The Trumanite Network, the fight for Madisonian Restoration, and WW3
By Norman Ball – In the wake of last week’s downing of a Russian Il-20 surveillance plane in Syria, much speculation has ensued over the retaliatory weapon systems Russia plans to deploy: S-300s vs. S-200s, Krasukha-4 mobile electronic warfare systems, etc.
These are tactical determinants to be sure, not sea-change level paradigm shifts in and of themselves.
By now, most people are aware of Russia’s Ministry of Defense (MOD) laying the blame squarely on Israel, when a more diplomatic response might have diluted the culpability to include Syrian incompetence and S-200 operator error. This conclusion is clearly at odds, and not just tonally, with Putin’s rather laconic and diffused assessment: “a chain of tragic, random events”.
There are even more nefarious theories such as one posed here on these very pages that the French frigate Auvergne or even RAF aircraft from the Akrotiri base in Cyprus were responsible for the Tl-20 strike, and that Russia chose to implicate the Israelis instead, one reason being, of course, to avoid inviting a NATO Article 5 response.
Of greater import (than freshly deployed MOD weapon inventories) is the bifurcation evidenced in the Russian response. There’s been a migration from the univocal and measured parsings of Putin, Foreign Minister Lavrov and Press Secretary Peskov to a shared podium populated by a less nuanced, more binary power center consisting of Minister of Defense Shoigu, Deputy Defense Minister Gerasimov, and the so-called Stavka; binary as in, shoot or don’t shoot. How simpler can a march to war get?
In marked contrast to the advisory role of the Security Council of Russia, for example, a Stavka would be operationally focused, tasked with expediting strategic resource allocations in the event of a rapidly evolving, large scale conflict.
In a May 4th Asia Times article, Pepe Escobar predicted such a shift just prior to Putin’s ministerial appointments:
“Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to announce a new government. And a bombshell is in the making. The new cabinet is bound to be a Stavka: that is, a war cabinet.”
In fact the personnel changes were minimal in the new government. And yet Shoigu’s enhanced speaking role, post-Il20, supports the contention that Putin’s range of motion, his up-until-now broad latitude of response, has been curtailed.
Without needing to pass judgment on the long-term efficacy of his absorb-then-counter-strike
In short, the Statesman Approach has ceded turf, willingly or otherwise, to the War Cabinet. Many have noted an emergent war cabinet footing in the Trump Administration as well, particularly with the arrival of National Security Adviser John Bolton in April.
Evidence of a converging lethality?
Just as war is a secular trend’s final economic gesture after a series of progressively under-performing business cycles (each successive cycle hobbled by mounting, unassailable debt), the efficacy of statesmanship dissipates in like fashion. Diplomacy becomes an exercise in pushing on rhetorical strings.
Has Putin acceded to a consensual or an imposed power-sharing? We’ll probably never know. Has he been relegated to adjunct status on military affairs? Highly unlikely. Let’s be deferential to the Russian President and call it a more collective response to future incitements. Nonetheless there is an unmistakable whiff of failure. Recourse to war is the ultimate failure of statesmanship.
If the reader will permit a brief philosophical interlude, war’s arrival is as supernatural as it is inevitable. Despite our many retrospective dissections, it routinely exceeds our efforts to fully understand and thus avert; at best, we succeed only in postponing it.
Lincoln said it best in his 1865 Second Inaugural near the conclusion of the American Civil War:
“On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it…Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came.”
Human agency flatters itself as being the Prime Mover. Not so. War, of some cryptic accord, governs its own arrival.
And the war came.
In the Syrian theater today, human co-agency finds itself at an all-too-human impasse. Yesterday, Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu asserted that the IDF will continue operations to prevent Iran from establishing a Syrian foothold. This was in response to Russian Defense Minister Shoigu’s declaration the day before that the S-300 air defense systems and automated air defense management systems were on their way to Syria. Where is the conceivable walk-back for either side? The fuse is lit at both ends.
We are at an immovable object – irresistible force moment where elaborate pretexts and false flags recede in importance. How will a sickening slide to war be averted now? One senses, in the impasse, war’s hell-bent determination to arrive.
Another pressing casus belli
Straddling the two primordial nemeses –Land Power and Sea Power– there exists a hybridized, destabilizing construct, the Pipeline; call it land as oceanic usurper.
The Nordstream 2 pipeline project is one leading economic indicator that could forever alter the geopolitics beneath its ‘feet’. And it appears, despite President Trump’s most valiant efforts, to be a ‘go’.
The Berlin-to-Moscow pivot, should it proceed from this key connectivity, will extend Eurasian consolidation immeasurably. Here’s Tom Luongo recently with what amounts to a Mackinderite/Great Game interpretation:
“U.S. and British foreign policy has been obsessed for more than a hundred years with stopping the natural alliance between Germany’s industrial base and Russia’s vast tracts of natural resources as well as Russia’s own science and engineering prowess.
These two countries cannot, in any version of a unipolar world dominated by The Davos Crowd, be allowed to form an economic no less political alliance because the level of coordination and economic prosperity works directly against their goals of lowering everyone’s expectations for what humans can accomplish.”
George Friedman (formerly of Stratfor, more recently of Geopolitical Futures) has for years offered much the same rationale for the great wars of the modern era, below:
There is a Left Hand and Right Hand at play in the world, each belonging to the same anatomy despite great efforts to obscure their dark connectivity. Opinions vary on the neural center. Suffice to say both hands are, at the moment, enacting their shadow-play with eerie simultaneity –one globally, the other closer to home.
Speaking of closer to home (for me anyway), let us touch briefly upon the battle currently underway in the US. The American domestic climate has everything to do with what’s transpiring on WW3’s formative fronts.
The Trump Russian Collusion narrative is collapsing at calamitous speed, exposed for the whole-cloth fiction it is.
The fact is the Syrian and NATO war theaters are being brought to a boil at precisely the same time the US flank of the Deep State (really the overarching Five Eyes transnational consortium of surveillance agencies that actively operate as One while maintaining the mirage of discrete and ‘cooperating’ national entities) is under unprecedented attack and potential exposure.
MI6 and GCHQ are all over the backstage shadow-play. Too many of the Collusion key players possess Five Eyes credentials: Stefan Halper (CIA, MI6), Joe Mifsud (MI6), Christopher Steele (MI6), Alexander Downer (ASIS, MI6), Robert Hannigan (GCHQ). That ‘former’ MI6 spy Chris Steele is consistently portrayed as a rogue retiree with a personal grudge against the President is a telling bit of institutional misdirection.
Herein may lie the rationale behind Trump’s uncharacteristic reversal, specifically his September 21st retraction of a September 17th declassification order demanding vast troves of FBI un-redactions. How so? Because the request drew much bigger fish than the usual and expected slate of domestic adversaries known as the American ‘Deep State’.
See more on Double Government here.
Among other things, the redactions almost certainly conceal extensive Five Eyes participation. Trump will seek his pound of flesh wherever the plot-line takes him. And it seems to be leading to the international stage, from the ranks of America’s ‘steadfast allies’ no less.
See Trump’s 9/20/18 interview here (at 2:50):
And his next-day tweet here:
I met with the DOJ concerning the declassification of various UNREDACTED documents. They agreed to release them but stated that so doing may have a perceived negative impact on the Russia probe. Also, key Allies’ called to ask not to release. Therefore, the Inspector General…..
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 21, 2018
And Fox News’ Judge Napolitano here at 0:16, eighteen months ago on March 14, 2017:
Australia and the UK leaders are likely to have collapsed in a heap at the prospect of the Trump un-redactions. Suddenly Trump has been presented with a transnational cache of fresh leverage. The declassification hook drew a couple of foreign whales. So it’s been retracted pending a more ambitious fishing expedition.
Ponder too (particularly after listening to Napolitano, above) the earth-shaking ramifications of the following headlines:
“UK and Australian Governments Revealed as Central Players in Attempted Coup of US President”
“Seeking to Avoid an NSA Imprimatur, President Obama Directly Sought GCHQ Intervention in an Effort to Subvert His Elected Successor, Trump”
What are the NATO implications alone?
And what countermeasures will pour forth to avoid/displace such a headline? America’s Dept of Justice/FBI participants in this attempted coup are suddenly reduced to mere parochial players in a burgeoning geopolitical tsunami of unprecedented magnitude. Faced with such abject exposure (not to mention cries of treason) Five Eyes has little choice but to unleash a diversionary countermeasure of similar scale.
That would be WW3.
Conclusion? The Russian ‘shift’ is commensurate with the heightened need in the West for a diversionary conflagration. Born in the aftermath of WW2, Five Eyes requires the ‘rejuvenative effects’ (heaven help us) of WW3. No matter that, in FVEY’S relentless pursuit of open-air lockdown, we might all die.
Call it panopticonic nihilism or Kafka’s cage in search of a post-nuclear bird.
The planet’s inexorable slide to war is the elephant in the CNN soundstage. With luck, we’ve seen the last of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s endless parade of fact-devoid assault victims, allowing us, here in the US anyway, to focus anew on that most pressing of national pastimes: Trump-bashing on the edge of the abyss.