Perhaps then in sympathy with the trend to super nation led “power blocks”, the term “superpower” should too evolve to “superblocks”.
The Soviets were able to perpetuate their dysfunctional power reign (much) longer than they should have because of these strategic relationships/partnerships, whether looking at Russia plus the “other” Soviet Union entities like Belarus and Ukraine for example, or looking at the aggregate Soviet Union plus the Warsaw Pact countries of Eastern Europe. In fact, these countries and that subservience to “Russia” (the real core entity of both the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact), in large part subsidized that undeserved, in essence artificial longevity. While these internal/external partnerships did not cause the Soviet Union collapse, they did in fact prolong that inevitably and therefore the lesson learned is that these type of strategic partnerships, however obtained, were (are) extremely necessary and beneficial. Now take that lesson and apply it to a “functional” superpower like China and the result is not prolonging inevitable collapse but rather synergistically ensuring its continued growth and long term longevity.
China has clearly figured this out. Adding a new, perplexing and increasing complexity to the mix, which if not addressed by the U.S. and WEAST, will accelerate even faster China’s rise and make its ultimate global power even greater, is its growing military, economic and technology cooperation with Russia. Russia of course with its own potent Commulism game plan. These developments all building off the landmark 2001 Russia-China Friendship and Cooperation Treaty, the first of its kind since the Stalin era. One of its specific mission statements being to counter perceived U.S. hegemony. That agreement interestingly on the heels of another pivotal strategic partnership between the two, and four other countries including Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. It is called the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and provides complete geo-political transformation and new strategic positioning for China and Russia in Central Asia. In fact, SCO is purposely designed and intended as a block of U.S. and NATO (EU) interests in the region.
This “one plus one equal three” synergistic relationship between China and Russia and associated actions suggests mutual intent in the short term to act collectively as a de-facto “functional” superpower counter-balance to the U.S. For example, the unique and high profiled August 2007 SCO joint China and Russia military exercises in Russia were viewed personally by the leaders of both countries; being but a proxy for what’s to come, which may include a formal military alliance.
Russia has indeed learned from both its past Soviet era mistakes and China’s newfound success. As with China, another relevant concern to highlight and not yet recognized by the U.S. and WEAST either is that a resurgent Russia now also aggressively embraces Commulism. It’s interesting how former Soviet Union KGB superstar, U.S. antagonist and now Russian President, Vladimir Putin, has grudgingly come to accept the need for capitalism, if communism is to survive. While recognizing capitalism’s utility, he now too accepts its necessity, as a core component and/or underpinning in his own grand, un-vocalized plan to restore and reinvigorate as best he can the former Soviet Union. Call it Putin’s “Soviet ReUnion” Plan, the plan to bring everyone back together again.
Under the global radar, the underpinnings of this resurrection are already coming into place. Most don’t realize that the “reunion” began with the forming of the “Community of Russia and Belarus” on April 2, 1996. The basis of the “union” was strengthened on April 2, 1997, at which time its name was changed to Union of Russia and Belarus. This “Union” is really at present, a “confederation” as the two have not yet formally joined. However, the BBC reported on Nov. 28, 2007 that “the Presidents of Russia and Belarus, Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko, say they have agreed on a timetable for further integration of the two countries. However, they stopped short of giving exact dates or details of the creation of the new union state.” While Mr. Lukaskenko’s decision to “go Russia” was in large part driven by his need for a superpower ally, he had no choice but Russia given him being ostracized by the U.S. and EU for human rights violations. A disturbing trend is still clear however, noting other former Soviet republicKazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan seeking to join the “Union” soon. Even Serbia, itself never part of the former Soviet Union, is now expressing interest in joining the Union of Russia and Belarus.
For those that may argue that Mr. Putin can’t achieve much of that plan given his very limited remaining time in office, they are not thinking in his mental paradigm. His mindset is Soviet, not Russian. He’ll find a clever way to remain in office – for a long time to come. As Russia drifts back to old Soviet ways, his continued stay in power will become easier and easier. Here’s an article on but one projected Putin game plan to remain in power:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_brock_no_071217_russian_dictatorship.htm
See too a coming article on Russia and Commulism, specifically Russia’s growing threat to the newest members of NATO, the former Warsaw Pact nations.
Perhaps Venezuela’s recently announced plans for sweeping Constitution reform and abolishing Presidential term limits will provide the model Putin too seeks for himself. In fact, it would not be surprising if the Chavez “President for Life” Plan, even though failing on its first Referendum attempt, is really a collusionary testbed for a similar but grander Putin-like Plan to come.
See following Venezuela Referendum article:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_brock_no_071211_venezuelan_referendu.htm
On the broader China aspect, China is now looking at Russia in the same way the Soviet Union needed and exploited the eastern European nations. In effect, Russia is China’s Warsaw Pact equivalent, enhanced with superpower capability. Ironically, the one difference here being that unlike the Warsaw Pact countries, Russia is voluntarily succumbing to this role.
To gage just how fast the old Communist world is transforming to Commulism, one need only note the pace of change in some of these global names. Besides China and Russia, other noteworthy Commulism converts include Vietnam over the last decade or two and now even signs evident in the hardest of hardcore communist states, Cuba. With Fidel Castro’s health on the wane and his acting President (since July 2006) brother Raul Castro’s power on the rise, the winds of change are in the air as Raul favors the course pursued by China and Vietnam.
One key indicator of Russia’s embrace of Commulism is comparing Moscow 1989 to Moscow 2007. Any visitor then and now can visually see the striking transformation and benefits from this overt change in core ideology. Moscow has gone from a “drab to fab”, a bustling cosmopolitan city. Another indicator would be Russia’s dramatic trade situation change with the world, specifically the U.S. as a representative proxy example. As reported by U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Division, in 1992 the U.S. imported just $481million Russian goods. By 2006 however, this annual figure had ballooned to $19.8 billion, a trend which continues.
Note: These funds in part or in whole, along with growing trade surpluses from other countries, are the fuel helping Russia get its tentacles back into these former Soviet Union states. The threat being the potential to undermine these newbie NATO members’ commitment and revert back to Cold War alignment status. See later section (and coming article noted above) on the Baltic states and other recent new Eastern European NATO entrants.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
