Contorted Language and Ersatz Theory Hid Europe’s Peril
Hanna Reitsch was the first woman to fly a helicopter and also a jet plane. She was an early glider pilot and refined air brake technology. It was as a gliding instructor that she toured Australasia where in an interview she was asked what Germans most regretted about World War 2.
“Losing it,” replied the winner of two Iron Crosses.
How did West Germany recover so rapidly from World War 2, and then absorb so easily the old Soviet East Germany?
The aviatrix had supplied the answer. It was the next fixture that counted. Not the engagement that had just been lost.
Anyone crossing over from the still devastated UK in the early 1960s saw how swathes of Britain’s industrial cities were still laid waste while West Germany’s had somehow been utterly restored without any indications of the so-recent conflict.
The German single minded determination to win the peace was conducted without any diverting distractions especially those of an ideological nature.
So when the green movement took over from a highly visible yet hardly threatening bunch of post war anarchic collectives it was received with relief as a middle class and manageable safety valve.
Nobody imagined that the green movement would become the applied ideology that would involve Germany for the third time as the detonator for a European war.
Or that the fuse would be most deeply disguised by the 16 years of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s regime when Germany on the face of it had achieved the broad uplands of peace and prosperity as the stabilizer of Europe.
The requirement to manage and contain the green movement would amount to Germany each year entrusting more and more and then most of its power requirements to Russia.
This particular lesson in the peril of appeasement is being ignored with everyone in authority pretending it never happened in the first place.
Unabashed international and national government agencies criss-cross airspace seeking to reappropriate Covid funds. Treasuries are told that they must divert gigantic resources to finance poorer countries whose problems are in fact due to political instability.
As Russia bombards Ukraine in order to land lock it the global debate conducted by the intergovernmental agencies whose job it was to stop the conflict in the first place still centres on a modelled crisis instead of the actual one. Any diversion is welcome. Think Glasgow.
The 1972 Nixon-Kissinger entente with China was designed to introduce a split in world communism. Yet nobody sounded the alarm that there was pending a re-grouping for the February 24 Ukraine invasion.
Hanna Reitsch in two words bluntly summarised a state of affairs that most are still too tremulous to articulate. Most people who had anything to do with Germany in the decades immediately after the war know her verdict to be correct.
Compare this with the situation now in which governments, media outlets, and intergovernmental organisations dance around issues of any importance at all if there is any danger of giving offence to any ordained ideology, especially one from which they profit.
Where are the West’s intelligence agencies in all this? Nowadays theirs is anything but an oath of silence as they must jockey around with the rest of the bunch for their funding.
They restrict themselves to dazzling insights into the blindingly obvious.
There is a lesson here and it is one that the ruling/ political class cannot bring itself to confront.
It is that ideologies can overwhelm the very organisations supposed to manage them and they do so by infiltrating the body politic as a cause more noble than the obvious ones such as national defence.
The fact that Nato handed over its main strategic asset, its fuel supply, to the enemy that it was configured to fight, to contain, reminds us how ideology cancels logic.
Ideological pronouncements now dominate. These catch-phrase and slickly-branded theories replace what were until quite recently known as statements.
Hanna Reitsch who flew the last plane out of Berlin was witness to and participant in what is considered the most lethal of these theories.
The aviator’s summary in its plain spoken two-word delivery distils a simple fact.
Which is why it still stands out amid the ethereal, obscure yet high-sounding slogans which today masquerade as descriptions of what has gone on, is going on, and what will go on.
Retribalization zealotry route for China penetration of institutions
Accelerating separatism in favour of pre-European inhabitants in Australia and New Zealand encourages China to press ahead with its scheme to widen its presence in Oceania.
The CCP understands that the more the governments of Australasia utter the words coming together, the more determined they are in fact to ensure that the opposite happens.
The announcement by Australia’s new Labour government that it intends to establish a parallel Aboriginal advisory auxiliary parliament signals an in-depth commitment to a dual foreign policy and one that will favour a tilt toward China.
New Zealand’s Labour government has a slate of policies both declared and undeclared to empower through co-governance those claiming a pre-European birthright and thus an enhanced perceived and distinct lived experience.
In Australasia separatism blends with policies on clean energy and identitarianism to become the main ingredient of the political formula for winning upscale metropolitan electorates.
This now in turn blends with China’s already successful penetration of institutions that are highly regarded by these same privileged co-governance movement activist bases.
Internationally China’s quite recent capture of Hollywood by becoming the major cinematographic consuming nation put China at the fountain head of in-vogue progressive trends and this is the reason why there is so little public contention over China’s acts and intentions.
It is the reason for example why in these Australasian lands of the great reset public broadcasters only handle in a stifled way China’s role in the genesis and then dispersion of the Covid 19 plague.
Also muted for example is anything very searching in terms of analysing the confluence of Beijing’s Winter Olympics and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Also off the table is insight into the volume and quantity of the abandoned United States military hardware in Afghanistan likely to have been transferred across the border for copying and/or actual use in China.
China’s acquisition of Hollywood in order to protect its other institutional investments is an example of its win-win approach meaning it wins twice. It colonised the film colony and in doing so guaranteed the security of its other downstream contemporary culture investments.
There is something in common here with the broader clandestine modus operandi.
A national intelligence agency secures an above-board and conspicuous asset, one operating in the light of day, (limelight in Hollywood’s case) and uses it to conceal and reinforce its other subsidiary assets that operate in the shadows.
The advent of tribal co-governance in Australia and New Zealand demonstrates how the win-win ploy brings with it for China a multiplier effect.
The knock on is that it grasps the imagination of the new and decisive culturally sensitive voting bloc the excitable metropolitan intelligentsia with its determination to occupy the contemporary moral high ground.
China’s ability to influence outcomes is matched only by its hidden persuasion to staunch debate on matters inimical to these outcomes.
The Middle Kingdom knows that the drift toward co-governance in Australasia is an Oceania political current flowing strongly in its favour.
Ever since it implanted Maoism in Paris in 1968 China has understood how receptive are the West’s urban intelligentsia to it doctrines.
As it focuses on replacing the United States in the Indo-Pacific hegemony China will continue to colonise in the region institutions in public broadcasting and education with their instinctive shared anxiety to be on the right side of history which the CCP views as its own right to determine it.
The CCP understands too that within the socialist governments of constituted democracies there lurks a solid core of hard liners. These are the CCP’s dragons teeth… the sowers of the seeds of strife.
The CCP knows how prone ideologues are to its own way of thinking and how eager this new political class is to empathise with the new rallying cries notably the one about the importance of being on the right side of history.
It was Chairman Mao few now care to remember who enshrined the importance of being politically correct.
The CCP’s penetration of western institutions indicates an understanding of the porosity of these institutions beyond that of their own proprietors.
Where the governments of countries in the grip of progressivism see diversity, the CCP sees divergence, disunity and contention. Open doors in other words to opportunities for intervention under any number of guises.
Republicanism becomes an intense if as yet unspecified issue with the return after a nine year interval of a Labour federal government. Palace courtiers seeking to avert it and tempted to send out members of the Royal family on flag waving tours should hesitate.
The reason is that Australia needs the Royal family much more than the Royal family needs Australia.
Australia is often considered the most over-governed of any nation anywhere
Without the monarchy Australia would have added to its already richly layered in-place constituted governance a fifth layer and which like the other existing four layers would become elective.
There is the central federal government in Canberra. It has two houses, an upper and lower.
Then there are the state governments which similarly have an upper house and a lower house.
It is the monarchy which by occupying the top of this heap means that to these four layers there cannot be added a fifth political layer in the form of a presidential layer.
Would for example an Australia minus the monarchy adopt the French system with an elected president?
Australia has yet another layer of governance, an additional layer often overlooked internationally.
It is that each state in addition to having a prime minister (known as “premier” to distinguish them from the federal prime minister) also has a state governor.
In a republic how would state governors become state governors? Would they be elected as they are for example in the United States?
If you add a presidential layer to all this Australia would have a total of six layers of constituted elective government and still not counting local government.
Australia’s new Labour-led government is an activist one dedicated to symbolic change and progress.
This is exactly the kind of coalition of the privileged that has one single towering target which is another coalition of the privileged this time one based on bloodline…..the monarchy
Buckingham Palace courtiers will be tempted to palliate this renewed and reforming fervour by sending members of the royal family to Australia to draw the sting.
If they do they will merely present the reformers with their dream target which is the royal family in the flesh.
It is uncertain that the courtiers have got the message that what worked so successfully in the 1950s-70s era now has quite the opposite effect of the desired result.
The ill-advised open Land Rover parading of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in Jamaica (pictured) is a warning.
Prince Charles meanwhile around the same time found himself in Canada cornered by activists loudly seeking public apologies and acknowledgments for long ago internal measures that most Canadians themselves were unaware of.
Another example of clumsy Palace bureaucracy was the decision to position Prince William as a soccer aficionado. In the UK the soccer version of football is a working class pastime.
William doggedly in the stands spectating was loudly and embarrassingly booed at one of England’s big games.
The lesson is that even in England the ideal way of keeping the Royals in touch with the collective mood is to kick them out of touch.
It was the former federal prime minister Scott Morrison of the Liberal (ie conservative) Coalition and his decision to step back from cultural wars that dismayed his traditional loyalists and paved the way for vote splitting fringe parties to usher in the Labour government.
Australia’s extraordinary civil and economic progress since its federation in 1901 has often been credited to a population largely indifferent to politics and reserving their partisan zeal instead for sport.
No longer. Australia now manifests itself as the United States once did. Which is as a new nation put into the world to do good.
Australia’s ever more frequently recurring progressive paroxysms mean shaking off much of the impedimenta accumulated before and after 1901.
This clutter of yesteryear is personified by the monarchy which paradoxically until just a few decades ago in the Antipodes was similarly viewed as a universal force for good.
A royal visit in the current mood will be interpreted simply as a promotional stunt for the monarchy.
This will be the progressive point of view regardless of the countervailing and now seemingly mandatory crack of doom planetary proclamations uttered by the heirs apparent during the course of such tours.
Benign royal absenteeism will allow to be placed in perspective in the Australia-Monarchy transaction the question of who exactly is doing who the favour?
Choreographed cover up meant Allies sourced power supplies from their enemy
Robert Ludlum the thriller writer was asked how he discovered his rich amalgam of world threatening conspiracy, mystery and corporate greed. “I was leafing through a picture book portraying Germany between the wars,” he explained.
“The population was poverty stricken, hopeless. Then a few pages later this same population became transformed into a picture of purposeful prosperity.
“What had happened?
“Hitler had taken over. Hitler had to have external assistance, powerful international helpers. Who and what were they and how did they transform Germany so quickly?”
Thus fired and inspired by this dark mystery as he saw it, Robert Ludlum launched his 27-book dominance of the thriller business in the closing decades of the 20th century.
“Who paid for all those shovels, uniforms, autobahns?”
Robert Ludlum a genial, unpretentious New Yorker who died in 2001 aired in a matter-of-fact manner his lightbulb moment in the course of an Australasian promotional tour.
There are no indications that he ever offered this explanation before or since.
Mr Ludlum filled this informational vacuum with an unmatched series of fantastical conjectures in book and movie form. If he was still writing now Mr Ludlum might consider the following……
Why a defence pact in this case Nato organised to defend its members against a known enemy Russia deliberately puts its head into the mouth of this same threat by depending on it for its strategic fuel supplies.
Who implemented this self-contradictory arrangement? Who or what caused the treaty member governments to embark on this self-defeating strategy? Were there subsidies declared or undeclared? Were there other undisclosed inducements official or semi official?
So who or what suppressed the fact that these same member countries one after another were entering into covenants, contracts, with Russia for anything up to half their fuel requirements?
Why is the Nato defence pact funding to the tune of around $1 billion per day its own opponent?
What happened to the whistle blowers, the individuals and the institutions entrusted with raising the alarm?
There is the matter of the mainstream media. Who or what cowed it into submission as Nato members over so many years one after the other arranged to finance exactly the foe that Nato was designed to protect them from?
What were the factors deflecting them from sounding the alarm when the security of their own countries became so obviously threatened?
Were their allegiances in fact devoted to entities that did not include their own readers, listeners, and viewers? If so what or who were and still are the focus of these undisclosed loyalties and allegiances?
Today’s Robert Ludlum equivalent pondering their own The Scarlatti Inheritance, The Osterman Weekend, The Rhinemann Exchange, The Holcroft Covenant and Bourne conspiracies now have a rich new motherlode.
This includes how the world’s most watched commodities, the energy ones, as a result of this are exploding in cost greatly to the profit of the exporting nations such as Russia.
Someone knows the answer. Who or what are they and more significantly, where are they?
A working Robert Ludlum-style three word title for a thriller based on all this?
Turn of the tide but Premier was blind to gathering storm and deaf to hinge of fate
In his book The Churchill Factor Boris Johnson describes the war leader as being regarded as a “tosser” by both colleagues and the electorate at large. Only when he became prime minister in 1940 did this impression recede insists his biographer.
Politically much the same thing happened to Boris Johnson himself in his even more surprising ascension to war leader after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and in which he too assumed the mantle of the lion giving the roar.
Like his storied predecessor Mr Johnson has tended to make his own rules. Mr Johnson has always believed that like Winston Churchill he too is a creature of providence and of destiny, and to this end also possesses built in shock absorbers.
Which is why he took himself off to Kiev at the earliest opportunity there to be seen striding through the streets with president Zelensky.
In political terms being a “tosser” means being unpredictable, unreliable, out for the main chance, out for yourself instead of for your party.
Winston Churchill changed his party on several occasions, veering from Conservative to Liberal and then back to the Conservatives.
Mr Johnson managed to change his party without actually leaving it.
Australians know this as the Turnbull Effect after their own federal Liberal (ie. Conservative) prime minister Malcolm Turnbull who in full office suddenly began imposing policies ardently held by his parliamentary Opposition, notably anti-nuclear edicts.
Mr Johnson did much the same thing when he dramatically and publicly converted to the same collective cause shrilly threatening Britons with meat free diets and heat pumps in place of their domestic fireplaces.
Mr Johnson resembles his heroic subject in physical conformation being stocky and thickset and like Winston Churchill projecting a gruff no frills roast beef image. Yet here he was suddenly advocating a way of life more California than Yorkshire.
It is now that we can identify a key difference between Boris Johnson and Winston Churchill. Unlike Churchill Mr Johnson did not see the storm clouds gathering over Europe, or if he did he hoped they would go away.
The extent to which his Glasgow global convocation acted as a universal diversion from the gathering storm remains so delicate that it cannot be discussed, let alone subjected to objective evaluation.
This applies for instance to United States special envoy to Glasgow John Kerry. He was United States foreign secretary in 2014 when Crimea was originally seized. He might reasonably have been expected to have picked up at the very least some groundswell intelligence to impart.
Perhaps even a privileged update on the imminent Russia follow-up invasion?
When it came to fuel power nobody wanted to confront the EU’s dependence on Russia. The German dependence is well known. Italy is just as dependent. But nobody is talking about it, in spite of Italy having pioneered geothermal power.
Boris Johnson’s head was in the faddish sand. Perhaps like his European counterparts he put it there to avert the anger of the modish and skittish activist metropolitan privileged single issue bloc.
Winston Churchill in contrast braved the fashionable pro German acquiescence of high society and much of the aristocracy during the 1930s by constantly warning about Germany’s true intentions which duly came to pass.
Mr Johnson’s own appointment with destiny will always be shrouded by his deliberate boosterism of the Glasgow excitability which camouflaged among other things the White House’s electoral policy of securing its own coastal enclave vote by curtailing domestic energy production in favour of also relying on Russia’s.
Still, even if he did see the inevitable outcome of Russia’s drive for the warm water ports which began in 2008 with the invasion of Georgia he refrained from a full voice Churchillian warning to the West about the peril of putting its power supplies in Russian hands.
Winston Churchill stridently predicted German revanchism and kept sounding the warning regardless of the enemies however powerful or fashionable he made in the process.
Was the Brexit campaign the Boris version of this in distancing Britain from the European follies underpinning the Ukraine invasion?
Possibly. But one more sensitive topic. Why was Britain in this invasion lead up also importing so much of its energy from Russia and with no word about the inflammatory contribution inherent in this?
Winston Churchill immune to ideologies would have proclaimed the danger of this, urged the ramping up of internal production.
The spiteful silliness directed at Mr Johnson for his participation in cheering along his staff lock down after-hours drinks will melt into the mists of time. The Glaswegian virtue-a-thon may go the same way.
In the spirit of his The Churchill Factor manifesto Boris Johnson will be seen as having shared with his hero one single factor. It is the spirit of unrestrained action and commitment when the big picture threat finally and unequivocally presented itself in the form of the actual invasion.
For the past 117 years Germany has known how to extract motor spirit fuel from the air. This on top of the fact that Germany had invented in the first place the combustion engine motor vehicle carried a definite implication: Germany would introduce for the mass market the alternative to fossil fuels.
The opposite happened. Germany instead became dependent on fossil fuel energy derived from Russia.
The original belief that Germany would introduce alternative fuels stemmed from Germany’s domination of chemical synthesis giving it 70 percent of the world market and giving the world such names as BASF, Hoechst, Bayer and the I.G Farben combine.
After World War 2 the Allies were determined to install in the Axis powers a system of government which would eliminate dictatorships. Proportional representation was the solution.
It eliminated autocrats. But ushered in an element that would reveal its peril only much later on.
In the meantime Germany started to construct nuclear power stations, a construction that would become greatly accelerated after the Middle East oil shocks.
The growing die Grünen now started conflating the existing German peace movement with anti nuclear environmentalism.
As die Grünen grew so did its determination to shut down nuclear power, a campaign that was only thwarted in its total success when the last remaining reactors were saved from closure by the February 24 Ukraine invasion.
Even during the height of the Soviet era in the partitioned Germany the allies consistently underrated the German Ostpolitik doctrine which actively sought a rapprochement with the Soviets.
Then came the fall of the Berlin Wall and with it the acceleration of die Grünen. Germany became increasingly dependent on imported energy. It was cost-effective and successive coalition governments dare not challenge die Grünen because it increasingly held the balance of power.
The reunified Germany far from releasing the power of its chemical and engineering sectors to implement alternative fuels had simply decided to use Russia’s.
Global academia and think tanks always failed to factor in Germany’s thirst for Russian hydrocarbons. Its defeat in World War 2 was a result of operation Barbarossa designed to capture Russia’s carboniferous resources.
Neither did the West’s academia and think tanks care to look too closely into the way Germany’s commercial weltanschauung far from engaging in a united effort to synthesize fuel now simply dealt with China in development of the automotive and engineering sectors.
Indeed, many would be surprised if they knew how many high-branded premium face value German products are in fact machined in China.
Neither did these same think tanks and research “units” care to wonder too deeply why after its 2014 seizure of the Crimea and resulting sanctions Russia went ahead and tried to appropriate the remaining area of Ukraine it hadn’t already captured,
The reason was that president Putin knew by then that even into the longer term Russia was sanction-proof, thanks to an unparalleled era of credulity in Europe and the United States.
The February 24 invasion blew apart the set of deliberately cultivated Western politico media illusions about Germany.
One of these was the belief rigidly held by this same class that Germany’s environmental movement in its political guise was entirely a force for good.
February 24 severely dented also the media class extreme reluctance to challenge China on anything at all. Even now a shunned topic is the linkage between the Beijing Olympics at one end and the United States midterm elections this year as the likely window of opportunity for staging the invasion.
Ukraine tore away the myth fostered in the United States that China by virtue of trade would become a benign force. After February 24 there emerged a new trade bloc, the Russia-Soviet one.
Nowhere is this credulity more evident than about president Putin himself.
Russia’s post Stalinist rulers governed under a first-among-equals arrangement. The Nikita Kruschev (pictured) troika was an example . After some initial window dressing for the benefit of the West Putin like Stalin ensured that he ruled alone.
Bismarck coined the term Realpolitik. In the last 30 years Germany became the focus of what now is so cruelly revealed as the diametric opposite in the form of Unrealpolitik, wishful thinking detached from evolving realities.
This illusory politik was though masked by a piety that effectively deflected any criticism or commentary as to the eventual destination which was ultimately revealed on February 24.
Outcome Clouded as Lucky Country becomes the Deluded Country
The United States and Australia are the two most weather conscious electorates in the world and the pending Australian general i.e. federal election is overcast.
Australia’s recent predilection for moral issues is obscured by its image everywhere else as the Lucky Country and which arrived at this felicitous state through a determination to avoid entanglement in the abstract and the obscure.
Federal politics illustrates Australia’s transition from being the Lucky Country to an excitable one. In politics personal value judgements publicly expressed predominate.
The Greek-derived word misogynist has become the barbed poison dart of Australian public life. It becomes more deeply embedded in the flesh of the target the more these targets expound why they are not in fact misogynist.
Curiously for a nation once proud of the way in which it thumbed its nose at the rest of the world, Australia consistently reveals itself now as a dedicated follower of fashions transmitted from the more rarefied drawing rooms and salons of the United States and Europe.
A pointer to the direction of the pending federal election is the frequency with which public figures chide each other for a perceived absence of a “moral compass.”
The pending election with its prurient preoccupations has about it an aura of a morality play.
A series of curious episodes in quite recent years show that Australia has concocted its own version of alarmism and which is quite different from mass moods elsewhere in the Anglosphere and indeed the developed world as a whole.
These fevered episodes have the peculiar characteristic of igniting passion in every part of society starting at the judiciary and its enforcement agencies all the way through to everyday people.
The first example of this modern moral panic was the Baby Azaria case in which a toddler disappeared from a camping site at Ayers Rock (pictured).
Though a burden of probability indicated the child was removed and killed by a dingo, a wild dog, there followed the incarceration of the child’s parents as an uproar fuelled from the top of society ran its course until evidence came to light utterly exonerating the parents.
Then and in very recent times this became mirrored by the hounding of Cardinal Pell which again was stoked by the same governmental authorities and with the notable addition on this occasion of the unrestrained glee of the government’s own activist public broadcasting channels.
Cardinal Pell was absolved of guilt after a tortuous series of court procedures culminating in the prelate’s successful appeal.
Both these cases were strongly imbued with the paranormal.
The baby Azaria case because of the child’s name and also because the parents belonged to the Seventh Day Adventist sect.
Cardinal George Pell’s because of the cleric’s extraordinary spiritual career journey from a provincial Australian working class background to become the second most powerful man in the Vatican.
In between these two revealing human events came the techno moral panic undertow in the form of the decision to retrofit French nuclear submarines with diesel engines.
This Quixotic institutional example of contemporary superstition faced its inevitable confrontation with geopolitical reality and did so very recently.
Australian taxpayers in atonement for this fevered retro-progressivism are now liable for more than $5 billion in contract termination penalties for submarines that were never built, let alone launched.
A national character once moulded around practicality, method and order and stoicism did in a mere generation transform itself into an erratic top down driven one jumping excitably between sorcery and contemporary taboos.
Atomic submarines treaty will be prey to close-in China eavesdropping
The Ukraine geopolitical counter weight gave the CCP the opportunity to cause it to be known that China was reinforcing its already troubling presence in Oceania with a base in the Solomon Islands only recently wrested away from an alignment with Taiwan.
The installations in the Solomon Islands will be ready to monitor Australia’s pending fleet of atomic submarines constructed and deployed under the AUKUS alliance and which will represent the allied-controlled major strike force in the southern hemisphere.
Guadalcanal (pictured) the main island, was a critical focus of the defence of Australia during World War 2 and is often considered the decisive battle in the Pacific theatre.
The CCP’s pressing strategy remains to shift attention from the Indo Pacific region and back where the CCP wants it which is in Nato’s backyard in Europe.
The Beijing Olympics provided the ceremonial cover to crystallize this. The war would be over before Nato had even had time to convene the meetings to implements sanctions.
Beijing would anyway underwrite the Russia exports simply by agreeing to take the output should anything go wrong with this scheme.
Even if the war dragged on for months rather than weeks, the United States and German reliance on hydrocarbons from Russia would continue.
The Eastern bloc always understood the way in which governments in the United States and Europe put tactical electoral considerations ahead of defence strategy.
In less than a year the United States had converted itself from an energy exporting nation into a major importing one. An unanswered conundrum is why president Putin abruptly curtailed this allied compounding reliance on Russian hydrocarbons by invading Ukraine.
Inspired leaks reveal that Washington’s belief in its shared common purpose view of the CCP was so enduring and deep set that it approached Beijing to be peacemaker, honest broker over Ukraine.
Seemingly Beijing went along with this asking typically in all such dealings of this nature for more and still more data and giving as much weight to what was undisclosed as was disclosed. One piece of data passed on would have been the strong conviction within the United States military to the effect that the war would indeed be a short one.
When the vaunted and much publicised and increasingly soft-looking Nato sanctions eventually cut in the CCP will take over as the dominant customer for Russia’s hydrocarbons and will duly set the price to suit itself.
Had he remained rules based and within his own constituted frontier president Putin could have at least tripled the value to Russia of this Nato dependency. He had a clear market run to the next United States presidential election at the very least.
CCP encouragement stands out as an obvious reason. The CCP knew that the IGOs along with many NGOs were determined to keep the United States and the United Kingdom as the new avatars of political aversion to hydrocarbons.
They were prize additions to the existing captive market held in line by these same IGOs and NGOs, already featuring such energy dependent jewels as Germany and Italy.
The United States in its new national security self-eroding way had already introduced and thus supercharged for Russia’s immense benefit reverse elasticity for hydrocarbons. Demand increased and so did the price paid to Russia.
The more hydrocarbon prices rose so did demand. The reason demand and thus price consistently and in harness rose was because of the artificial shortage created by the White House
The CCP emerges in one of its favoured win-win positions. When the allied sanctions eventually cut in it becomes the obvious disposal market for Russian hydrocarbons.
If the allied politically-driven campaign into electrical vehicles accelerates then China will similarly become the disposal market for the Russian primary commodities required for these also. Nickel is but one obvious example.
President Putin it is said blames the United States for all and everything that goes wrong. So why did he deliberately ignore Napoleon’s dictum about the folly of interrupting an enemy while he is making a mistake?
In this case the mistake was the United States deliberately and even painstakingly abandoning its central strategy of energy self-sufficiency and in doing so putting itself in the hands of the very dictatorships it is pledged to defy.
In the resulting commotion in Europe China takes advantage of the diversion and digs itself deeper into the Indo Pacific.
Shadowy Kremlin adviser may be answer to West taken by surprise riddle
When John Kerry on learning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine announced that he hoped it would not interfere with his global climate change plans many were aghast. “I hope President Putin will help us to stay on track with respect to what we need to do for the climate.”
There are some signs that the former Democratic presidential nominee’s statement needs to be examined even more closely than it already has been.
The reason is that president Biden’s climate envoy may have believed that he was on one side of a covenant that overruled military intervention in the deeper interest of controlling man made distortions to the climate.
John Kerry is also a former United States secretary of state and his belief that he was party to any covenant, pact, might reasonably rest on his own belief in his Russian counterpart.
Ruslan Edelgeriev (pictured above) is a central figure in this particular drama and who has been ignored in the West which is all the more surprising bearing in mind his obvious status.
His role from the start was designed to mirror the West’s well intentioned attitudes to climate. His candid attitude dovetailed into that of the West’s climate advocates, notably those of Kerry himself. Ruslan Edelgeriev had a one-on-one with John Kerry at Glasgow.
“We agreed to continue cooperation after Glasgow, including on methane and the satellite monitoring of greenhouse emissions," the Russian climate envoy told Tass.
John Kerry told Tass that the meeting with his Russian counterpart was “excellent.”
Ruslan Edelgeriev has a solid and diverse background in Chechen academia garnering degrees in law, and farm products processing technology.
Prior to this he did his conscript service in the Russian military followed by ten years in the security service, the FSB. Now his career took off. He became the Chechen deputy minister of agriculture. Then the big jump to deputy prime minister of the Chechen Republic followed by four years as premier.
In 2018 he took over the climate envoy job, and thus became cemented in as a member of president Putin’s innermost circle.
This was the man that president Putin had in waiting just to meet the John Kerry type that he knew would emerge as the standard bearer for the Democrat flagship binding belief, the climate one.
Indeed, John Kerry’s Roman Catholicism would have blended with his Russian counterpart’s role as a family man complete with six children.
The duo had at least two face-to-face meetings. John Kerry also had a phone call with his counterpart’s boss, president Putin himself. An activist since the 1960s and now fixated on climate John Kerry could not have refrained from rhapsodising about the great future that lay before Russia and the US in shared climate ethics.
A theme in this would have been in the US side pointing out to the Russians the degree to which they were even on track to being the beneficiary of global warming as their vast Arctic territories unfroze and opened up to agriculture, along with the ports needed to ship the cornucopia to a needy world.
John Kerry’s mind we may assume had become cleansed of the awful occasion when as US Foreign Secretary he stood by while Russia not waiting for the Arctic to heat up simply grabbed instead the Crimea and its warm water ports.
The Atlantic alliance consistently gave the impression of being untroubled by the gathering indications that Russia intended to reabsorb the remaining Ukraine and by any means;
The lead up period was characterised notably in the United States and Great Britain by an ever increasing revivalist vilification and condemnation of oil and gas.
This transatlantic chorus increased in crescendo as the indications of the Ukraine invasion grew more obvious. The possibility must be considered that among the choir masters there was a belief that the problem had been taken care of.
Was this a belief that in the transcending common and higher interest of climate cooperation there had been concluded a non-aggression pact? John Kerry’s reaction to the invasion in which he trusted that president Putin would keep climate “on track” reinforces this sense of priority of a fixed if undisclosed objective amid the turbulence.
Electorally in the United States climate consistently emerges as the common preoccupation of the coastal elites. This is why the White House postures that the surge in energy prices due to the war in Europe is actually beneficial. Why? Because it compels the introduction of new energy alternatives.
Neither is this confined to the United States. The outcome of Australia’s pending general election shows signs of being decided on the same doctrine and by the same type of people.
The Atlantic alliance remained consistently blind to the nuances of this war notably for example that the completion of the Beijing Olympics inaugurated the start of it. A reluctance to factor in Ruslan Edelgeriev is another example.
Squeamish Officials Confront Clash of energy supply versus altruism choice in South Seas
The closure of the Marsden Point oil refinery underlines the success of New Zealand’s Labour government in capping its own energy industry.
The enthusiasm of the incoming government was demonstrated when in it immediately announced legislatively enforced cut backs in oil and gas exploration and production.
The fact that this proclamation was made to a gathering of university students was itself indicative of the target voter market that Labour intended to lock in.
A doctrinally be-dazzled mainstream media skirts around New Zealand’s developing energy dependence symbolised by closing the Marsden Point Refinery, the nation’s only such installation and the keystone investment in the nation’s quite recent industrialisation era.
Disclosures meanwhile from international energy regulatory authorities to the effect that the government’s de-industrialisation countervailing offset emission trading certificates are losing in global markets their fungibility, tradeable value, was discretely buried.
Then came Ukraine. This demonstrated how an ideologically-triggered reliance on foreign energy supplies placed the once energy independent world into the grasp of the world’s most vicious despot suppliers.
This has led to a clash of cultures in New Zealand which is simply too awful for anyone to point out. It is the collision between the all-embracing climate ideology and traditional humanitarian ideals.
New Zealand’s official politico-media class hysteria over climate rests on the determination of international bodies to frighten the nation. They do so by calculating the sparsely-populated nation’s contribution on a per-head basis.
Even this produces a world contribution percentage that can barely be expressed even in fractions of a single decimal point.
Also smoothed over in the interest of ideology is that most of this is from grazing animal methane which is a short lived gas.
US cabinet members insist that the Russian supply embarrassment is merely an awkward interruption in its Net Zero policy, its real and true objective.
In New Zealand which has long pointed the way to the most purist climate ideology the cost of this same ideology is forecast by the respected NZIER consultancy as $28 billion.
This is similarly brushed off. So is the effect on Taranaki the nation’s energy region which also happens to be the only industrially diversified district.
Moscow’s embassy in Wellington will have used New Zealand as a Western-attitude sampler, bellwether, in all this.
The embassy is the most effective of foreign legations in the capital ensuring that its officials who are adept with colloquial English gauge personally opinions and that these same officials enjoy a longevity of service in order to cultivate their contacts.
They will have reported for example how New Zealand’s very large number of officials with job descriptions involving climate ideology become so unnerved at any suggestion from international organisations that New Zealand is somehow not pulling its weight globally, that it is failing to meet its “targets.”
These international organisations constantly urge these same officials to be ready to get their climate agenda “back on the table.”
At first this priority was to be resumed as soon as the Covid emergency subsided
Now it is once the Ukraine war, an authentic crisis, has receded from the public consciousness.
More worrying still is New Zealand’s contribution to the overheated evangelical fervour emanating from the COP26 convocation in Glasgow.
This had the effect of showcasing to the Russians especially the silliness that had overtaken Great Britain. Boris Johnson radiated the impression that diets had become Britain’s priority and that a Net Zero scheme had become the once energy-exporting nation’s overall and overriding strategy.
The Russians saw how there was no effort to manage the expectations from COP26. They saw how Boris Johnson’s climate fervency was a by-product of his own recent domestic rearrangements.
Then Johnson became wrapped in the kind of backsliding-in-high-places dottiness that from time overwhelms the Establishment in Britain. This time it was who had been partying-and-where during the Chinese plague lockdowns?
This, on top of the grip that United States progressives have on the White House now combined to reassure the Russians of their own grip on the West’s energy requirements.
The Russians also continued to wonder after the uncoordinated evacuation of Kabul why those responsible kept their jobs, and even appeared to flourish in them.
The ensuing Ukraine war has emerged as a direct challenge to hitherto sacrosanct new western ideology which in its way has proved to be as enduring and as indelible as anything communism once engendered among its adherents.
Nations in the political grip of it are now required to make up their minds over which cruel despot will fill in their energy shortfalls.
There becomes introduced a clash of cultures, one that the politico-media class deems so sensitive that they can only dance around it.