Eve here. Under Michael Hudson, it explains how long the neocons have been (so that they return before they become “neocons”), and explains why this project is essential and still considered important to present our control.
By Michael Hudson, he is a professor of economics at the University of Missouri in Kansas City and a researcher at Bird College at the Levy Institute of Economics. Hisst Book is the destiny of civilization. Originally published in The Democracy Collective
Opponents of the war with Iran say they see the war as not American interests and that it poses no visible threat to the United States. This appeal has missed neo-conology, which has led foreign polls for over half a century, and now threatens to include the Middle East in its most violent war since South Korea. Because its logic is very aggressive and very disgusting for most people, violating the fundamental principles of international law, the United Nations and the US Constitution, there is definitely embarrassment to the author of this strategy, to spell out what he is at risk.
What is at stake is the US attitude to control the Middle East and strengthening the US unipolar power.
In 1974 or 1975, they talked a lot about the creation of a new International Economic Order (NIEO). I worked with Herman Khan at the Hudson facility on international finances and trade, and he bought me at that time to join in a military strategy discussion about plans already underway to cover Iran and divide it into ethnic groups. Herman found the weakest place, Baluchistan, on Iran’s northeastern border with Pakistan. Kurdish, Tajiks, Turkish Azerbaijanis were those who were aging from one another, giving us a battle of important potential clients that will shake up both Iran and Pakistan’s political orientation when necessary.
Thirty years later, by 2003, General Wesley Clark had pored to Iran and had to take control of the Middle East, starting with Iraq and Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan, leading to Iran.
Fast forward to today
Most of the geopolitical dynamics debate about how the international economy is changing focuses on BRICS and other countries’ attempts to escape US control, breaking away from trade and investment. But the most aggressive and dynamic restructuring of the international economy has been Donald Trump’s whirlwind since January, and has to lock him in a US-centric economy by not agreeing to not concentrate trade and investment in China, Russia and other states that have been seeking their own autonomy self-economy from US control since January. That’s all about the war in Iran.
Trump has experienced the experience of not trading with China and responding to his threats to create chaos for Tarato, hoping to regain the US market by reaching an agreement that would in fact accept UNE’s traditions and financial sanctions against it. This battle, as well as Russia and China, explains the US’s purpose in the current battle with Iran. And Cuba in Venezuela is another country that is trying to restructure its economic policies to restore their independence.
From the perspective of US strategists, China’s industrialist socialist emergency poses an existential danger to US unipolar control in providing a model for other countries to participate in restoring national sovereignty that has been steadily eroded in recent decades.
Many of the Biden administration and the US Cold Warriors seek the issue as democracy (a country defined as a client administration as a country that supports US policy) and dictatorship (a country defined as a country defined as a country defined as a country defined as a country that supports US policy) and dictatorship (a country whose attitude explains the US/NATO attacks on Russia in the Ukrainian attribute war and the recent US/Isoraeli war against the US/Isoraeli war.
Motivation has nothing to do with Iran’s attempts to protect the sovereignty of its people by developing an atomic bomb. The fundamental problem is that the US has initiatives to prevent Iran and other countries from leaving the hegemony of the dollar.
Below is how the neoconservatives will write about the US national interests of overturning the Iranian government and introducing the institutional changes necessary for a democratic change in government.
US diplomacy can control oil in the Near East as Iran and its component parts have been transformed into a series of clients. Oil Management You are an internationally operating US oil company and as a US oil and gas producer, you have the corner of the US international economic power. Near Eastern oil management also means managing the vast holdings of US Treasury securities and private sector investments by Saudi Arabia and other OPEC countries.
The US holds these OPECs and other foreign investments hostages. This can be expropriated as the US recorded $300 billion in Russian financial savings in the West in 2022. Iranians in today’s conflict.
But it’s not just the key to controlling the Near East and its holdings. Iran is an important link to the Chinese belt and road programme of the new Silk Road in railway transport to the west. If the US can block it, this China wants to build it.
Iran also blocks Russia’s development through the Caspians and is key to accessing the south. Under US control, Iran’s client regime could bypass the Suez Canal and threaten Russia from the south.
For neocons, this goes to the central pivot where US national interests are based – if you define that national interest as creating a forced empire of client states.
I think Trump’s warning to Tehranian citizens is only trying to stir up domestic panic as a US prelude to mobilize ethnic opposition and divide Iran into constituent parts to evacuate their cities. It is similar to the US wanting to succeed in disbanding ethnic groups in the Russian and Chinese regions. It is the US strategic hope for a new international order that remains under its command.
b>Trump’s Republican budget plan and its significant military spending increased
Of course, the irony is that the United States is restraining its declining economic empire from keeping itself destructive. The aim is to control other countries by threatening economic disruption. But it is our threat of chaos that drives them to seek options elsewhere. But the goal is not a strategy. And plans to use Netanyahu as Ukrainian Zelensky’s response demand US intervention with willingness to fight Israel at the end, with many aces US/NATO fighting the last Ukrainians. Finding an escape hatch is a warning to the whole world. In addition to US trade and financial sanctions aimed at making other countries rely on the US market and the dollarized financial system, attempts to impose a military empire from Central Europe to the Middle East are politically self-dislocated. It leads to future divisions between the American unipolar world order and moral basis and the global major irreversible thing about simple self-interest.
The fact that Iranian missiles were able to penetrate Israel’s much-born iron dome defenses shows the stupidity of Trump’s pressure on a huge trillion dollar subsidies for the US military industrial complex for similar Boondogur. So far, only the oldest and most effective missiles have been used. The goal is to deplete Israeli anti-missile defenses, preventing serious Iranian attacks from blocking them in a few days or a week. This has already been demonstrated over the course of several months, just as Iran showed how easily it can bomb US military bases.
The ostensible US military budget is actually much larger than reported in the bill. Congress is funding in two ways. The obvious method is to purchase weapons directly paid by Congress. Microphone spending routed through US foreign military assistance to allies such as Ukraine, Israel, South Korea, Europe and Asian countries is less recognized. This shows that military burdens typically explain the entire US budget deficit and prevent the rise in ostensibly government debt (many of which have been reliably self-funded by the Federal Reserve since 2008).
2001 permission for the use of military force. And under Article 51 of the United Nations Chat, the state of Ra Meble cannot attack other countries unless it is attacked by or prevents impending attacks by that country. Still, the US must provide security board approval. This is clearly blocked. If the US proceeds without such permission, Trump and his advisors are as guilty as Netanyahu, who committed a war crime.
The problem, of course, is that the United Nations has a world possibility of implementing international law that is too unrelated. To be free from the US unipolar order, all alternative international organizations are required, independent of the US, NATO and other client allies.
