For the United States, the economy has long been the arena of struggle to achieve the goal outlined in the national military strategy - the new world order under American leadership. Russia can respond to the threat asymmetrically.
That the United States and its allies use the price of oil as weapon, not a secret. “The Petroleum Economic War (EV) against the Soviet Union,” says Norman, “ensured such success that this strategy is now being used against large geopolitical enemies with the goal of breaking into their political system. Multinational banks are equivalent the fleetbecause they are capable of projecting a force with powerful destructive potential. "
Something more dangerous
Expert Saul Sanders testifies: “For more than 40 for years, the United States and its allies have fought a formidable enemy armed to the teeth - from nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles to the world's best propaganda and subversive network. But the United States and the West secretly began to affect the numerous vulnerabilities of the Soviet autocratic economy. Perhaps that is why only a few people in Russia foresaw the extreme vulnerability that led to a sudden explosion. ” Considering the situation of the growing Russian threat in the context of economic confrontation, Sanders notes: "This is not a return to the Cold War, but in a sense it can even be something more dangerous."
A few years ago, the American online edition of Politico published an article entitled "The Pentagon Prepares for Economic War." In it, in particular, it was told about the first war game, focused not on bullets and bombs, but on how hostile countries can cause targeted damage to the American economy. It was also said about the elaboration of global scenarios that would allow the US to change the balance of forces in its favor by destructively affecting the economic systems of the adversary countries. All this was carefully studied by representatives of the US military and intelligence community.
The current confrontation is conducted mostly in secret. This permanent state, where there is no difference between war and peace, covers all spheres of existence of states and peoples. This is the new way of life. Economics and politics become weapons, subject to the single goal of dismantling states through destruction, including economic sovereignty.
According to globocrats, individual economies should become slave units of the monster state. Planting an open, borderless market The United States National Military Strategy (NAF) marks as one of the key objectives of the military.
In the States there is the Institute of Economic Warfare (IEV), which is part of the American Center for Democracy. It was created by neo-cons, one of the leading ideologues of which former Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Pearl, nicknamed the Prince of Darkness, gave the following assessment: "The IEM always anticipates the next threat."
Since Russia has been declared the main threat and target for extermination in the US NAF by Russia, we will need to protect ourselves from such aggression. This does not mean that we should exclude traditional war (TV) from the sphere of attention. It's time to go beyond narrow approaches. We need both strategies: symmetrical defensive and asymmetrical offensive (preventive), based on surprise, unpredictability. And here an important place is occupied by the economic component.
The Bloomberg editorial says: “It's time to spread the war to other fronts.” K. Morris states: “As tensions increase between Russia and the United States, it becomes more and more obvious that the EW between the two superpowers has begun. This battle is now taking on a global scale. ”
The extent of manipulation
The country's defense capability directly depends on the economy. EV is aimed at delivering an irreplaceable blow to the defense potential of the state - the object of the attack, depriving it of the opportunity to repel the aggression.
In the British Encyclopedia (the most complete and oldest universal encyclopedia) the following definition is given: EE is the use or threat of using economic means against a country in order to weaken its economy and thus reduce its political or military power. EV also includes the use of appropriate means capable of forcing the adversary to change his policy or behavior or to undermine his previously normal relations with other countries. Such common means include a trade embargo, boycotts, sanctions, manipulation of tariffs, freezing of assets, suspension of aid, a ban on investment and other capital movements, and expropriation. This should also include the denial of access to the necessary physical, financial and technological resources or other blocking of gaining profit from trade, or deriving benefit from financial and technological agreements with other countries.
All this is point punches. But there are also weapons of mass economic destruction (OMEU).
Sanders writes: “The weaknesses of Russia are much more obvious now. In contrast to the Soviet era, present-day Moscow sought and, to a certain extent, achieved integration with the world economy ... The Russian leadership ignored the recommendations of advisers who warned about the growing impact of EV being led by the West. ”
The absorption of national economies by the world system in the process of integration with the subsequent elimination of economic sovereignty is the OMEU of the states in the course of the modern global confrontation.
The manipulation of the global financial system with the aim of blocking the adversary’s access to cash and credits for the development of production in general and the military-industrial complex in particular should also be attributed to the OMEA. In short, this is called financial manipulation and financial terrorism.
Among the components of financial terrorism is the material support of various extremist organizations (for example, ISIS), as well as participation in drug trafficking and other forms of smuggling, which requires the involvement of banks specializing in the laundering of criminal money. This plows the armed forces and intelligence services of the West in order to raise money for secret subversive operations.
The OMEA is also called mass migration organized artificially and provoked in one way or another, which is intended to create a pretext for the beginning of an armed intervention and to provide support from world public opinion.
Thus, to form the basis for NATO aggression, militants from the Kosovo Liberation Army, on pain of death, expelled Kosovo Albanians from their homes and drove them to the border, where Western correspondents with cameras were already assembled. Journalists recorded a crisis that required “humanitarian intervention,” which began with the support of the duped world community.
What is happening today with mass migration from combat areas is the same provocative course aimed at inciting mass discontent of the population with the invasion of visitors. With the help of the same media, the situation can be brought to a boil, and then the public consciousness will readily accept war as the desired factor of “liberation”. After all, on television constantly show footage of how refugees are attacking the police, refuse from the proposed products and medical care.
Already appointed and the main culprit in this crisis - Russia. For example, Czech Defense Minister Martin Stropnitsky said that it is the Russian Federation that organizes, coordinates and finances the current invasion across the borders of the Balkan states into European countries of Muslims, men of military age. “The Russian Federation,” says Stropnitsky, “does not want the unity and cohesion of the European Union. I do not foresee that the current invasion of migrants will end soon. ”
The same fables, citing certain intelligence sources, are repeated by the new Minister of Defense of Hungary, Istvan Simichko. According to him, Russia is financing and organizing the transportation by bus of a large number of Muslims, men of draft age.
Presumably, it refers to the invention of Russian buses, which are able to swim in the Mediterranean. After all, it is from there, from the territories controlled by the Americans and their vassals, the main stream of migration comes.
Hungary and the Czech Republic were not in confrontation with us, in many matters they even identified themselves. And if all of a sudden the heads of the defense departments of these states act sharply anti-Russian, it means that the provoked migration crisis is meant to embroil our countries, to turn even those who are neutral, into enemies of the Russian Federation.
It is not surprising that, following the accusations of Russia in organizing an Islamic invasion of Europe, there are calls by some American analysts to immediately prepare for the inevitable hostilities against the Russian Federation.
Hierarchical and network approaches
EV covers not only the state level, but penetrates the society. In the strategic documents of the Pentagon, the main target of the modern war is declared the population of the country - the object of attack. Manipulating the behavior of people, influencing their consciousness, forcing dissatisfaction with the financial situation - all this can lead to devastating consequences. Economic losses and casualties as a result of the corresponding aggression can be many times greater than the physical losses in the course of traditional war.
A large-scale EV has been launched against Russia. It uses the entire arsenal of tools: from surgical strikes of high-precision economic weapons on individual targets to the global impact of the OMEU. But if EV is being waged against us, then it is necessary not only to defend ourselves, but also to win. Losing it leads to a deliberate surrender to TV.
Here a problem arises due to the fact that we have two opposing approaches to understanding such threats. This is due to the presence of two views on the economy as a whole. One is hierarchical, focused on monocentrism and the leading role of the state. The other is networked, aimed at fragmentation, economic separatism and management polycentrism with the main role of global structures and reducing state participation in the economy, because it interferes with an open market. As for such characteristics as fragmentation and economic separatism, their extreme manifestations were well defined by Canadian expert and director of international service High Alert Investment Management Ltd Ronald Holland, listing the following US goals for Russia: vassal dependence, territorial division and development of zones of influence.
The network economy is a departure from state responsibility for development. It is worth noting that the global crisis of the year 1929 was successfully overcome precisely when the market was limited or when it was completely abandoned.
At the center of the hierarchical model is an enterprise that provides industrial production and state sovereignty. In the center of the network - a bank associated with transnational financial structures, with all the ensuing consequences. So, Holland cites as an example the situation in Greece, clearly demonstrating that even in electoral democracy, whose citizens demand change, nothing like this can happen, because all politicians are subject to influential circles of foreign banks.
The proponents of these two approaches have different ideas about eh, threats and vulnerabilities that the adversary can use in its conduct. The fact that for some - a threat, for others - an advantage. What some view as a vulnerability, others consider it an achievement.
With the coexistence of such dualism, it is impossible to win in EV. Moreover, it will lead to defeat and to the surrender to TV. Need to be determined. Moreover, time is not just short, it is no longer critical.
It may be objected that certain international treaties signed by Russia will not allow this choice to be made. In response, it is worth remembering the following words of Pyotr Stolypin: “The state can, the state is obliged, when it is in danger, to adopt the strictest, most exceptional laws in order to protect itself from disintegration. It was, it is, it will always and always. This principle is in human nature, it is in the nature of the state itself. When the house is on fire, gentlemen, you break into other people's apartments, break doors, break windows. When a person is sick, his body is treated, poisoning it with poison. When a killer attacks you, you kill him. This order is recognized by all states. There is no legislation that would not give the government the right to suspend the flow of the law when the state organism is shaken to its roots; which would not give him the authority to suspend all norms of law. This, gentlemen, is the state of necessary defense ... There are fateful moments in the life of a state, when state necessity is above law and when it is necessary to choose between integrity of theories and integrity of the Fatherland. ” In the conditions of war, all legal principles must be subordinated to the laws of defense of the Motherland and victory.
American analyst Christopher Martenson writes: “The United States has unleashed the EE against Russia. The situation is becoming more tense and has every chance of developing into something much bigger and more deadly than it appears in the Western press. If it looks like war, acts like war, smells like war, then it must be war. And everyone should be concerned about these events. ”
Of course, separate measures of economic impact for military purposes were applied in stories many times, but only now they took shape in the system, in the theory that became the basis of modern global confrontation.
To counteract this, Russia needs its own EW strategy. It must be offensive because defense does not ensure victory. And offensive direction is provided with a hard-willed course to preserve economic sovereignty while neutralizing vulnerabilities that can be used by the enemy and become threats.
According to Holland, President Putin and Russia will withstand this attack on the sovereignty of the country. EV will end in a dead end, because we can not be subdued by invasion. Let's hope that happens.