The story continues from Part 2
The SCO Forms
On June 15, 2001, the Presidents of six Eurasian nations held the founding summit of the SHANGHAI COOPERATION ORGANIZATION, in Shanghai. This summit meeting was a turning point in Eurasian and world affairs, and has far-reaching potential, in the coming period, to shift the global strategic situation. The six leaders are Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. These six leaders focused on three issues: their nation’s security and territorial integrity; and economic cooperation. Since 1996, the original “Shanghai 5” nations, now joined by Uzbekistan, have moved rapidly forward, and are well aware of their real, and potential, political and economic capabilities.
Since the end of the Soviet Union, Russia has undergone an economic debacle. China, still a developing nation, must develop economic security for the world’s largest population, 1.26 billion people. The Central Asian republics are poor, isolated, and face dangerous insurgencies in the region, supported by the intelligence agencies of Britain, Israel and the US. Lack of development of vital resources, especially water and transport, is putting serious constraints on all the nations of the SCO. Yet, at the same time, their potential is incalculable. All of this is making London and New York extremely nervous. They just cannot allow a development as the above to proceed. It would prove fatal to their plans. We shall see just how the two networks plan to topple this emerging Eurasian economic development.
Do note that this program was started by China in 1993. It gained momentum when Russian leader Boris Yeltsin went to China in early 1995, and appealed for help, in the immediate aftermath of the Chechnya fiasco. Thus, the first meeting took place in 1996. Yearly meetings followed. When the US bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999, it gained an added urgency. This bombing occurred when NATO bombed Serbia in order to extract Kosovo. The US claimed it was mistakenly bombed. Five missiles were fired at the embassy. No one bought this story.
Finally, when the Bush Administration assumed office in January 2001, the US military budget shot up by a crazy amount, between March and September. Most of this budget went to pay for new military equipment. This huge increase in the Pentagon’s spending implied that America was gearing up for a major war somewhere in the world.
With the SCO being formed in June 2001, a new urgency took root in Washington. Do recall that one of America’s prime aim in Eurasia was to make sure that “no group of nations come together”, which could oust America from the region. This budding potential had to be stopped.
And thirdly, was to forestall China in going forward with its infrastructure investments in building a deep-sea port at Gwadar, on the coast of Baluchistan. The port at Gwadar has been under discussions for many years, but it was only in March, 2001, that China agreed to be the sole sponsor.
Gwadar could also become an alternative oil router to China, from the Strait of Hormuz. China was desperately looking for alternative routes to transport its oil from the Middle East to China, by-passing the “chokepoint” of the US-controlled Malacca Strait, next to Singapore. Gwadar could offer Central Asian nations a less costly outlet for their oil than current Western.
Afghanistan the Taliban
After the Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, the country descended into a brutal civil war. In late 1995, a group of religious scholars had enough. They got together and thus were born the Taliban. Within 2 years, they managed to secure control of most of the country. At around this time, Unocal began negotiations with the Taliban for transit rights to build a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan (with the 3rd largest gas reserves in the world) to Pakistan. Both the CIA and the ISI, along with Saudi Intelligence, backed the Taliban. The Taliban were romanced by Unocal, being invited to the White House, and given a VIP tour of its offices in Houston, Texas.
By mid-June 2001, the negotiations were turning ugly. Besides a transit fee, the Taliban wanted Unocal to build infrastructure in Afghanistan. Predictably, Unocal refused. Did you know that there is not even 1 kilometer of any railway lines within Afghanistan! At a last-ditch attempt at resolving matters, a final meeting was held in Berlin, Germany, in July 2001. The conference was a failure. Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary, Nazir Naik, who was present at this meeting was told by his American counterparts to pass on a message to the Taliban. This was the message; “Tell the Taliban that we can shower them with a carpet of gold, or we can bury them under bombs! “. If there was going to be no deal, then the Americans were planning to invade Afghanistan by not later than mid-October, to get into country before winter began. Why this desperation? The answer was ongoing economic and financial collapse in the US.
America was in a corner, and was desperate to nip this in the bud. The go-ahead was given to start the invasion of Afghanistan. The key was the announcement by the Pentagon in late August that it has decided to move 60,000 troops from Europe to Asia.
Back in America, the economic and financial sectors were in free fall.
The Party is over for the Dollar
There was a red alert for the dollar. In 2001, the dollar fell 10% against other major currencies. It is clear that not many people realize what a dollar crash will mean: the bankruptcy of the entire world financial system.
And the dollar, which has been backed by the political and military power of the US, has begun to see an outflow of capital, which is quickening. The dollar, has until then, been held up by a $500 billion inflow of capital, so a very strong tidal shift was underway. Military adventures tend to follow financial crises.
The US could not allow these Eurasian powers from coming together. And so, the Rockefeller family put into motion a series of events, starting from 9/11 to the Invasion of Afghanistan, in order to neutralize this Eurasian threat to their dominance of Eurasia. Therefore, we see such Rockefeller agents such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski who say “break it up’ and the only way to do that is to start a war. In the last century, the world has witnessed two such wars over this issue. The British organized World War One to prevent France, Germany, Russia, and the Ottoman Empire from cooperating around such ideas as the Trans-Siberian Railroad, or the Berlin-Baghdad Railroad. World War 2 started as a geopolitical war. New York and London had worked together to put Hitler into power in January 1933, with the intent that Hitler would attack Western Europe and the Soviet Union. Why? To blow up Eurasia. And they succeeded brilliantly. We are now headed for the potential THIRD geopolitical war in a hundred years. Both the networks want to start this, to prevent the nations of Central Asia as being a fulcrum point for bringing East Asia and Western Europe into economic harmony.
To forestall all of this, the Rockefeller family initiated what became known as the 9-11 terror attacks on New York and the Pentagon. Months before it happened, this incident was known within the Rockefeller family as “the event” For further information, in detail on this, please read the 2 part article called “The SCO and 9-11”, dated 9th and 25th May, 2015. You will find it in Volume 1, issues numbers 9 and 10.
The question is how would they be able to achieve that? One of the key weapons for them is Israel. They could induce Israel to start a war in the Middle East, which Israel could not win, now. They have the ability to win a war, BUT THEY COULD NOT OCCUPY AND HOLD TERRITORY. They would be destroyed by the attempt to occupy and hold adverse territory. They would be forced to go nuclear, which would be sufficient to throw the whole region into flames for decades.
The other option is to cause a terrorist attack on American soil – a mini “Pearl Harbor”-, a shocking incident, or series of incidents, which would then be blamed on Muslims. This would give the Americans a pretext to bomb and occupy certain areas of the Middle East, as a first step in taking physical control of the region, the very heart of Eurasia. This would provide an ideal grip on the throat of the world’s oil supplies, thus threatening the economic existence of both Asia and Europe. This would be a prelude to attaining financial, economic and political supremacy over all these regions, thus maintaining their grip on global power.
At the same time, Israel would be able to expand its physical size, as it would not have attention focused on itself. The link between a weakened financial system, and an aggressive and expanding Israel is too strong to ignore.
The Event
On September 11, 2001, at 8.45 am, in New York City, a hijacked plane crashed into one of the World Trade Center twin towers. Less than 20 minutes later, a second plane crashed into the second tower. David Rockefeller was sitting in his 17th floor office in the Chase building and saw the event he put into motion! A short while later, a third hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon building in Washington. Simultaneously, a car bomb went off outside the State Department building in Washington. Not long thereafter, a fourth plane crashed into the grounds in Pennsylvania.
It was, without doubt, a shocking event. Played live on TV networks to a global audience, it held the entire world glued to their TV sets. Immediately, the first suspects were Muslim groups, most notably Osama bin Laden.
So, the question is WHO DID IT?
Did you know that the World Trade Center was built in 1970? It was pushed through by the Governor of New York State (at that time, Nelson Rockefeller), and financed by a consortium of banks led by Chase Manhattan, the Rockefeller family bank, headed at that time by David. These towers were nicknamed “Nelson” and “David”!
At one level, these attacks were meant to be symbolic – The Pentagon, State Department, and Wall Street. These represented symbols of American power. We can understand the first two targets. But why specifically the World Trade Center? Here are the reasons:-
The World Trade center complex was operating at a loss for many years. It was sold to a Manhattan property mogul, Silverman, a few months earlier. Secondly, In April 2000, the dot-com bubble burst. This created a rising vacancy in the commercial real estate market in Manhattan, and other urban areas within the US.
An attack by an outside power would be dangerous to them. Nobody has, as yet, defeated America in war. So, it was an inside job.
With the knowledge that the overall property market was in decline within the US, the Rockefellers knew that they had to hold up the Manhattan property values. The US commercial real estate markets always followed the Manhattan commercial real estate market. By bringing down the two towers, in addition to building no 7(which was not hit by any plane, but still collapsed in the same way as the twin towers!), this created a removal of a lot of office space. Presto! No more vacancies. This held up the real estate values within Manhattan, and the rest of America.
And, finally, the sheer shock value. It was a psychological attack, creating panic within the American population. The idea was to use this attack to make the population malleable, to accept what Washington was planning to do next, in terms of draconian legislation. The aim was to militarize the US domestically. One cannot fight wars of looting globally, while loudly proclaiming the advantages of democracy and freedom, domestically. The American population had to be suborned. A short while later, the Patriot Act was passed, which meant turning America into a police state.
As to who was behind it? Look at who has the most to benefit from the US move into Afghanistan and Central Asia. The most powerful family in America is the Rockefellers. The CIA is an entity within the Rockefeller orbit. Nelson Rockefeller’s brainchild was the OSS, formed during World War 2. It then changed its name to the CIA after the war, and this agency was headed and staffed by various Rockefeller staff. It even banks with Citibank- a Rockefeller bank.
A few years ago, one of the CIA agents who took part in the planting of explosives in the 3 towers made a death-bed confession as to his role in this. And stated that he and his co-workers were drinking in a bar and saw the TV news while this was going on. Go to the article, SCO & 911 for the details of this attack- a clear false flag operation. Barely a month later, the US invaded Afghanistan.
Within Afghanistan, a group that was fighting the Taliban for control of the north was called the Northern Alliance. Prior to the New York attack, the leadership of the Northern Alliance was opposed to American intervention in Afghanistan. In this regard, the CIA carried out an assassination on its key leader, Ahmed Shah Masood, on Saturday 8th September. It neutralized the one force in Afghanistan, other than the Taliban, that would oppose the US. Afghanistan would serve as a “platform “from which the US would stop the integration of Eurasia.
The Saudi Connection
Blame was laid on Osama bin Laden, and Al Qaeda. But, American media and intelligence also laid blame on Saudi Arabia. The US said that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals. To refute this lie, the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia called up a press conference, and told the audience the all the hijackers are alive and well. And that they are in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, he granted permission for the press to go and interview them! So, why was Saudi Arabia blamed?
In 1998, due to low prices and a deteriorating financial situation, then Crown Prince Abdullah started the Saudi Gas Initiative, or the SGI. He invited the world’s major oil companies to invest in the gas resources of the country. Four separate ventures were created. Many oil companies bid for various parts of these 4 ventures. David Rockefeller was not thrilled. He informed Abdullah that the US oil companies considered Saudi Arabia to be in their sphere of control, and wanted all these ventures to go to American companies, on an exclusive basis. When Abdullah refused, a covert war began between the two houses. Starting in 1999, it ended in 2007. This was a deadly war conducted in the shadows. Saudi Arabia was put under the spotlight, and any chance to blacken their name was not passed up, including Michael Moore’s spin job, “Fahrenheit 9/11.
Here are some other points. When Bush took office in Washington, on January 20, 2001, the first thing he did was increase the Pentagon’s budget. It went up by 300% between March and September. Did he know something that no one else did?
That Tuesday, September 11, while the towers were burning, two planes landed at Kandahar airport, in Afghanistan, at 2pm local time. They had arrived carrying executives from 2 Chinese state-owned companies, to sign economic and security accords with the Taliban. And lastly, this attack on September 11 was known in advance to senior Rockefeller family members, by at least 6 to 9 months. They called it “the event”!
So, dear reader, there you have the truth of the matter of 9-11. Also remember, that New York (the Rockefellers) would not allow any outside power/intelligence agency to mount such an operation within the USA. These are not how things are done at the highest levels of power in the world.
If we take the words of Washington strategist Brzezinski and understand the axioms of Halford Mackinder as the driving motive for Anglo, and later, American foreign policy for more than an entire century, it begins to become clear why a reorganized Russian state under Putin has gone into motion to resist the overtures and overt attempts at deconstruction being promoted by Washington in the name of democracy. How has Putin acted to shore up Russian defenses? In a word: energy.
Russia
The re-emergence of Russia as a factor in world politics, however weakened from the economic shocks of the past two decades, has been based on a strategy that obviously has drawn from principles of asymmetric warfare, economic as well as military. Russia’s might, back in 2004, was no match for the awesome Pentagon power projection. However, she still maintains the only nuclear strike force on the planet that is capable of posing a mortal threat to the military power of the Pentagon. In cooperation with China and its other Eurasian SCO partners, Russia is clearly using its energy as a geopolitical lever of the first order.
The US debacle in Afghanistan and Iraq have done far more than any Russian military challenge to undermine the military strength and global influence of the United States as sole decision maker of a unipolar world.
Russian Energy Geopolitics
In terms of the overall standard of living, mortality and economic prosperity, Russia today is not a world class power. In terms of energy, it is a colossus. In terms of landmass it is still the single largest nation in land area in the world, spanning from the Pacific to the door of Europe. It has vast territory, vast natural resources, and it has the world’s largest reserves of natural gas, the energy source currently the focus of major global power plays. In addition, it is the only power on the face of the earth with the military capabilities able to match that of the United States despite the collapse of the USSR and deterioration in the military by the early 2000s.
Russia has more than 130,000 oil wells and some 2000 oil and gas deposits, of which at least 900 are not in use. Oil reserves have been estimated at 150 billion barrels, similar perhaps to Iraq. They could be far larger but have not yet been exploited owing to difficulty of drilling in some remote arctic regions. Oil prices above $60 a barrel begin to make it economical to explore in those remote regions. Russia’s state-owned natural gas pipeline network, its so-called ‘unified gas transportation system’ includes a vast network of pipelines and compressor stations extending more than 150,000 kilometers across Russia. By law only the state-owned Gazprom is allowed to use the pipeline. The network is perhaps the most valued Russian state asset outside the oil and gas itself. Here is the heart of Putin’s new natural gas geopolitics and the focus of conflict with western oil and gas companies as well as the European Union.
Today, Russia is clearly pursuing a fascinating, highly-complex multi-pronged energy strategy. Moscow appears to hold a winning hand in the one important non-military lever it has to tip the global geopolitical balance of power in its direction, and away from Washington’s overwhelming dominance. Oil and natural gas are at the heart of the strategy. For the past 2 decades, Russian production of oil has surpassed Saudi Arabia’s to be the world’s largest, at just over 10 million barrels daily. And in terms of known reserves of natural gas Russia is far away the world leader. Russian natural gas has increasingly been the foundation for a brilliant series of Russian energy geopolitical initiatives for several years. Gazprom is the centerpiece of this energy strategy.
To counter the eastward march of NATO into countries of the former Warsaw Pact, and the various US attempts to lure Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, Putin has used the economic lever of Gazprom. With its enormous gas resources Russia seeks to win stronger economic ties in Western Europe, thereby neutralizing the potential military strategic threat from the NATO encirclement. No country has been more the focus of this Russian pipeline diplomacy than former wartime foe Germany.
High Stakes Eurasian Chess Game
In a sense, the Eurasian land area today resembles a geo-political game of three-dimensional chess between Russia, the EU, and Washington. The stakes of the game are a matter of life and death for Russia as a functioning nation, a point that Putin realized in 2001.
US attempts at the military encirclement of Russia included not only the Rose and Orange Revolutions in 2003 (Georgia)and 2004, 2009 and 2014 (Ukraine), but also the highly provocative Pentagon missile ‘defense’ policy of placing US-controlled(not NATO-controlled) missiles in key former Warsaw Pact countries on Russia’s direct perimeter.. All of these US moves have attempted to isolate Russia and weaken her potential strategic allies across Eurasia.
In 2004, the CIA launched a political takeover of the Ukraine, through the Orange Revolution, Washington used this to cut off the flow of gas to Europe, not once, but three times; in 2004, 2006, and 2009. This was to show the EU that Moscow is not a reliable supplier. It was also used to demonstrate to Moscow that:” play ball, or else—“.
Had Ukraine joined NATO after Kiev’s 2004 “Orange Revolution” brought Washington’s man Viktor Yuschenko in as President, then Ukraine would have been in a strategic position to economically strangle Russia on command. Some 80% of all Russian gas exports to EU countries were flowing across Ukrainian territory. Today, some 40% of all state revenues in Russia comes from its oil and gas exports.
Nord Stream
After the 2004 Ukraine Orange Revolution, Moscow’s western pipeline strategy was put into play to bypass both Ukraine and Poland through construction of an underwater gas pipeline, Nord Stream, running from Russia directly to Germany.
Washington was bitterly opposed to Nord Stream, and attempted to unsuccessfully block it by proxy through back-door support for Poland and other EU opposition. Russia and Germany successfully completed the Nord Stream 1 and 2 projects. In September 2022, the CIA blew up 3 of the 4 strings of this pipeline.
South Stream Vs Nabucco
In a second major front in what could be called the Russia-USA pipeline wars , at the same time Nord stream was coming into play a ferocious geopolitical battle has also been raging over a second planned major Gazprom gas pipeline project to EU countries called South Stream. This pipeline would be laid on the Black Sea floor, pass through Bulgaria, and terminate in Austria, from the southern part of the EU. Moscow created these two pipeline systems to assure the EU of stable supplies. South Stream would be sister counterpart of Nord Stream. At a length of 900 kms, it would have an annual capacity of 63 billion cubic meters, even larger than Nord Stream 1.
To counter the growing Russian energy ties to the EU, the EU Commission with strong Washington backing, proposed an alternative in 2002 called the Nabucco pipeline – an integral part of a US strategy of total energy control over both the EU and all of Eurasia. It explicitly has been conceived to run entirely independent of Russian territory and is aimed at weakening the energy ties between Russia and Western Europe.
The battle between Russia’s South Stream and the Washington-backed Nabucco was intensely geopolitical. The winner will hold a major advantage in the future political terrain of Europe. Were Moscow to succeed in completing South Stream and retain its integral control over the delivery pipeline infrastructure, it would represent nothing less than a major geopolitical defeat for Washington. Remember, the American’s basic game plan is to ensure that it controls all the energy and pipelines going into Europe. In this manner it can dictate Europe’s future.
Washington had placed obstacles in Europe to ensure that Gazprom would not be able to succeed in implementing South Stream. Turkey as a key transit state had already given permission. South Stream was stalled. When the US managed to pull Ukraine into its orbit in December 2014, and when the US began to sanction Russia’s energy industry, a decision had to made. South Stream had already cost Gazprom $3 billion, when Putin pulled the plug. Washington was thrilled. A short while later, Putin shocked them when he announced a much shorter version of South Stream. That is Turk Stream. Much of the pipeline infrastructure was already in place. Turk Stream would end at the Turkish-Greek border. Putin said,” If Europe wants this gas into southern Europe, and then it is up to the Europeans to build pipelines to take it from the Greek border, deeper into Europe.” In short, Washington had successfully stopped Russia in its South Stream “strategy”, in Europe. As we shall see, the battle then expanded into Africa
As Henry Kissinger once said, if you control the oil flows, you control the destinies of nations. Europe is technologically advanced, but lacks access to raw materials. Russia is in dire need for this technology to improve its economy, and it has an over-abundance of the raw materials that Europe needs. It would be a ‘win-win’ for both. Were that to happen then Europe can tell the US “bye-bye”; we don’t need you anymore. Please leave Europe, and take your troops with you”. America, overnight would become a third-rate power, and the Rockefeller Empire and its main subsidiary – the US, will join the graveyard of empires. Not letting itself be totally dependent on EU gas or oil revenues, Moscow is turning east, and focusing on building long-term energy partnerships with China. We shall examine the geopolitical implications of that shift.
The story continues in Part 4 – – –
