From economic crisis to geopolitical disaster


From economic crisis to geopolitical disaster


By Alfonso Elizondo



Without any sign that the economic crisis ignited in 2008 is about to be over, new international tensions on the world political scene throughout the Western world  are on the rise. This tendency has isolated countries that considered the theory of imperialism old-fashioned. So the tendency to coordinate between the major imperialist powers which took place in 2008-2009 has been abandoned and transformed into an economic war between the major powers of the West, the financial axis of Wall Street and London, and the European countries.

The European left seems to be unable to realize that when facing a program of a new European debt cycle led by Wall Street, the German government opposes it while trying to avoid going against Washington’s policies; this is done by carrying out an austerity policy as imperialist and against the working class as the policies of economic stimulus proposed by the United States and some European countries.

Merkel seeks concerted distribution of excess debt and existing credits, in addition to preserving its industrial base and its links with China and Russia, as well as challenging the relationship between the production and the financing of the economy, in order to know who to charge with the devaluation of the enormous mass of fictitious capital that was created in recent decades by the main imperialist centers worldwide.

In his book The Grand Chessboard the analyst Zbigniew Bizezinesky says it’s been in Ukraine where the global economic crisis became for the first time ever a geopolitical crisis. Something similar to what happened with Yugoslavia in the 90s, following the fall of world order after the war and the policy process fragmentation that came after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Although the United States and Germany are still marching together, it is not difficult to understand that they have different aims in the long term. While Berlin seeks to conquer new markets and skilled labor at a low cost in Eastern Europe, something similar to what Russia is trying to do, so Germany does not want to risk its relationship with this country, and therefore is only pressing the Russians toward a relation of subordination. This is the reason why Ukraine has enjoyed some special protection from Russia and Germany in recent years.

But Berlin has no other alternative but to use the diplomatic game in relation to the continuation of the crisis, since there is no possibility of survival of European capitalism against German hegemony; Germany is trying to keep Europe together maintaining a strong industrial production, due to the fact that it does not have the financial and military power of the United States; it also requires cheap energy and the need to maintain a de facto leadership among the democratic nations of Europe.

Moreover, Germany has a privileged relationship with Beijing and the remote possibility of a geo-economic union between China and Germany. Mocking the maritime domain of the United States would be a nightmare scenario, as it would confirm the already devalued dominance of the United States and cause a crisis of unpredictable dimensions. So now it is not possible to achieve a multi-polarized world domination without completely destabilizing

the current global system.

With the current world order ,the United States seeks to deny Moscow any zone of influence, while its second goal is Berlin, and going even further, a relation between Moscow and Beijing. It’s been noted that Obama uses all sorts of provocations to force Germany to choose between them and the Russians, it happened when the Malasyan Airway plane in Ukraine and the Russian jet shot in Turkey.

While Merkel has adopted an intermediate position, being more open when it comes too condemning the Russians and restricting some of the most radical ideas of NATO. Faced with the danger of war in eastern Ukraine, its minister has tried to mediate between Moscow and Kiev while seeking to reconcile the different interests of the EU. At the same time a growing debate is emerging in  Berlin, however it has not appeared in the press, and it relates to the need to rethink the link between Germany and the United States. This is despite the provocative attitude of Obama in supporting insurgents in Kiev and the agreement signed between Russia and Beijing.

In short, the United States is providing geopolitical material that could spark a fire between Russia, China and Germany, given its reluctance to recognize the steady decline of its global hegemony and intolerance to accept that the world can no longer be addressed like before. This is causing a global political imbalance that could lead to new clashes between the great powers.

So the current situation can cause a progressive alienation of Eurasia with the United States that could have very serious consequences. Although there has been a symbolic response to this problem in the form of  the climate agreement between Xi Jinping and Obama at the Summit of Paris where Russia was left all alone. It is also true that this has only been mere propaganda of the United States to cover its ever-increasing hegemonic weakness.

Nowadays there are almost no borders in Eurasia that are not disputed or challenged. It seems that the US is unable to survive the global crisis without ruining and disorganizing those States that are not marginal, in order to extend its financial influence on a global scale. As for Europe, if it does not come out of the current financial game it will be  obliged to follow the lines of Germany; it now seems to be an expression of the dream for a peaceful globalization where only the theory of imperialism can consciously prepare workers and people for the catastrophes that lie ahead in the next few years.

Addendum: In the end it will be possible to create a new political map of Eurasia, where we can identify the five geostrategic major actors: France, Germany, Russia, China and India, and five geopolitical pivots: Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Korea Turkey and Iran, whose importance is not due to their power, but their location in the region which gives them a special role in defining access to important areas or deny resources to regions and major countries.