Geopolitics Visibly Heading Toward Confrontation

The recent developments in geopolitics are a clear indication of conflicts. The US was a unique superpower for a couple of decades and unwilling to share or pass on the status of superpower to any other country. While it is a natural cycle and in the past, many superpowers enjoyed a certain period and then shifted to others.

Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, British Empire, etc. were good examples. The rise and fall of nations was a natural cycle.

It is well understood that the US may take measures to sustain the status quo for some more time and extend its peak for a longer time, But the new steps taken by the US are unlikely to help, instead might speed up its deterioration.

The US pulling out of WHO at such a critical moment when Pandemic has crippled the whole world, and the WHO role has become more vital, has damaged the US reputation in the International community and termed it as an irresponsible act.

The US has suspended funding for some other UN organizations too. The meddling into WTO is also creating a negative impact. The US deliberations are aiming to paralyze the existing UN-structures.

Strict policies on Social Media is a big strike on freedom of expression. The US was advocating for democracy, human rights, and freedom of speech, but it seems, all of such slogans were for others and having different standards for themselves.

It has distorted the American image and termed it as hypocrisy. Democratic values are vanishing in American society. Racism and violence are taking over, and culture is moving toward chaos and instability.

The global economy is suffering and victim of Pandemic, but in America, it is more visible and adverse. Instead of helping other nations, Americans are suffering and fighting for their own survival.

The US can not compete with China on the economic front. The passing of a resolution on Hong Kong has aggregated the situation furthermore.

On defense, the US can not win against China in the Pacific region and cannot win against Russia in the Baltic region. In middle-East, its attacks on Iran have exposed its defense capabilities. The US is also leaving Afghanistan after a humiliating defeat and will pull out of Syria too.

EU is seriously thinking about what to do in the case of US-China-Russia conflicts. NATO might not be effective anymore. Allies are re-evaluating their support extended to the US in the past and may opt for an alternate approach.

On the other hand, Russia-China relations are gaining momentum. President Xi paid his first visit to Russia after taking charge of the Presidency in 2013.

The two leaders were enjoying cordial relations and meeting each other on many platforms like G20, SCO, BRICS, etc. It is expected that President Xi may visit Russia on June-July sometime this year to attend the SCO / BRICS Summit.

Close cooperation between Russia and China can play a pivotal role in forming a new world order. Reforms and restructuring are desired in the UN and its organizations to fade out the American monopoly and influence.

EU will join if the Russia-China emerges as global alternate powers. It is believed that change is inevitable. It is possible, China may struggle alone or Russia alone in isolation, but joint efforts will definitely reinforce each other resulting in rapid change.

The aim and objective may be to provide relief to humanity and work together for total welfare. Fight against poverty, hunger, injustice, and racism, intolerance, and extremism.

Work for peace, stability, harmony, and prosperity for all. We should struggle for a world where every human being can live with dignity, free of any pressure or fear. Rich or poor, strong or weak, big or small, everyone has access to justice, equality, and respect.

There will be no one above the law or people of lesser God.



Published by


The 21st Century

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of 21cir.

One Reply to “Geopolitics Visibly Heading Toward Confrontation”

  1. The US needs to be put on trial under Nuremberg International Law for terrorism and wars of aggression where it has killed millions through unprovoked wars of aggression committing mass murder and genocide backed by its war criminal allies UK, Canada, Australia etc. Also US and its criminal allies should be held accountable for racial discrimination, abuse and killing of people of colour , not only in US but around the world. The cold blooded murder of George Floyd (among many) in 2020 is a case in point. The US is evil and corrupt and uses terrorism to further its global agenda.
    Globally, it is widely believed that the United States tends to use terrorist organizations as hired guns in order to pursue its own interests all over the world. Since September 11, 2001, the White House has been implementing its expansionist policies, under the guise of the ‘War on Terror’, to seize natural resources and riches of other nations. And this was especially evident after the US interventions in Libya in 2011 and then Syria, and Washington’s actions in Afghanistan and the entire Middle Eastern region. The cost in human life is staggering. Since World War II alone it is estimated that the U.S. has killed at least 30,000,000 people in over 37 victim nations. In response to the killing of 3,000 U.S. citizens on September 11, 2001, the U.S. killed at least 1,000,000 Iraqis who, along with their government, had nothing to do with the 2001 attacks on the U.S.
    US wars of aggression have killed millions of innocent men, women and children around the world. Yet more often than not they have been based on weak evidence, questionable motives, and outright lies. Why, then, do large portions of the public staunchly support the US troops? Why are so many Americans satisfied with the U.S. bombings of Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other Middle Eastern countries, knowing that this is creating starvation and refugee crises of catastrophic proportions?
    How the U.S. Rally Support for Wars That Kill Millions of Innocent People Worldwide: Propaganda, Lies and False Flags:
    The pattern consists, first, of brandishing “false flags”—that is, perceived threats, dangers or human rights violations such as Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction and involvement in 9/11, or alleged chemical attacks by the government of Syria that were never corroborated. Next comes the use of propaganda to manipulate public opinion and enlist widespread buy-in. Quoting and parroting the government, the media helps spread this propaganda. This approach has successfully garnered support for both official warfare and acts of aggression such as plundering other country’s resources and removing left-leaning foreign leaders.
    The many revelations in Propaganda, Lies and False Flags include:
    • The testimony that sparked the first Gulf War—the Nayirah testimony—was entirely falsified to further the agenda of Citizens for a Free Kuwait, a US-backed organization. And Nayirah? She was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US, not a hospital volunteer as she claimed in Congressional testimony.
    • In 2020 the US assassinated Iran’s General Qassam Soleimani, head of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and then considered retaliation from Iran an unprovoked aggression that went to the brink of triggering an invasion.
    • The US government developed a narrative positioning Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido as the legitimate president despite not being democratically elected by the people of Venezuela, enabling Guaido to stage a bloody albeit unsuccessful coup. Ultimately it was not about democracy, but oil.
    • The 2011 US intervention in Libya for “humanitarian purposes” following Libya’s attempts to quell violent unrest belied resentment for Libya’s support of Palestine and the desire to seize Libya’s rich oil assets.

    The sheer length of the conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and Washington’s inability to achieve its desired goals all point to the true motives behind the US ‘War on Terror’. At first, the United States and its allies decided to use al-Qaeda (terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation) to destabilize the situation in the region and overthrow legitimate governments there. Then, after the plan failed, the US helped establish the Islamic State (also known as IS, ISIS, ISIL and Daesh, a terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation), which was to be used as a direct means of intervening in the region.
    Such an approach was clearly evident in Syria where, throughout the conflict, the United States illegally supplied tons of weapons, worth billions of dollars, to terrorists from Daesh. The CIA and the Pentagon used various schemes to bring arms from Eastern Europe and the Middle East to the war zones. Only in 2015, Washington supposedly provided Daesh militants with $500 million in funding. According to a US Defense Department Inspector General report, from 2017 to 2018, the Pentagon lost track of more than $700 million worth of weapons and equipment
    It’s hardly a secret that Washington did not only help jihadists financially but would also regularly save their lives by evacuating them from dangerous areas and transporting them to US military bases, where they were subsequently trained. Afterwards, these militants could kill Syrian soldiers who essentially stand between Washington and Syrian crude oil. Numerous reports in various media outlets have, on many occasions, exposed USA’s clandestine schemes in Syria. And still, Washington continues to openly provide direct and indirect support to terrorists.
    It has already been reported earlier that, according to a former colonel of the Syrian Armed Forces, Sultan Aid Abdella Souda, detained for desertion, “there is a direct connection” between militants in Idlib and the United States. The US trains the militants in Idlib to stage attacks on oil/gas and transportation infrastructure, and to plan and carry out acts of terror in the territories under the control of Syrian government forces.
    Recently, schemes used by US armed forces to operate in Syria in order to justify their presence in the country came to light. A key witness for Damascus and a former field commander of Syria’s armed opposition, Hannam Samir (also known as Abu Hamzi) has shared his views on US military tactics in the region. He has affirmed that the Pentagon and the CIA have established networks for recruiting mercenaries in southern Syria. Hannam Samir also talked about the logistics of supplying Islamist terrorists with weapons. He was the commander of an outpost near the Rukban refugee camp. According to his statements, instead of trucks full of humanitarian aid, convoys with weapons and food travelled unimpeded through guard posts and the camp, where the US al-Tanf military base is also located. Using recruited “moderate opposition” as cover, Americans, at some point in time, stopped fulfilling any of their promises, with salaries and food provided only once in three months. Disagreements arose among field commanders and, subsequently, Abu Hamzi and his unit decided to defect and surrender to Syria’s governments forces. Unquestionably, all of the evidence pointing to Washington’s ties with terrorists instead of US efforts to wage war on terror, should be made publicly available and used during international court proceedings as proof of USA’s dirty policies in the Middle East.

Leave a Reply