Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Cover via AmazonDid America win on Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard or did America fail its Hegemonic designs for EURASIA?
The Neocon were inspired by the notion of a lone superpower asserting its might across the world and subscribed themselves to the Grand Chess Board ideology. The architect of this ideology was pivotal in Neocon policy making and writings.
Who do I refer to as the architect, well I refer to Zbigniew Brzezinski and all those who subscribe to his ideology for American & ultimately the hegemony of EURASIA. For those who are not aware of who this man is, please look him up, a major player in International Politics and his kind have been known by a variety of secret names, Illuminati, New World Order, and a host of other secret and shrouded influential societies. Zbigniew Brzezinski a Harvard graduate was and no doubt still is a counselor to The Center for Strategic & International Studies. A Professor for American Foreign Policy at the acclaimed John Hopkins University. He was the National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (1977 – 1981). The Trustee and founder of the Trilateral Commission. Mr Brzezinski is an International advisor of several major US/Global corporations.
He was a very close associate to Henry Kissenger and under President Reagan he was a member of the NSC – Defence Department Commission on integrated Long Term Strategy and also a key member of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. Mr Brzezinski is a past member & director with continued association of The Council of Foreign Relations (CFR). In 1988 Mr Brzezinski was the Co- Chairman of the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force and behind the George Bush Snr. vision for a New World Order. He inspired many among the Neocons who signed up to his vision for a New American Imperial Century, the likes of Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney and the countless more were the major contributors to The Project Of The New American Century (PNAC). Brzezinski was also a sharp critic in the way Neocon executed his vision and was often at odds with the incompetent blood thirsty Bush Presidency.
Zbigniew Brzezinski was very outspoken about Neocon invasion of Iraq and felt this was a personal vendetta and not a geostrategic offensive and would fail America in Afghanistan. Mr Brzezinski wanted change from the Neocon mismanagement of the grand game and spoke of greater American global diplomacy to curtail some of the wrong doings of The Neocon misadventures and rhetoric. Today Zbigniew Brzezinski is a chief advisor to the charming and ever so diplomatic Obama.
I believe Mr Zbigniew Brzezinski was at the heart of the PNAC think tank and I say so based on The Neocon aggressive vision for an Imperial America and Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book “The Grand Chess Board” however a failed execution by The Neocons is another thing altogether. Therefore to define American failure or success in EURASIA and ultimately Afghanistan one must measure against what Brzezinski envisioned.
The Grand Chess Board defines his Ideology for American supremacy of Eurasia referring to the Grand Game played on a grandeur scale, & to Hegemonise the most strategically important region in the world – EURASIA.
By EURASIA – Brzezinski defines 4 regions;
1. Europe
2. Russia
3. The CAUCAS & Central Asia referred in his book as Central Balkans
4. East Asia or The far east.
Central to his EURASIAN policy, he Mr Brzezinski refers to America after the cold war as the only sole and truly last global powerhouse – the only superpower.
America must assert itself across this region which it rightfully should inherit because this title and power. Essentially no major power must emerge from the EURASIA region to oppose America. He was essentially for total American Hegemony and Imperialism through brute force and robust aggressive policies essentially incarcerating regional hotspots found slam bang on global strategic trade routes or geostrategic hubs.
Mr Brzezinski wanted the world to not ignore America after the cold war and rightfully give homage and allegiance to the world’s greatest ever economic and military power.
“Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, EURASIA has been the centre of world power” – (p.xiii) The Grand Chess Board.
Mr Brzezinski expands further in very plain and candid terms how America must capitalise on its prize of becoming victorious after the cold war as the worlds lone super power.
“It is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges capable of dominating Eurasia & thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian
geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book” (p.xiv) The Grand Chess Board. Quotes henceforth will be taken from “The Grand Chessboard” authored by Mr Brzezinski 1998.
The book is vast when discussing and understanding American current and past foreign policy including the Balkan War of the 1990's, but one thing is very apparent America wanted all of the cake for her self and Bharat’s role would be of facilitator a proxy on a grandeur design of The British East India Company replacing British with American. America has no vision of a Bharat equal to her or relevant but sees her as a blunt instrument to play her grand game. Russia assertiveness in old Soviet Satellite states crumbled during the Yugoslav war and her support for Serbs failed and NATO support for the Muslim Muajahdeen once again crippled any reestablishment of an overt Russian Block in The Caucus. Central Balkans we refer to central Asian nations were important equally not to fall within Russian influence and thus Islam again was used to fill any vacuum the Russians may manipulate. The fight to influence and hegemonise The CAUCAS to what Mr Brzezinski refers to as East Balkans was to capitalise on the world’s largest resource centre, untapped oil, gas and minerals that could change the fortune and geopolitical standing of the region. It was imperative for a stagnant American Economy to capitalise on and safeguard a new century of dominance. Therefore it was imperative for American Economic interests that no one asserts themselves in this region. One can see an almost phased strategy to dominate and hegemonise the region, Eastern Europe, The Balkans, Containing Russia and then the final stage would have been containing The Far East (China).
How America should manage and influence EURASIA was imperative to America sustaining her presence as a global power for a very long time to come. When we refer to manage and influence what we are essentially talking about is destabilisation, hegemony and instil her Imperial presence for a very long time at the expense of the innocent masses.
“How America, ‘manages’ Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates EURASIA would control 2 of the world’s most advanced and productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over EURASIA would almost automatically entail Africa’s subordination, rendering the western hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world’s most central continent. About 75 percent
of the world’s physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three fourths of the world’s known energy resources.” (p.31)
One can understand what the prize is to gain strategic importance in this region and why the game players and those with vital legitimate interests in the region go to great lengths to maintain their strategic depth. We know what America and the Neocons saw in this vast region from the CAUCAS to Central Asia, the untapped oil, gas, mineral mines that lie beneath the Caspian, Afghanistan and how to transport through Pakistan to the Straits of Hormuz. Like The British East India Company these jewels could only be extracted if you have overall control of this vast region and a number
of regional partners. Mr Brzezinski and many who subscribe to this ideology felt in a post cold war era America had absolutely no major obstacles to occupy, hegemonise and extract such resources.
” Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public’s sense of domestic well-being. The economic self denial (that is, defence spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are congenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to Imperial mobilization”. (p.35).
However Brzezinski question how to best mobilise national consensus to implement such a global policy, he discusses sudden threats that will essentially make Americans sublime to the casualties in such conflict even if professional soldiers too die along with the civilians. This external threat must affect American domestic well – being and on the morals of democracy America can impose its ideology and impositions on
others. Others who will be incapable of defending themselves against the world’s greatest power. I hope those reading are now reflecting on where this sudden threat came from and how an overpowering force imposed its presence on sovereign foreign lands in the central EURASIAN region of Afghanistan. Zbigniew Brzezinski reminds the reader in his book on the economic worth of hegemony over Eurasia.
“The momentum of Asia’s economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea.” (p.125)
Brzezinski has a very imperial view on America and American hegemonic imposition across the globe.
“in the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America
is not only the first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is likely to be the very last.” p.209
“moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society. it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct
external threat” (p.211)
Zbigniew is making those subscribing to American Global Imperialism think about just how to rally the people of America to engage in a foreign intervention involving American armed forces. He suggests Americans will mobilise together against an external threat that will give America the consensus to engage in the EURASIAN region. Americans reluctant to engage in world war 2 were suddenly faced with an external threat that they must stand united against for the greater good. I refer to American involvement in World War 2 after the Pearl Harbour bombing. Mr Brzezinski also recognises that America to engage in a wider conflict for a very long time to come must need a reason to engage in a conflict. Zbigniew Brzezinski is actually searching for a threat akin to Pearl Harbour that will unite and mobilise America in a conflict that will allow American foreign policy goals to become
indistinguishable with American consensus and ideals, essentially legitimising engagement in a conflict by democratic consensus.
“The attitude of The American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America’s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese
attack on pearl Harbour” (p.30)
Not only was Mr Brzezinski discussing external threats that threaten the American way but a catalyst to push American people towards engagement of this external threat. So it is clear that for a grandeur engagement in Eurasia – America needed
legitimacy through an external threat but also an overwhelming consensus from within to retaliate against a modern Pearl Harbour.
Once in control of EURASIA America needed to maintain her legitimacy and supremacy in EURASIA, she had to promote herself as the “do gooder” against those it will propagate who do not share the interest and wishes of the region. Mr Brzezinski explains this very well in his book.
“To put it in terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires , the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion & maintain security dependence among vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together”.
I do believe America has failed on all 3 imperatives as it neither won the trust and support of the people of Afghanistan and nor could it destroy their alliances with other regional players. Afghanistan has never seen security for 30 years and the last decade was far more so devastating, therefore there was no reliance on American security rather the insurgency fuelled even more so. Americans treated the Pashtuns with contempt largely so for placing their eggs wrongly in one basket namely with the Indians and their N.Alliance minority Afghans. America successfully created an external threat and legitimised a war on Afghanistan but failed on every account to influence the region. American failure could not keep regional stakeholders to whom Mr Brzezinski refers to as barbarians from colluding and influencing any status quo. Major stakeholders being Pakistan and Iran who instead of being approached
by the Neocon and treated amicably were both treated with contempt and again largely falling foul of Indian schematics to pave its way into Afghanistan. Other stakeholders like Russia, Turkey, China, and Saudi Arabia were also ignored as Neocons pursued their simpleton offensive of might is right. The Neocon were not relationship builders nor were they capable of winning the masses and providing them with security. At this juncture the Neocon drifted chasms apart from Brzezinski goal and the conflict became bloodier and brutal without stabilising the region and befriending key stakeholders, the Neocon incessant desire for warmongering led to a major blunder, referring to the illegal war on Iraq. America had lost its prestige, its humility and its pivotal standing and any good will from its modern Pearl Harbour. It is here America seized to become a global Imperial power or empire akin to The British but became a global dictator the world community wanted to distance itself from. American hegemony over Eurasia lost many a pawns on her grand chess board because of Iraq, they kept falling until America in spite of her unparallel fire power was left bare and vulnerable.
America had just lost her prestige and dominance giving rise to regional players to out manoeuvre her very easily. The Neocons misadventures into Iraq failed to allow them to maintain their focus on Central Balkans a region Zbigniew Brzezinski called central to world dominance.
Referring to an area Mr Brzezinski called “Eurasian Balkans” and in a 1997 map in which he is said to circle the exact location ( Central Asia linked to Caspian Sea and down to The Persian and Arabian Gulf) he described this exact location back in 1997 “Moreover they ( Central Asian Republics) are of great importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbours, namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signalling an increasing political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold.” (p.124)
“once pipelines to the area have been developed, Turkmenistan’s truly vast natural gas reserves augur a prosperous future the country’s people” (p.32)
These networks of pipes extract the gas and oil from The Caspian basin and travel to what was the once Yugoslav Republic, directly through Kosovo and reach Europe. Now for those who completely missed what I wrote and have a short lived memory, does this give clarity on why Balkanisation of Yugoslav and the conflict in Kosovo between forces loyal to Russia (Serbs) and those whose cause was taken up by NATO
Bosnian Muslims, Kosovan and Albanian Muslim actually took places. The core reason for the war was hegemonic designs for the region linked to The Caspian Basin untapped oil reserves. NATO won that war safeguarding future oil and gas supplies to Western Europe and similarly today a war is ending East and South East of the Caspian Basin the region of Central Asia. Whoever influences over these pipelines has immense geostrategic leverage and the potential for great economic prosperity. Afghanistan like Kosovo is the major land locked region in Central Asia and hence I draw parallels between the Balkan Wars and Afghanistan war. The political reason a facade but at the heart is a fight for economic, regional or in America’s case global supremacy.
“In fact, an Islamic revival – already abetted from the outside not only by Iran but also by Saudi Arabia – is likely to become the mobilizing impulse for the increasingly pervasive new nationalisms, determined to oppose any reintegration under Russian and hence infidel control” (p.133)
It was in American interest to revive Political Islamic to galvanise anti Russian sentiment but Brzezinski did not have an answer how to dissolve Islamic revival in the Islamic lands and adopt American policies. The Neocon War on Terror further alienated the Islamic world and Neocon aggressive policies and offensives and mobilisations against Islam have only fuelled this revival further and has led them into the quagmire they are in today in Afghanistan. Again this comes from not befriending Iran or Pakistan and limiting early Saudi Arabia involvement. I believe this is another example of how Neocon were completely misguided by India and her desire to increase her regional and global footprint. India played USA off against Pakistan and Iran supporting, arming Jundullah against Iran as well as Tereek-e-Taliban and BLA against Pakistan under the American Neocon umbrella in Afghanistan. This failure of Neocon to involve Pakistan and allowing Indian pervasive agendas from within Afghanistan to destabilise not only Pakistan but also Iran while American media demonised both Iran and Pakistan has now brought these nations closer together. Here again we see a departure from what Mr Brzezinski intended for Pakistan.
“For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain Geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan – and to deny Iran the exercise of such influence in Afghanistan and Tajikistan and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking central Asia with the Arabian Sea.” (p.139)
In fact the opposite has precipitated out of Neocon feverish attempts in partnership with India to terrorise, destabilise and demonise Pakistan. Pakistan and Iran have signed an agreement to build a gas pipeline which will not eventually link with India but instead with China – I-P-C much to Washington’s dissatisfaction. Pakistan will further benefit from a pipeline linked to Turkmenistan via Afghanistan, all under a diminished “imperial” role for America in Afghanistan and total isolation of India. Mr Brzezinski message to the Neocons was clear “engage Pakistan” instead they followed the Indianphiles into the current American predicament in Afghanistan and imminent retreat by mid 2011.
In the grand scheme of things America sacrifice, investment and total devastation of American image abroad was all a welcomed sacrificed had America successfully created her hegemony in Afghanistan.
Zbigniew Brzezinski writes “It follows that America’s primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it.” (p.148).
In other words American influence from the Caspian to the Arabian Sea must remain paramount and central is American hegemony over Afghanistan which has failed abysmally. Here again Neocon policies to alienate Iran and Pakistan through India has proved wholly unsuccessful. China, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey and Russia are not engaged in fighting for total dominance but working together towards regional stability and prosperity. This will begin with the American imminent withdrawal from Afghanistan and construction of the oil and gas pipelines across central Asia which will be further enhanced through road and rail links. Central Asian energy resource an distribution links will go towards integrating Central Asia linking major players like China, Russia, Turkey and Iran to the ISTAN nations of Central Asia and the Arabian Sea. American influence will slowly dissolve and her concentration will be to monopolise Asia Pacific through India but even there she will face major obstacles and hostilities thanks to the legacy of Neocons and an over indulgence with India. Obama is Zbigniew Brzezinskis last hope to hold together American influence in Eurasia by rectifying the mistakes of The Neocons by partnering with major stakeholders but one thing is for sure total dominance for America in Eurasia looks bleak.
Therefore in answering the title of this article I will leave it to you to decide. American economy is crippled, America can not sustain itself in Afghanistan which has become its longest war. America has no role for India inside Afghanistan and rightly so. America seeks reconciliation with the Taliban, 9 years later and
America is now full circle here in Afghanistan, it has neither contained China, nor has it contained Russia, Iran. It has alienating its only real ally Pakistan where anti American sentiment has never been so high for a country that has never been but warm and friendly to America. Afghanistan is firmly in the Taliban and insurgent control and it is said over 90% is well within the Afghan National Resistance control a collective name for the myriad of groups fighting alongside The Taliban against America and NATO inside Afghanistan. Americans are set to leave Afghanistan and withdrawal will begin in 2011 after which an alliance between Turkey, Iran, China, Pakistan and Russia will come together to stabilise this region.
The Neocons failed Zbigniew Brzezinski and all who subscribed to The New American Century. America is no longer the lone super power woth emrging power epicentres many of whom will work in allaince to counter American assertiveness.
Filed under: Current Affairs Tagged: | United States, Central Asia, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter, Soviet Union, New World Order, Center for Strategic & International Studies, The Grand Chessboard
No comments:
Post a Comment