“There cannot be a just war, because there is no such thing as a just war. War is the temporary loss of judgment” (Juan Bautista Alberdi).

Zbigniew Brzezinski, in his book “Between Two Ages: The Role of the United States in the Technetronic Age” (1.971) points out that “the era of rebalancing world power has arrived, a power that must pass into the hands of a new global political order based on a trilateral economic link between Japan, Europe, and the United States”. Such a doctrine would involve the subjugation of Russia and China and would include the possibility of a pre-emptive US nuclear strike using Trident II missiles against vital Russian and Chinese targets.

The Ukrainian conflict

The Ukrainian conflict would have meant a return to the Cold War between Russia and the US and a return to the doctrine of containment, the basis of which was set out by George F. Kennan in his essay “The Sources of Soviet Behavior” published in Foreign Affairs in 1947, the main ideas of which are summed up in the quote “Soviet power is impervious to the logic of reason but very sensitive to the logic of force”.

These include the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO’s military structures and the build-up of military forces with four new battalions deployed on the European border with Russia, and the Russian response with the installation in Belarus of Iskander-M missiles with multiple warheads and S-40 anti-aircraft missiles, in line with the Cold War dynamic of action-reaction. For its part, Russia has installed Iskander-M missiles with multiple warheads and S-400 anti-aircraft missiles in Kaliningrad, and if NATO closes the Soviet enclave’s access to the Baltic Sea, the Kennedy-Khrushchev missile crisis (October 1962) could be replayed with Kaliningrad as its epicenter.

NATO’s entry into the Ukrainian war?

With the US immersed in the November presidential election campaign, France, Poland and the UK would be the trident of choice for the globalists to implode the Ukrainian front next summer and provoke NATO’s subsequent entry into open conflict with Putin’s Russia, re-elected until 2030.

Poland is trying to become a local player in the Eastern European hornet’s nest and extend its influence into the Ukrainian zone by claiming the right to incorporate the Ukrainian region of Lviv, already occupied by Poland from 1918 to 1939, into the Polish map.

Moreover, in a statement by the Russian Foreign Ministry, Russia warned that “the arrival of F-16 fighters in Ukraine will be seen by us as carrying nuclear weapons, and we will consider this step by the US and NATO as a deliberate provocation”, while accusing the West of openly supporting Ukraine’s sabotage actions on Russian territory and of supplying Kiev with British and French long-range missiles, as well as the new US ATACMS, which can reach Russian territory.

As part of the action-reaction dynamic of the new Cold War 2.0 scenario, Putin has ordered his country’s armed forces to carry out tactical nuclear maneuvers on the southern border with Ukraine soon. This would be a Russian response to claims by French President Emmanuel Macron and other senior British officials that they are “ready to send military contingents to Ukraine”.

If no one prevents it, all the signs are that we are heading for the next NATO entry into open conflict with Putin’s Russia, with the use of ‘non-strategic’ nuclear weapons, also known as ‘tactical nuclear weapons’, not out of the question. According to the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), of which Russia would have some 1,800 warheads and NATO would have 250 deployed in Europe, the outbreak of a low-intensity nuclear conflict could escalate into a large-scale nuclear conflagration with catastrophic consequences for humanity.

US against China

The Kissinger Doctrine advocated the establishment of the G-2 (US and China) as global arbiters. Thus, in an article published in the New York Times entitled “The Time for a New World Order”, Kissinger already considers China as a fellow superpower and advises against protectionism or treating China as an enemy (which would make it a real enemy). He also calls for relations between the United States and China to be raised to a new level based on the concept of common destiny (along the lines of the transatlantic relationship after the Second World War), which would see the non-violent route (America-Asia) enthroned as the world’s main trade axis to the detriment of the Atlantic route (America-Europe).

However, the Pentagon’s clear objective would be to confront the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), founded in 2001 by the Shanghai Five (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) and later joined by Uzbekistan, India, Pakistan, and Iran, which, together with the ALBA countries, would form the hard core of resistance to US and British global hegemony. The organization was reportedly strengthened following a visit to Moscow by Chinese Defense Minister Li Shangfu, during which he described Russian-Chinese military relations as “strategic” and stressed “the need for an alternative security strategy to NATO”, symbolized by the SCO.

AUKUS and the nuclear crisis

China and the US have differences over the autonomy and status of Taiwan and freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. China is fully aware that the Australia-UK-US strategic agreement, known as AUKUS, symbolizes a shift in global geopolitical cartography, moving the Atlantic arena to the non-violent Indo-Pacific as the epicenter of the geopolitical pulse between the US and China.

In this context, Chinese General Jing Jianfeng, speaking at the most important security forum on the Asian continent in Singapore, accused the United States of trying to create “a version of NATO in Asia to maintain its hegemony”. Thus, the US aim would be to create a nuclear crisis arc around China, stretching from Indian Kashmir to Japan, through South Korea and the Philippines, and closing with New Zealand and Australia, to deter China from its quest to dominate the China Sea.

The US has allocated $1.9 billion for the resupply of US weapons to Taiwan while deploying a new ground-based launcher system for its Typhon medium-range missiles on the island of Guam as a clear warning to Beijing to curb its military ambitions. The Pentagon could also resort to a false flag attack on the US Navy stationed in the islands near Taiwan (reminiscent of the explosion of the battleship Maine in Cuba in 1898), followed by a pre-emptive nuclear strike on vital Chinese targets using Trident II missiles.

In short, we are heading for a war scenario that will be a global conflagration with incalculable consequences for the human species and the future of the planet, involving nuclear powers.