of The Great Chessboard between the Western and the Eurasian bloc. Just like a ‘revolution’ in Syria (and by extension, Iran) offers breathing space to the debt-driven economies of the West, it is in the interest of Russia and China to have stability with these trade partners.

And whereas these continental powers remained relatively silent concerning Libya last year, they have now begun a clear strategy for the Eurasian and African continents.  Considering that three quartsers of the worldwide resources and productive factors are encompassed in this greater region, one realizes a lot is at stake.

In October, Putin finally and explicitly called into existence the ‘Eurasian Union’.  It is but a matter of time (and presidential elections) before further steps will be taken. Since 2009, Putin and his allies have already been toying with the idea of a new reserve currency to drive the USD out, for instance. In reality, this ‘Union’ is more of an ‘Eurasian Unification’ and the fundamental geopolitical laws state economic convergence comes before political union. At this rate however, it won’t take long before mutual economic interest will evolve into an open defense of ideological allies. And from that moment on, lines will be drawn and choices will have to be made.

It is no secret the ideology of the European Union is Western. However, the prerequisite of economic unification has not gone as planned. The best example of this is the critique from Brussels and Strasbourg (the EU capitals) on Hungary’s new constitution. This constitution on the one hand holds some points obviously inspired by Christianity (ideology), but it also concerns the corporatist intertwining of government and finance (economy). There is now a concentrated effort on undermining the latter through critique on the former, but this is hardly more than an admission of weakness while the EU stays fragile in both respects. To quote Putin one last time: “Let them better use their money to pay their foreign debt and stop implementing ineffective and expensive foreign policy.”

Economic stability is now upheld thanks to China and the shuffling of debt between Western banks and governments, but in the meantime Europeans are shooting themselves in the foot with ideological games. We all know Greece is dependent on Iranian oil (the loss of which is now ironically compensated by the EU), but what must the Greeks think now that their supposed ‘friends’ put their country up for foreclosure while their assigned ‘enemies’ can trade at reduced tariffs with the rest of the world?

The European basis for resources, industry and trade is continental, but Western hegemony is faltering. And no matter how nice they try to present their ideological arguments, the economic future lies elsewhere.

Thus, with the media and political manipulation in Syria and Iran, one can only pose the question: In whose interest are we shooting ourselves in our own feet?

—–

About the Author: Thierry Vanroy is a Belgian political writer, public speaker and activist.  He is also a web designer, consultant, e-marketing expert.  He is known for spreading controversial ideas which go against the Western status quo. Through current events and economic analysis, he proposes a future of Eurasian geopolitics, Traditionalist reconciliation and economic freedom to those who would otherwise remain oblivious to what can be called ‘The Empire.’

He also writes in Dutch for solidarisme.be and he manages a personal blog against islamophobia at blog.thierryvanroy.be (also in Dutch).  This is his first column at RidingTheTiger.

About William van Nostrand

William van Nostrand is a native of Chicago, Illinois and is currently the Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of RidingTheTiger.org. He holds a B.A. in Economics as well as a minor in cultural anthropology. His interests are highly varied and include late medieval European architecture, German romantic classical music, and travel.
  • Pingback: Is Southern Agrarianism America’s Final Hope? | Counter-Revolutionary Traditionalism()

Archives