Tag Archives: China

by | March 20, 2023 · 8:50 pm

Putin and Xi Jinping are “dear friends” and they are both working on a New World Order

Xi Jinping visited Vladimir Putin today, and they both called each other «dear friends.» Xi says China is ready with Russia to stand guard over world order based on international law, on Moscow visit earlier today. Xi added that with Russia, China was ready to defend the UN-centric international system.

Xi pushes China to play a more dominant role in managing global affairs. China`s New World Order is on the way.

This is what the war in Ukraine is about: the new world order. The war in Ukraine is set to fundamentally transform the International order, and some people call it the world`s «de-Westernization».

A World Order is an impressive work that focuses on the geopolitical distribution of power, Henry Kissinger wrote in his book World Order.

During the 20th century, political figures such as Woodrow Wilson and Winston Churchill used the term «new world order» to refer to a new period of history characterized by a dramatic change in world political thought and in the global balance of power after World War I and World War II.

Photo by Markus Spiske on Pexels.com

The interwar and post-World War II periods were seen as opportunities to implement idealistic proposals for global governance by collective efforts to address worldwide problems that go beyond the capacity of individual nation-states to resolve while nevertheless respecting the right of nations to self-determination.

Such collective initiatives manifested in the formation of intergovernmental organizations such as the League of Nations in 1920, the United Nations (UN) in 1945, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949, along with international regimes such as the Bretton Woods system and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), implemented to maintain a cooperative balance of power and facilitate reconciliation between nations to prevent the prospect of another global conflict.

After World War II, they all said; «Never again», and the winners, led by America, drafted conventions that defined unpardonable crimes against humanity, and sought to impose costs on those committing them.

Recalling the economic disasters and human miseries that paved the way to world war, the framers of this order built the UN and other international institutions to promote cooperation and development.

Progressives welcomed international organizations and regimes such as the United Nations in the aftermath of the two World Wars but argued that these initiatives suffered from a democratic deficit and were therefore inadequate not only to prevent another world war but to foster global justice, as the UN was chartered to be a free association of sovereign nation-states rather than a transition to democratic world government.

British writer and futurist H.G. Wells went further than progressives in the 1940s by appropriating and redefining the term «new world order» as a synonym for the establishment of a technocratic world state, and of a planned economy, garnering popularity in state socialist circles.

Right-wing populist John Birch Society claimed in the 1960s that the governments of both the United States and the Soviet Union were controlled by a cabal of corporate internationalists, «greedy» bankers, and corrupt politicians who were intent on using the UN as the vehicle to create a «One World Government».

This anti-globalist conspiracism fueled the campaign for U.S. withdrawal from the UN.

In his speech, Toward a New World Order, delivered on 11 September 1990 during a joint session of the US Congress, President George H.W. Bush described his objectives for post-Cold War global governance in cooperation with post-Soviet states. He stated:

«Until now, the world we`ve known has been a world divided – a world of barbed wire and concrete block, conflict, and the cold war. Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the genuine prospect of new world order.

In the words of Winston Churchill, a «world order» in which «the principles of justice and fair play …. protect the weak against the strong…..»A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.»

The New York Times observed that progressives were denouncing this new world order as a rationalization of American imperial ambitions in the Middle East at the time.

And now, everything has changed. Again. China`s New World Order is coming.

We are moving from a Unipolar world to a Multipolar world where Europe and the U.S. are less influential. The war in Ukraine is dividing opinions between people in Western nations, and those in countries like China, India, and Turkey, a new poll suggests.

The war in Ukraine has laid bare the «sharp geographical divides in global attitudes» on «conceptions of democracy, and the composition of the future international order,» according to a new survey from the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).

While Western allies have «regained their sense of purpose on the global stage,» the gulf between their perspective and the «rest» has grown wider, the ECFR added.

There are different views about the general role the West will play in the future world order. Some people expect a new bipolar world of two blocks led by the U.S. and China, whereas there were signs that most people in major non-Western countries see the future in more multipolar terms.

China has always been in front. The silk road is known for all the roads from China to Europe, and nobody knows how old it is, but it can be as old as ten thousand years. The silk road was popular because the Chinese sold silk to Europe.

Today, China is still in front as they are considered to be the factory of the world. But this is probably not a surprise for people in China. Why?

For more than two millennia, nomarchs who ruled China proper saw their country as one of the dominant actors in the world. The concept of Zhongguo (the Middle Kingdom, as China, calls itself), is not simply geographic.

It implies that China is the cultural, political, and economic center of the world.

This Sino-centrist worldview has in many ways shaped China`s outlook on global governance. The rules, norms, and institutions that regulate international cooperation. The decline and collapse of imperial China in the 1800s and early 1900s, however, diminished Chinese influence on the global stage for more than a century.

But China is back. China has reemerged as a major power in the past two decades, with the world`s second-largest economy and a world-class military. It increasingly asserts itself, seeking to regain its centrality in the international system, and over global governance institutions.

These institutions, created mostly by Western powers after World War II, include the World Bank, which provides loans and grants to developing states, the International Monetary Fund, which works to secure the stability of the global monetary system; and the United Nations, among others.

President Xi Jinping, the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong, has called for China to «lead the reform of the global governance system,» transforming institutions and norms in ways that will reflect Beijing`s values and priorities.

For over two thousand years, beginning with the Qin dynasty (221-226 BCE) and ending with the collapse of the Qing (1636-1911 BCE), monarchs who ruled China proper invoked a mandate of heaven to legitimate their own rule and rhetorically assert their own centrality to global order, even though they never built a truly global empire.

Even when China`s influence collapsed in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Chinese elites dreamed of regaining global influence.

At the end of World War II, China became an initial member of the United Nations and seemed poised to play a larger role in the new international order. But after the Communist Party won the civil war and took power in 1949, China rejected the international system and tried to help create an alternative global governance order.

Frustrated with the existing international system, the Republic of China (Taiwan) remained seated on the UN Security Council, instead of the People`s Republic of China, Beijing promoted alternative values and institutions.

In 1953, Premier Zhou Enlai enunciated «The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence», mutual respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, mutual nonaggression, noninterference in each other`s international affairs, equality, mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence.

Endorsed by leaders of many newly independent former colonies, these principles formed a basis for the nonaligned movement (NAM) of the 1960s. NAM became a counterweight to Western-dominated global governance.

China returned to the international system in the early 1970s and rebuilt its ties with the United States. It accepted a weaker international role and sought to participate in the institutions and rules set up after World War II.

After the end of the Mao era, China opened up in the 1980s and 1990s, reformed its economy, and increased its role in global governance, including by cooperating with international institutions. During this time, China adapted many domestic laws to conform to those of other countries.

Deng Xiaoping, who ultimately succeeded Mao, oversaw major economic reforms in the late 1970s and early 1980s, which launched China`s growth and ultimately increased its global reach. Deng introduced market reforms, and encouraged inflows of foreign capital and technology, among other steps.

During this period, China also joined more global financial and trade institutions, including the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Intellectual Property Organization, and the Asian Development Bank.

In 1989, the Chinese government violently cracked down on democracy protestors in Beijing`s Tiananmen Square, and elsewhere in the country, which resulted in widespread international condemnation.

To help rebuild its reputation and ties with other countries, beginning in the early 1990s, Beijing increasingly embraced multilateralism and integration with global governance institutions. Beijing signed multilateral agreements it had previously been reluctant to join.

In the first decade of the twenty-first century, China often proved willing to play by international rules and norms. As its economy grew, however, Beijing assumed a more active role in global governance, signaling its potential to lead and challenge existing institutions and norms.

The country boosted its power in four ways; it took on a bigger role in international institutions, advertised its increasing influence, laid the groundwork to create some of its own organizations, and sometimes subverted global governance rules.

In 2010, China surpassed Japan to become the world`s second-biggest economy and earned the third-greatest percentage of votes in the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It also created its own Multilateral Organizations.

China started to create its own Beijing-dominated institutions. A process that would expand in the 2010s. In the previous decade, Beijing had established the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which built on the earlier Shanghai 5 group, and brought together China, Russia, and Central Asian states.

In the 2010s, the SCO would become a vehicle for China to challenge existing global norms, such as pushing its idea of closed internet controlled by governments, rather than one global, open internet.

Under President Bush and Obama, Washington generally accepted that Beijing would increasingly support global governance norms and institutions. In 2005, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick publicly urged China to become a «responsible stakeholder» in the international system.

The Donald J. Trump administration, by contrast, has expressed greater concern over Chinese efforts to subvert existing norms and has pushed back against Beijing`s efforts to use international institutions to promote Chinese foreign policies and programs like the Belt and Road Initiatives.

But China challenges International norms and rules. Under Jiang Zemin`s successor Hu Jintao, China more openly challenged international norms. Beijing asserted that its sovereignty over disputed areas of the South China Sea was a «core interest,» and «non-negotiable, « despite participating in negotiations with other claimants.

Beijing also expanded its footprint in the South China Sea; it built military facilities on disputed islands and artificial features. And it expanded its aid around the world.

Since the early 2010s, as China`s economic and military power has grown, so too has its ambition and capability to reform the global governance system to reflect Beijing`s priorities and values.

Some of the priorities Beijing promotes in global governance are defensive in nature and reflect long-standing. Chinese aims: preventing criticism of China`s human rights practices, keeping Taiwan from assuming an independent role in international institutions, and protecting Beijing from compromises to its sovereignty.

Yet China also now seeks to shape the global governance system more offensively, to advance its model of political and economic development. This development model reflects extensive state control over politics and society and a mix of both market-based practices and statism in core sectors of the economy.

Xi Jinping has called for more shared control of global governance. He has declared that China needs to «lead the reform of the global governance system with the concepts of fairness and justice».

The terms fairness and justice signal a call for a more multipolar world, one potentially with a smaller U.S. role in setting international rules. The Donald J. Trump administration`s retreat from global leadership has added to China`s opportunity to fill the void and promote multipolar global governance.

China is now pushing for a bigger role in International agencies. Chinese officials lead four of the fifteen UN specialized agencies. They are also creating alternative institutions. Beijing is building its own, China-centered institutions.

In 2013, Beijing launched the Belt and Road Initiatives. A vast plan to use Chinese assistance to fund infrastructure, and boost ties with, other countries, like their neighbor Russia. Beijing`s more proactive global strategy serves the Xi administration`s dream of returning China to its past glory.

China`s evolving global governance strategy is most apparent in four major issues; global health, internet governance, climate change, and development finance.

China seeks to become a leader in global internet governance and to promote the idea of «cyber sovereignty». That a state should exert control over the internet within its borders. In October 2017, Xi Jinping unveiled his plans to make China a «cyber superpower.»

Globally, Beijing promotes its domestic cyber sovereignty approach to internet governance, which hinges on Communist Party control and censorship. Xi`s administration uses increasingly advanced technology to dominate the domestic internet and social media, blocking global search engines, and social media sites, and promoting domestic versions.

China`s domestic internet offers an alternative to existing, freer models of internet governance, and Beijing also uses its influence at the United Nations, and other forums to push countries to adopt a more closed internet.

Meanwhile, Chinese corporations such as Huawei, and CloudWalk have supplied repressive governments in Venezuela and Zimbabwe with surveillance tools like facial recognition technology.

And the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) contains a «Digital Silk Road Initiative» that includes inviting foreign officials to participate in workshops on information technology policy, including controlling the internet.

If China and Russia can set the standards for internet governance, they could pave the way for other countries to embrace cyber sovereignty, sparking a divided world with two internets. One is generally open, and the other is closed and favored by autocracies.

The world has become less democratic in recent years. Democracy is in decline. The number of people that have democratic rights has recently plummeted: between 2016 and 2022, this number fell from 3,9 billion to 2,3 billion people.

The world underwent phases of autocratization in the 1930s and again in the 1960s and 1970s. Back then, people fought to turn the tide and pushed democratic rights to unprecedented heights. But what now? Can we do the same again?

A new Chinese world order is coming, and they are not democratic.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | February 27, 2023 · 8:26 pm

The Stasi Surveillance is the most repressive and oppressive surveillance system ever operated

Many people around the world do not want a surveillance society, but the truth is that it has never been easier to follow different people 24/7/365. Many are looking to Communist China, and its tactics and impact on society.

But surveillance isn`t something new. The Nazis did it. So did the Communists in East Germany. The Nazis had Gestapo, while the Communists had Stasi, and Stasi is the official name for Ministerium fur Staatsicherheit (German: «Ministry for State Security»).

Stasi was a secret police agency of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). Furthermore; the Stasi was one of the most hated and feared institutions of the East German communist government. It all started after World War II: in 1950, and it lasted until the end in 1990 (after the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989).

Photo by PhotoMIX Company on Pexels.com

The difference between Gestapo and Stasi is that Gestapo had 40,000 officials watching a country of 80 million, while the Stasi employed 102,000 to control only 17 million. One might add that the Nazi terror lasted only twelve years, whereas the Stasi had four decades in which to perfect its machinery of oppression, espionage, and international terrorism and subversion.

By at least one estimate, the Stasi maintained greater surveillance over its own people than any secret police force in history.

The Stasi employed one secret policeman for every 166 East Germans. By comparison, the Gestapo deployed one secret policeman per 2,000 people.

Stasi agents infiltrated and undermined West Germany`s government and spy agencies.

The Stasi was much worse than the Gestapo, if you consider only the oppression of its own people, according to Simon Wiesnthal of Vienna, Austria, who has been hunting Nazi criminals for half a century. But, why was the Stasi so extremely good?

Many of the techniques used by the Stasi had actually been pioneered by the Nazis and in particular the Gestapo. They relied heavily on information-gathering and intelligence in order to create an atmosphere of fear and to get citizens to denounce one another. It worked extremely successfully. But, why did they do it? What was the goal of the Stasi?

The goal was to destroy secretly the self-confidence of people, for example by damaging their reputation, organizing failures in their work, and destroying their personal relationships. Considering this, East Germany was a very modern dictatorship. The Stasi didn`t try to arrest every dissident.

They had many different tactics, including questioning, repeated stop, and searches, strange noises on telephone lines, and conspicuous visits to the workplace so that bosses and colleagues were aware of the police interest.

The Stasi steamed open letters, copied them, filed them, and sent them on. They went into homes when people were out and bugged them. They tapped into the phone infrastructure of the building, maintained contacts and occasionally cooperated with West German terrorists.

The Stasi`s function was similar to the KGB, serving as a means of maintaining state authority. This was accomplished primarily through the use of a network of civilian informants. KGB also invited the Stasi to establish operational bases in Moscow and Leningrad to monitor visiting East German tourists.

The Stasi also acted as a proxy for KGB to conduct activities in other Eastern Bloc countries, such as Poland, where the Soviets were despised.

Due to their close ties with Soviet intelligence services, Mielke referred to the Stasi officers as «Chekists». In 1978, Mielke formally granted KGB officers in East Germany the same rights and powers that they enjoyed in the Soviet Union.

Between 1950 and 1989, the Stasi employed a total of 274,000 people in an effort to root out the class enemy. In 1989, the Stasi employed 91,015 people full-time, including 2,000 fully employed unofficial collaborators, 13,073 soldiers and 2,232 officers of the GDR army, along with 173,081 unofficial informants inside GDR, and 1,553 informants in West Germany.

Regular commissioned Stasi officers were recruited from conscripts who had been honorably discharged from their 18 months’ compulsory military service, had been members of the SED, had had a high level of participation in the Party`s youth wing`s activities, and had been Stasi informers during their service in the Military.

The candidates were then made to sit through several tests and exams, which identified their intellectual capacity to be an officer and their political reliability. University graduates who had completed their military service did not need to take these tests and exams.

They then attended a two-year officer training program at the Stasi college (Hochschule) in Potsdam.

By 1995, some 174,000 inoffizielle Mitarbeiter (Ims) Stasi informants had been identified, almost 2,5% of East Germany`s population between the ages of 18 and 60. 10,000 Ims were under 18 years of age.

From the volume of material destroyed in the final days of the regime, the office of the Federal Commissioner for the Stasi Records (BstU) believes that there could have been as many as 500,000 informers.

A former Stasi colonel who served in the counterintelligence directorate estimated that the figure could be as high as 2 million if occasional informants were included.

Full-time officers were posted to all major industrial plants (the extent of any surveillance largely dependent on how valuable a product was to the economy), and one tenant in every apartment building was designed as a watchdog reporting to an area representative of the Volkspolizei (Vopo).

Spies reported every relative or friend who stayed the night at another`s apartment. Tiny holes were drilled in apartment and hotel room walls through which Stasi agents filmed citizens with special video cameras.

Schools, universities, and hospitals were extensively infiltrated.

A large number of Stasi informants were tram conductors, janitors, doctors, nurses, and teachers. Mielke believed that the best informants were those whose jobs entailed frequent contact with the public.

In some cases, spouses even spied on each other.

The roles of informants ranged from those already in some way involved in state security (such as the police and the armed services) to those in the dissident movements (such as in the arts and the Protestant Church).

Information gathered about the latter groups was frequently used to divide or discredit members. Informants were made to feel important, given material or social incentives, and were imbued with a sense of adventure, and only around 7,7%, according to official figures, were coerced into cooperating.

The Stasi had files on everyone. They spied on almost every aspect of East German`s daily lives, and they carried out international espionage. It kept files on about 5,6 million people and amassed an enormous archive. The archive holds 111 kilometers of files in total.

The Stasi was the official state security service of East Germany, the German Democratic-Republican in short the GDR. The Stasi`s motto was «Schild und Schwert der Partei» (Shield and Sword of the Party).

«The Party» was the ruling Socialist Unity Party of Germany.

The Stasi perfected the technique of psychological harassment of perceived enemies known as Zersetzung, which is a term borrowed from chemistry that literally means «decomposition». Chemical decomposition means chemical breakdown.

For example, the stability of a chemical compound is eventually limited when exposed to extreme environmental conditions such as heat, radiation, humidity, or the acidity of a solvent. Because of this chemical decomposition is often an undesired chemical reaction.

The goal was to paralyze people, and it could do so because it had access to so much personal information and to so many institutions.

By the 1970s, the Stasi had decided that the methods of overt persecution that had been employed up to that time, such as arrest and torture, were too crude and obvious. Such forms of oppression were drawing significant international condemnation.

It was realized that psychological harassment was far less likely to be recognized for what it was, so its victims, and their supporters, were less likely to be provoked into active resistance, given that they would often not be aware of the source of their problems, or even its exact nature.

International condemnation could also be avoided.

Zersetzung (decomposition) was designed to side-track and «switch off» perceived enemies so that they would lose the will to continue any «inappropriate» activities.

Anyone who was judged to display politically, culturally or religiously incorrect attitudes could be viewed as a «hostile-negative» force and targeted with Zersetzung methods.

For this reason members of the Church, writers, artists, and members further developed in a «creative and differentiated» manner based upon the specific person being targeted i.e. They were tailored based on the target`s psychology and life situation.

Tactics employed under Zersetzung usually involved the disruption of the victim`s private or family life.

This often included psychological attacks, such as breaking into their home and subtly manipulating the contents, in a form of gaslighting i.e. Moving furniture around, altering the timing of an alarm, removing pictures from walls, or replacing one variety of tea with another, etc.

Other practices include property damage, sabotage of cars, travel bans, career sabotage, administering purposely incorrect medical treatment, smear campaigns which could include subversion, wiretapping, bugging, mysterious phone calls or unnecessary deliveries, even including sending a vibrator to a target`s wife.

Increasing degrees of unemployment and social isolation could and frequently did occur due to the negative psychological, physical, and social ramifications of being targeted.

USUALLY, VICTIMS HAD NO IDEA THAT THE STASI WERE RESPONSIBLE.

The victims didn`t know what was happening. They were confused, and everybody around the target could watch as he or she crumbled under the relentless pressure of state harassment. Zersetzung was designed by the Stasi, and it was a form of psychological harassment to wreak havoc on an individual, without any need to arrest or torture the target.

Many thought that they were losing their minds, and mental breakdowns and suicide were sometimes the results. There is ongoing debate as to the extent if at all, to which weaponized directed energy devices, such as X-ray transmitters, were also used against victims.

A direct-energy weapon (DEW) is a ranged weapon that damages its target with highly focused energy without a solid projectile, including lasers, microwaves, particle beams, and sound beams. Potential applications of this technology include weapons that target personnel, missiles, vehicles, and optical devices.

The main goal was to give the victims a lot of pain because that was much better than putting them in prison and torturing them. One of the symptoms was called the Havana syndrome. It was a syndrome of medical symptoms reported by US personnel in Havana, Cuba, and other locations, suspected by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to be caused by microwave energy.

Some common bio-effects of non-lethal electromagnetic weapons include difficulty breathing, disorientation, nausea, pain, vertigo, and other systemic discomfort.

Interference with breathing poses the most significant, potentially lethal results. Light and repetitive visual signals can include epileptic seizures. Bection and motion sickness can also occur.

After German reunification, revelations of the Stati`s international activities were publicized, such as its military training of the West German Red Army Faction. Stasi experts also helped train the secret police organization of Mengistu Haile Mariam in Ethiopia.

They helped Fidel Castro`s regime in Cuba. Stasi officers helped in the initial training and indoctrination of Egyptian State Security organizations under the Nassar regime. They helped to create secret police forces in the People`s Republic of Angola, the People`s Republic of Mozambique, and the People`s Republic of Yemen.

The Stasi organized and extensively trained Syrian intelligence services under the regime of Hafez al-Assad. They also helped to set up Idi Amin`s secret service. They helped the President of Ghana.

Documents in the Stasi archives state that the KGB ordered Bulgarian agents to assassinate Pope John Paul II, who was known for his criticism of human rights in the Eastern Bloc, and the Stasi was asked to help with covering up traces.

The Stasi in 1972, also made plans to assist the Ministry of Public Security (Vietnam) in improving its intelligence work during the Vietnam War.

That was then, but how is it now? We must ask ourselves how our own society is built. The Stasi had a system for monitoring telephone conversations, but if they could do it in the 70s, what can be happening even today? What about social media, emails, smartphones, and computers.

A lot of people believe that China`s social system is scary. But that system is not only about China. It`s in many other countries in Europe and America. They have surveillance cameras, face recognition, and the requirements to always praise the government. It sounds like an Orwellian nightmare come true. Or a Stasi system of surveillance.

China`s social credit system affects freedom of speech, resulting in censorship and self-censorship, ultimately silencing any form of opposition. But this is not only about China. The web itself is a surveillance machine. As it stands today, you are what you click.

Once you`re logged on to your computer and have access to the internet, the system will see what you are doing, and you will be tracked by your browser, by third parties, by cookies, and by almost all the sites you are logging into.

The data you give the third party for free is aggregated and a profile about you is being created. Most of the information you give away for free is being used for targeted advertisements. But it could well be used to create a so-called Social Credit System.

Once all the data is collected, the profile is created, and it can be very difficult to change your own profile. Your profile of yours will lead to real-life consequences.

In addition, China has set up more than 100 so-called overseas police stations across the globe to monitor, harass, and in some cases repatriate Chinese citizens living in exile, using bilateral security arrangements struck with countries in Europe and Africa to gain widespread presence internationally, according to CNN.

The State Security Ministry is the principal civilian intelligence, security, and secret police agency of the People`s Republic of China, responsible for counterintelligence, foreign intelligence, and political security. The MSS is active in industrial espionage and adept at cyber espionage.

A document from the US Department of Justice described the agency as being like a combination of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Many foreign analysts describe the Communist «Part-State» and its security agencies as being left without a real ideology, relying only on repression and the stoking of Chinese nationalism, more recent works, however, highlight the increasing importance of Marxism-Leninism in the worldview, internal culture and self-image of the CCP security apparatus; Vladimir Lenin and Mao Zedong remain the central influences, although classical Chinese thinkers such as Sun Tzu are also studied.

1,412 billion live in China. How many agents do they have? Only 87 million live in Iran, and they have its own Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to protect the priests at the top. It is a multi-service primary branch of the Iranian Armed Forces. Active personnel last year was 210,000, while 60,000 was paramilitary forces.

According to BBC, the UK is preparing to formally declare that Iran`s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is a terrorist organization. It follows a similar decision made by the US in 2019. After a popular antigovernment protest in Iran, the number of people killed by security forces has increased.

The state of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran has been criticized by Iranians and international human rights activists.

The Stasi was one of the most hated and feared institutions of the East German communist government. Nor is CCP so popular. Iran`s Revolutionary Guard is also unpopular. The funniest thing is that they are all funded by «the people».

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | May 25, 2022 · 4:43 pm

If the US continues to go down the wrong path, there will be irretrievable consequences for the China-US relations and the US will have to pay an unbearable price

The Russia-Ukraine conflict is very similar to the Chinese-Taiwan conflict. NATO and the EU in Ukraine are a big threat to Russia. The same can be said about Taiwan. NATO in Taiwan will be a threat to China. So, this is the next big problem for the United States.

The tension is rising, and China is building up its military bases and have 14 warplanes in Taiwan`s air-defense zone.

President Biden said yesterday in a speech in Tokyo that he vows to intervene militarily if China invades Taiwan. «We have a commitment to do that,» Biden said. But that is not an official U.S policy. Is Biden trying to change U.S policy?

Photo by u674eu6602u8ed2 on Pexels.com

The U.S officials walked back Biden`s comments quite quickly and said this after his speech: «As the President said, our policy has not changed. He reiterated our One China policy and our commitment to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. He also reiterated our commitment under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide Taiwan with the military means to defend itself.»

The Taiwan Relations Act obligates the U.S to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability, and maintain the capacity of the U.S to resist any resort to force. But despite U.S weapons sales to Taiwan, the U.S has been ambiguous about whether it would intervene militarily, and the U.S acknowledges that all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is one China, and Taiwan is a part of China, as Biden reiterated yesterday.

In a speech in Japan yesterday, president Biden said; «We agree with the one-China policy. We have signed on to it and all the attendant agreements are made from there. But the idea that it can be taken by force, will dislocate the entire region and be another action similar to what happened in Ukraine. And so it`s a burden that is even stronger.»

China`s reaction to President Biden`s comments on Taiwan came very quickly: «China will take firm actions to safeguard its sovereignty and security interests. We mean what we say.»

What China wants is reunification. So, China is right now threatening Taiwan militarily.

The U.S policy dates back to December 15, 1978, when Jimmy Carter restored relations with Beijing and ended formal ties with Taipei (capital of Taiwan). Taiwan is a big chip-maker, and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said intense economic talks with Taiwan will take place in the weeks to come.

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman, Wang Wenbin said this yesterday:

«The US has been racking its brains to play with words when it comes to the one-China principle. I want to remind the US side that no forces, the US included, can hold back the Chinese people’s endeavor to reunify the nation. Also, no forces, the US included, can change the fate of the “Taiwan independence” forces who are doomed to fail. 

Reneging on its promise on the Taiwan question, the US has obscured and hollowed out the one-China principle, and publicly or stealthily incited and endorsed “Taiwan independence” separatist activities. If the US continues to go down the wrong path, there will be irretrievable consequences for the China-US relations and the US will have to pay unbearable price.

Our stern warning to the US: There is but one China in the world, Taiwan is part of China’s territory and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China. This is a consensus of the international community and a commitment made by the US to China.

The one-China principle is unshakable, China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity cannot be violated and the red line of avoiding creating “two Chinas” and “one China, one Taiwan” must not be crossed. 

China has full confidence and capability and is fully prepared to firmly stem the “Taiwan independence” separatist activities, foil all external interference and resolutely uphold its sovereignty and territorial integrity. I’d like to advise the US to listen to a well-known Chinese song with these lyrics: “For our friends, we have fine wine. For jackals or wolves, we welcome with shotguns.”

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | May 23, 2022 · 1:11 pm

Economic globalization is the trend of the times. Though countercurrents are sure to exist in a river, none could stop it from flowing to the sea

World Economic Forum (WEF) started its annual meeting yesterday, and it will continue till Thursday this week. This is the first global in-person leadership event since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, and this time their theme is; «Working Together, and restoring Trust.»

But the annual meeting has never been confronted with so many unprecedented global issues as it is now in 2022. The WEF`s annual meeting is coming at a crucial time. The most crucial in its 50-year history.

The world is recovering from a global pandemic, struggling with a war in Ukraine, and facing huge challenges from climate change. On top of that, monkeypox is coming, and so are inflation and famine.

One of the topics is globalization, and as we all know, globalization is dead right now. But, I think it`s only set on «pause.»

Chinese President Xi Jinping visited WEF in 2017, and on his first trip he said; «Whether you like it or not, the global economy is a big ocean that you cannot escape from.»

This time, in 2022, Xi said; «Economic globalization is the trend of the times. Though countercurrents are sure to exist in a river, none could stop it from flowing to the sea.»

Xi is also the founder of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which is the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. The Silk Road has always been important to the trade in the world. It was an ancient trade route that linked the Western world with the Middle East and Asia.

It was a major conduit for trade between the Roman Empire and China and later between medieval European kingdoms and China.

Established when the Han Dynasty in China officially opened trade with the West in 130 B.C., the Sild Road routes remained in use until 1453 A.D., when the Ottoman Empire boycotted trade with China and closed them.

Although it`s been nearly 600 years since the Silk Road has been used for international trade, the routes had a lasting impact on commerce, culture, and history that resonates even today.

I find it very interesting to see that Venetian explorer Marco Polo famously used the Silk Road to travel from Italy to China, which was then under the control of the Mongolian Empire, where they arrived in 1275.

Notably, they did not travel by boat, but rather by camel following overland routes. They arrived at Xanadu, the lavish summer palace of the Mongolian emperor Kublai Khan. (You can see the film about that relationship on Netflix. I think you will like it a lot).

In all, the explorer spent 24 years in Asia, working in Kublai Khan`s court, perhaps as a tax collector.

Marco Polo returned to Venice, again via the Silk Road routes, in 1295, just as the Mongolian Empire was in decline. His journeys across the Silk Road became the basis for his book, «The Travels of Marco Polo,” which gave Europeans a better understanding of Asian commerce and culture.

Khan`s Empire is gone. So are the Roman and the Ottoman Empire. Some historians say the start of the British Empire started around the 1490s, while others say the early 1600`s, but it all ended in the years after World War 2, with most of Britain`s colonies ruling themselves independently by the late 1960s. But what about the American Empire?

A New World Order started after World War 2, and the U.S became the leading Empire in the World. Now, we are all facing a revolution. A New World Order. Again. Globalization is dead, but it will come back, because as Xi said: «Economic globalization is the trend of the times. Though countercurrents are sure to exist in a river, none could stop it from flowing to the sea.»

On Friday, the S&P 500 briefly fell into a bear market, and the inflation in the UK hit a 40-year high in April. We are into a vicious cycle, and the WEF`s Chief Economists Outlook has warned of lower economic activity, higher inflation, lower real wages, and greater food insecurity globally in 2022.

They warn that this could have devastating human consequences as the global economy fragments.

As Saadia Zahidi, Head of the Centre for New Economy and Society and a Managing Director at the World Economic Forum explained:

«We are at the cusp of a vicious cycle that could impact societies for years. The pandemic and war have fragmented the global economy and created far-reaching consequences that risk wiping out the gains of the last thirty years.

Leaders face difficult choices and trade-offs domestically when it comes to debt, inflation, and investment. Yet business and government leaders must also recognize the absolute necessity of global cooperation to prevent economic misery for millions around the world.

The WEF`s Annual Meeting this week will provide a starting point for such collaboration.»

Four Futures for economic Globalization: Scenarios and their implications:

Globalization has created significant opportunities and lifted millions out of poverty, while also driving inequality and economic disruption. With many countries turning inward in search of new strategies to increase security and resilience, the convergence of physical and virtual forms of economic globalization is no longer a given.

As the traditional drivers of globalization have reached a critical juncture, we are entering a new phase of increased economic volatility, polarization, and structural reset of the global system. Ever-accelerating digitalization, however, means that the rivalry between global centers is rapidly expanding from the physical to virtual space, where competition over the control of technology and information networks is growing. How different economic centers of gravity will choose between physical and virtual integration, fragmentation or isolation will shape the fate of economic globalization in the years to come.

This White Paper outlines how the nature of globalization may shift as economic powers choose between fragmentation or isolation in both physical and virtual integration. The report calls for “no-regret actions” by policymakers: global cooperation on the climate crisis; investment in human capital to prepare populations for a range of economic futures, and returning to developing resilience through greater economic integration, knowledge-sharing, and diversification.

Globalization is at crossroads. It`s changing, but it isn`t ending.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | April 5, 2022 · 10:29 pm

From Unipolar world to Multipolar world

Do you remember when Vladimir Putin invited many world leaders to Russia`s annual Victory Day parade in Red Square on May 9, 2015? Do you remember that all the western leaders were boycotting that event because of the crisis in Ukraine?

Vladimir Putin said at that time that the U.S is trying to create a «unipolar world». Putin and Russia have used an address commemorating the 70th anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany to accuse the U.S of attempting to dominate the world.

I wrote an article about it on June 3, 2015, and you can read that article here. Cuba`s Fidel Castro shares Putin`s worldview. He released a new book called «Cold War – A warning for a unipolar world» on September 1, 2003. Castro said; «To endure the global struggle between the superpowers is bad. To live under the total hegemony of one of them is worse».

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

That`s exactly what the war in Ukraine is about. A world order. World dominance. But Putin stopped this big dream, which means we will go from a Unipolar world to a Multipolar world.

The U.S President, Barack Obama, and Germany`s Angela Merkel didn`t come. Neither did other Western leaders like UK`s Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Francois Hollande. Moscow has increasingly appeared to pivot away from Europe and focus more on developing relations with China, I wrote in the article at that time in 2015.

The Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, was the most high-profile guest on the podium next to Putin. Other presidents in attendance included India`s Pranab Mukherjee, Presiden Abdel Fatah al-Sisi of Egypt, Raul Castro of Cuba, Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and Jacob Zuma of South Africa.

«The boycott illustrates the depth and breadth of the chasm now separating Russia and the West,» said Dmitri Trenin, head of the Carnegie Moscow Center.

But what is Putin trying to say when he claims that the U.S is trying to create a «Unipolar World?»

Unipolarity in international politics is a distribution of power in which one state exercises most of the cultural, economic, and military influence. Unipolarity is an interstate system and not an Empire. Unipolarity implies the existence of many juridically equal non-states, something that an empire denies.

Unipolarity is anarchical. Anarchy results from the incomplete power preponderance of the Unipole. Kenneth Waltz, argues that great power cannot «exert a positive control everywhere in the world.» Therefore, relatively weaker countries have the freedom to pursue policy preferences independent of the Unipol.

Unipolar systems possess only one great power and face no competition. If a competitor emerges, the international system is no longer unipolar. Kenneth Waltz maintains that the United States is the only «pole» to possess global interests.

So, here we are. We knew at that time that Russia appeared to pivot away from Europe and focus more on developing relations with China.

Russia in bed with China, India, and Africa means a new world order, and that coalition is powerful. Keep in mind that 50% of the world population lives in China and India alone. In terms of business; that is a huge market.

The unipolar world has come to an end.

The modern international order, system, and relations developed after the end of the Thirty Years’ War in 1618 – 1648, and the conclusion of the Westphalia Treaty in 1648. Raymond Aaron studied international relations and he said: «I call the international system a set of political entities that maintain constant relations and can be involved in a large-scale war».

It`s all a part of an evolution, and there are four types of structural organization of the international system: the Westphalian system (1648-1789) as a system of classical European balance, the Vienna system (1814-1914) the system of European concert, the Versailles-Washington system (1919-1939) with the main conquest, the League of Nations and the Yalta-Potsdam system (1945-1991), the crown of which is the creation of the United Nations.

There are three types of world order: unipolar, bipolar, and multipolar. The unipolar world order presupposes the domination of a single super-power that is ahead of all other states by its combined power.

The bipolar world order is transformed into a multipolar one when economic and military power comparable to the power of the two states is reached by other powers. In an equilibrium system, several large states maintain roughly the same influence on the course of the events, restricting each other`s excessive claims.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the world was multipolar, but by the middle of the century, two World Wars and many smaller conflicts had created a bipolar model.

With the end of the cold war and the collapse of the Soviet Union, bipolarity was replaced by unipolarity. The United States began to play a major role. But that has come to an end.

Recent facts and events show that the United States cannot cope with the role of being the only pole in the current world order. They were unable to balance forces in the Middle East. Neither with their troops nor with the support of groups that tried to seize power. Therefore; the troops withdraw from the war in Afghanistan.

The old world order is gone forever. Now, the world has entered a period of uncertainty and increased risks, exacerbated by the inability of the United States and its allies to solve the global problems of our time.

Former Barack Obama adviser, President of the Council on Foreign Relations Richard Haas introduced the concept of a world without states or a multipolar world in his book «A World in Disarray: America Foreign Policy and the Crisis of the Old Order.»

Nations must be prepared to surrender independence to world structures. The unipolar system has ended, and International relations in the 21st century will determine the situation of polarity. The power would be blurred rather than concentrated, and the importance of nation-States would diminish as non-state actors strengthened.

A multipolar system complicates diplomatic activity. it`s not just that they’re more actors in the polar world. It lacks the predictable fixed structures and systems of relations that characterize unipolar, bipolar, and multipolar structures.

The multipolar system will be difficult and dangerous, and international relations are undergoing a powerful transformation in the 21st century that changes the nature, structure, and essence of the international order.

A formation of a new model of international relations will be very painful and costly, and the entire world order will have to go through an era of turbulence. We had the pandemic. Now, we have a war, but there is more pain to come. There will be more economic and social hardships and it`s time for more world chaos.

The British philosopher and sociologist Sigmund Bauman said: «No one can consider themselves truly indispensable. Even the most privileged status can be temporary and suddenly change».

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,