Some Events that Precipitated the Fall of the United States as a Maximalist Imperialist Power

2013 has definitely been a historic year, though in no way does this overshadow the foolhardy attempt of the fascist in Ukraine. It has set fire to the fall of the United States as the largest imperialist power. Naturally this is cause for rejoicing for those who, like us, struggle for a better world. True, we have been announcing it since 2008, and we can now see that it was fully achieved. It is like we are saying “Wow — we came, we saw and it died.”

In principle, the unipolar structure has been diluted almost from when it was first imposed — at the end of the last decade of the 20th century, to be exact. This is a result of the tremors that began to be felt by the unipolar structure’s experiments in Southeast Asia, the Asian Tigers. We knew that the structure had been imposed in 1991, following the fall of the former Soviet Union. Then its force became very fleeting. Later, with the great economic crisis of 2008, the situation became complicated and even more acute in 2010. Later that same year, unipolarity helped break up the Sino-U.S. strategic and economic partnership and it disappeared, battered by the great economic crisis and buried forever by the political-military response from Russia and China at the end of 2011. Since then we have learned that the multipolar structure was clearly on the rise. It grew even stronger in the first half of 2013 with the fall of the United States’ aggressive military line in Syria, from which an important equilibrium among the world powers emerged. This was a situation that the powerful group in Washington did not support and tried to fight on Sept. 3, 2013 by firing two missiles at Damascus. But the anti-aircraft defenses of Russia and Syria were so precise that they forced this criminal group to immediately desist from their infamous actions. Now China, the United States and Russia are matched militarily, but they are of course engaged in an arms race never before seen in human history. That should be very clear.

Based on this, here are some events that precipitated the fall of the United States from its pedestal:

First was the meeting of BRICS on Sept. 5, 2013 in Yekaterinburg, Russia. It was an emergency meeting held parallel to the gathering of the G-20 countries taking place then due to the Syrian conflict. The meeting took place just after the United States launched two ballistic missiles at Damascus from a NATO military base in Rotta, Spain. In fact, it was a meeting of extreme historic value that would later mark a turning point in international relations. Present at the meeting were the top leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, and the most important result was the ratification of the founding of a development bank in conjunction with $100 billion of start-up capital. In fact, it was a well-aimed blow to both the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

But in the context of this meeting there were a series of events that would later, as I said above, mark a turning point in coming international developments. It is nearly certain that in this period of the “14 days that changed the world (Aug. 21 to Sept. 3, 2013),” there was a series of secret meetings between China and the European bloc — which Edward Snowden of course was incapable of detecting — regarding the new global configuration that was driving China’s capitalist economic growth and which had plagued the European bloc. Foreseeing this situation, Washington unexpectedly announced the immediate enactment of the “Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the United States,” the first round of negotiations of which took place on Sept. 6, 2013. The details of this information will be seen further below. This might have prevented the isolation of the United States with respect to the ballistic missiles that were headed for Damascus. The isolation of the United Kingdom was particularly important and, as I see it, was later a decisive factor in the failure of the United States on Sept. 3, 2013. We must emphasize here how strong the financial links between the American and British bourgeoisie were. It was a superstrategic alliance that was sustaining the West and which collapsed during those 14 days. The consequences are unknown, but at that moment in September 2013 the collapse was crucial. On Sept. 25, 2013 in “Fatal Chronology: Collapse of the West Following the Shooting Down of Two Ballistic Missiles and the Strengthening of the Multipolar System” I said the following, citing Russia Today:

“On Aug. 29, 2013 the isolation of the United States begins. Its closest allies began to abandon it. Apparently they were already aware of the American intention to attack [Damascus] with ballistic missiles. At 07:10 GMT, Prime Minister John Key of New Zealand insisted today that any intervention in Syria in response to the use of chemical weapons be with the mandate of the U.N., though he believes that military action is morally justified.

“From Aug. 30 to 31 and from Sept. 1 to 2, 2013 there is no information available. Time is my worst enemy. International news reports are coming fast. Misinformation in the Western media is monstrous. It will take some time to clear up any misinformation.

“On Sept. 6, 2013, at the closing of the G-20 meeting the world powers were in plain disagreement, breaking the precarious consensus that had united them against the Pentagon’s warmongering on Syria for over two years. Nearly immediately, a new phase in the historic situation that had existed since 2008 was initiated.

“On the night of Friday, Sept. 6, the disagreement discussed above became a reality. During a lengthy press conference Russian President Vladimir Putin noted the polarization of those at the meeting, between the supporters of armed action against Syria and the defenders of international law and respect for the U.N. He said that the day before, they had been discussing the topic from dinner until 1:30 a.m. The United States, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Canada expressed support for armed action. [German Chancellor] Angela Merkel affirmed that Putin was very cautious and said that Germany would not participate directly in hostilities, as was observed in the list of the countries that wanted to initiate hostilities against Syria; Great Britain was not listed. Standing categorically against armed action are Russia, China, Brazil, South Africa, Argentina, the secretary general of the U.N. and the two countries with the largest Muslim populations in the world, Indonesia and India. Putin asserted that although he was not present, everyone knew what the pope’s pronouncement would be.” (1)

Second was the financial agreement between China and the European Union for greater Yuan liquidity in the eurozone. This would, among other things, promote foreign use of the Yuan. This agreement was signed between the People’s Bank of China and the European Central Bank on Oct. 9, 2013. More specifically, this is an important currency swap valued at 350 billion Yuan (45 billion euros), representing a major step in promoting the international use of the Yuan. Additionally, on Oct. 1, 2013 China signed a similar currency swap agreement with Indonesia valued at 100 billion Yuan and [other agreements] with Hungary and Albania in September 2013. The main point is as follows: “It is said this agreement is valid for three years and can be extended with the approval of both parties. The two central banks began negotiating the currency swap earlier this year. People’s Bank of China Governor Zhou Xiaochuan and European Central Bank President Mario Draghi came to an agreement during the regular meeting of the Bank for International Settlements held in September.” (2)

The most important task is to make the origins of these agreements clear. There were undoubtedly powerful reasons for such agreements. Looking only at what occurred in the international financial market at the beginning of 2013, the United States and Japan indeed wanted to sink the euro in order to depreciate their respective currencies. The circle of power in Washington, the great bourgeoisie, was very clear in this respect that it was sparing no effort in sinking even its own historic allies. Consider the following: “The continual strengthening of the [euro] in recent months and especially since summer, when it reached a value of $1.20, is becoming a threat to European competitiveness and even more so for the growth prospects of the weaker economies like Spain’s. Since November, the euro has reached record highs – on Friday it reached $1.37 – and it has been substantially revalued in relation to the United States’ currency .… To find an explanation for this ascending trajectory one must look not only at the relative calm that has invaded Europe following the sovereign debt crisis but also and especially at the monetary policies of the United States and Japan, which are directed toward depreciating their respective currencies .… Europe does not benefit from the same flexibility that Washington and Tokyo have to make monetary policy decisions. These have been the strategies adopted by the Bank of Japan, in the form of buying assets, and of the United States Federal Reserve, through liquidity injections and a near zero percent interest rate. They are responsible for the growing flow of money toward the euro.” (3)

Third is the financial agreement between China and Great Britain that was announced in Beijing on Oct. 15, 2013 by British finance minister George Osborne. Among other things, the agreement aimed to ensure that London would be the principal destination for Chinese investment and thereby enable London institutions to directly invest in Yuan in China with a starting maximum of 80 billion Yuan (9.6 billion euros), without having to pass through Hong Kong. In return China will be able to promote the circulation of the Yuan beyond its borders, with the midterm goal of encouraging exchanges and transforming the Yuan into one of the major global currencies. This is the most emblematic aspect of the free trade reforms put into place in September in Shanghai, which will permit for the first time the buying and selling of this currency without restrictions.

The main point is: “According to a publication by the news agency ANSA, the plan also relaxes restrictions on Chinese banks headquartered in the United Kingdom so that they inject more money into the European country. The British finance minister, [George] Osborne, said the aim was to ensure that London is the principal destination for Chinese investment. London Mayor Boris Johnson, Minister of State for Trade and Investment Lord Stephen Green, Minister of the City of London Lord Paul Deighton and Minister for Science and Innovation David Willetts all traveled with the British business tour through China. The Chinese government set an ambitious goal to increase direct investment abroad at a rate of 17 percent annually until 2015, to surpass $150 billion annually by that date. At the end of 2012, the total accumulated Chinese foreign investment abroad was about $531.9 billion.” (4)

And fourth is the six-month agreement signed on Nov. 24, 2013 between the members of the U.N. Security Council (China, United States, France, United Kingdom and Russia) plus Germany with Iran. It obliges Iran to reduce its production of 20 percent-enriched uranium, suspend all activity at the Fordow and Arak reactors and accept supervision by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The agreement called for the United States to release Tehran’s foreign funds and suspend the sanctions on Iran’s automobile and air services industries. In general, the sole fact of having arrived at an agreement of this type already suggests the strategic weakness of Washington and the triumph of Iranian diplomacy.

The summary of these facts is as follows:

On Nov. 20, 2013 the People’s Bank of China declared that China was no longer accumulating dollars. Before Nov. 14 the deputy of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, Mikhail Degtiariov, made an appeal to prohibit the circulation and saving of dollars in Russia.

On Nov. 23, China established an air defense identification zone. This is an inalienable right of this country, a fact that is very clear to China’s leaders. We can see that here: “As recently stated by the Chinese President, Xi Jinping: ‘It is time for China to become a country that sets the rules, rather than following the rules of others.’” (5)

Then on Nov. 30, 2013, Russia Today revealed that North Korea had resumed construction of its second missile base: “After nearly a year of standstill North Korea has resumed construction work on their rocket launch site in Tonghae, which is situated in the northeast of the country.” The article continues: “Experts say the resumption of construction on the new facilities in Tonghae indicate that North Korea remains committed to having two launch points (with the other in Sohae).” (6)

And finally, following the Iranian agreement Tehran was awaiting trade missions, especially in the West where it was being mobbed by those seeking to finalize oil deals. The supposed energy revolution touted by Washington remains idle. What about gas or shale oil? All this is false and pure speculation. The article notes: “The Western transnational oil corporations are rubbing their hands in anticipation of exploiting the abundant gas deposits in Iran — from France’s Total S.A. in the vast field of Fordo to the Anglo Saxon Petroleum Company in the vast countryside of southern Pars. There is enough gas in Iran to invite foreign oil companies such as Italy’s Eni and Norway’s Statoil. The Shiite theocracy is contemplating constructing electric plants that German and South Korean companies will line up to build. Zvi Bar’el adds that Saudia Arabia also wants to go into business with Iran but concludes metaphorically that the mines along the path may derail the big business to come.” (7)

This is impressive change.

Enrique Munoz Gamarra is a Peruvian sociologist specializing in geopolitics and international analysis.

Notes:

1) “Fatal Chronology: Collapse of the West Following the Shooting Down of Two Ballistic Missiles and the Strengthening of the Multipolar System.” Author: Enrique Munoz Gamarra. Article published on Sept. 25, 2013, in Los Pueblos Hablan.

2) “China and the EU Agree to a Currency Swap for 45 Billion Euros.” Article posted on Oct. 10, 2013, on spanish.xinhuanet.com

3) “Strengthening of the Unified Currency and the Risk of Another Currency War.” Editorial. Published on Feb. 8, 2013, in Crisis del XXI.

4) “The United Kingdom and China Sign a Historic Financial Agreement.” Article posted on Oct. 15, 2013, on noticias.terra.com.ar

5) “In Beijing, United States Vice President Receives Harsh Response to his Aspirations.” Note published on Dec. 7, 2013, in Contrainjerencia.

6) “North Korea Has Resumed Construction of its Second Missile Base.” Article posted on Nov. 30, 2013, in Russia Today.

7) “The Restructuring of Turkey and its Reconciliation with Iran.” Author: Alfredo Jalife-Rahme. Article published on Dec. 4, 2012, on Alfredo Jalife-Rahme’s blog.