04:49 PM — REGNUM

A region where no one can be trusted

As an analysis of recent events shows, the Middle East is a very delicate topic with a lot of pitfalls. In this, one can only agree with recognized experts in this field and with their assessment of the ongoing processes - "". What is the reason for the complexity of this region? First of all, it is due to history, especially the twentieth century, when the entire territory of the Middle East was someone's colonies.

After the collapse of the colonial empires, the territories of the colonies were divided according to God’s will, but with the same condition — potential currents of conflict were laid everywhere in the form of the presence of powerful ethnic and alien inclusions in the body of the new states: Kurds — in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Azerbaijanis - in Iran and so on. These wounds did not attract attention for quite a long time, while the bipolar geopolitical system existed. However, after the collapse of the USSR, a power vacuum formed in the Middle East, which, after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Americans decided to fill.

As part of this strategy, they put forward the idea of ​​a New Middle East, which we wrote about in one of the latest articles and which began to be successfully implemented, with the exception of Syria. But the plan is only a guide to action, and changes can and should be made to it. Syria, thanks to Russia, became the point that was deleted from the original plan. But this does not mean that the rest of the points of this plan are contrary to the interests of Russia - the countries of this region have always been wary of Russia and have always played their own parallel games with other centers of power.

Therefore, it is quite logical that Russia should be guided in relation to the countries of this region solely by its national-state interests, not succumbing to appeals to the "greatness of history", to "decency" and so on, since these countries never demonstrate similar positions, and only play in one logic - benefits exclusively for oneself, and if you can substitute the "big brother" or push his foreheads into another "big brother" - then it's generally wonderful.

So, based on these attitudes, let's see what is happening in the Middle East region and what it leads to. Let us consider the political aspects of the crisis around Qatar that has arisen so sharply.

(ss) Christian Senger

Qatar is the touchstone of the Saudis against Iran

First, the accusation of Qatar by Saudi Arabia in support of terrorism - absolutely correct, since Qatar was actively sponsoring the Muslim Brotherhood (an organization whose activities are banned in Russia), which, with the support of the Obama administration, specifically Hillary Clinton, blew up Egypt and Libya. However. After the change of shahs - Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani abdicated in June 2013 in favor of his son, Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani - Qatar began to curtail its support for terrorists. The reversal of Qatar's position is best evidenced by the fact that last year the country's sovereign wealth fund, together with Glencore, bought out a 19.5% stake in Rosneft.

Therefore, the accusation is at least belated. However, secondly, it looks all the more ambiguous because the KSA itself supports other, no less inveterate terrorists - ISIS and Al-Qaeda (organizations whose activities are banned in Russia). Accordingly, the ultimatum to Qatar because of its support for terrorists is just an excuse to hide the true reasons and purpose of the diplomatic attack, which, and not only in my opinion, is Iran - indeed the main geopolitical opponent of Saudi Arabia in the Middle East.

Accordingly, the KSA bought from Trump the opportunity to attack Qatar diplomatically, solely in order to gain access to the second step in this attack - to reach Iran. Moreover, it was Iran that Trump identified as the main threat to the United States in the coming years. The fact that the crisis around Qatar is nothing more than a diplomatic scam is evidenced, first of all, by the fact that already three days after the start of the crisis, Trump calls the Sheikh of Qatar and invites him to the United States to resolve the "unexpected" conflict, and the head of the State Department, Tillerson sends the right signal to all concerned parties, noting that the US is not interested in escalating the conflict.

Create - configured, but not for escalation. This is a classic layout. Especially in Qatar and the US military base is located, responsible for US troops in this region and Afghanistan, and a contract for the supply of 72 F-15QA multi-role fighters, which also includes the supply of related equipment and weapons, pilot training and aircraft maintenance, worth 21 .1 billion dollars has not been canceled.

The conflict around Qatar will not go into an armed stage also because it will mean a split of the Arabs into two fronts, which is not yet beneficial for the United States. In addition, the conflict in Qatar will lead to an armed clash between Saudi Arabia and Turkey and Pakistan. And if the KSA still cannot defeat the Houthis tribes in Yemen, then the thousands of military contingents of Turkey and Pakistan will not leave a stone unturned from the Wahhabist Saudi dynasty.

Therefore, the crisis around Qatar (as well as the DPRK) must be viewed as form style Trump is the creation of a high-profile informational occasion for raising the stakes in the game, and against this background, really serious tasks are already being solved. The main blow to the United States with the hands of the Saudis will be delivered elsewhere. And it has already been designated - this is Iraqi Kurdistan, behind which other parts of the divided Kurdish people should also declare themselves. The fact is that the president of the Kurdish autonomy in Iraq, Masoud Barzani, in Erbil (the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan) announced his decision to hold a referendum on independence on September 25 (read more about this in the material ""). Undoubtedly, as soon as this happens, the process of formation of Kurdistan will receive a new breath. Therefore, this is the strongest unifying factor for Iran, Syria and Turkey, whose territories are the main areas of residence of the Kurds.

Kurdishstruggle

Much is said about the fact that Barzani's statement was made at the suggestion of the Saudis. Including, and above all, the ties between the Saudis and the Iranian Kurds. In August-September 2016, for the first time there were reports that the Kurdish militias of Iran are actively supported by Saudi Arabia. In particular, the well-known think tank Stratfor claimed that Riyadh was financing Iranian Kurds through its consulate in Erbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, and there was an intensive exchange of information between the parties. KDP-Ying denies cooperation with Riyadh, but formal statements and real politics have little in common.

Tehran openly blames the Saudis. “Saudi Arabia is transferring funds to anti-government groups that cross the border. They tell them, "Go ahead and attack." They (the Kurds) ask where they can operate and the Saudis say, “We don't care. Iran should not feel safe,” said the former head of the IRGC, Mohsen Rezai.

“The pathos of the former chief “guard” is understandable, because, unfortunately for Iran, the matter is not limited to the Kurds. The Kurds are a kind of fuse that, when detonated, can blow up the mosaic and fragile structure called the "Islamic Republic" with its many diverse minorities - ethnic and religious. Having flared up, the fire of the Kurdish uprising is capable of spreading to Balochistan, Khuzestan, whose population is mainly Sunni Arabs, South Azerbaijan and Turkmen tribes in the north-east of the country, ”experts say.

This information Russian experts also confirm: “Of course, the Saudis support the Kurds, because this allows them to take away resources from Iran, make the life of the country less comfortable, especially since the Iranians themselves are doing the same on the territory of Saudi Arabia. So, not everything is calm in the Saudi province of Najran, bordering Yemen, populated mainly by Ismaili Shiites, and in the oil-rich Eastern Province, where the overwhelming majority of the population is Shiites. There is also a difficult situation in Bahrain, where the Saudis have to keep certain forces and even send reinforcements there. So it is in the interests of the KSA to support the Iranian Kurds. Moreover, two years ago there was information about a meeting of PJAK representatives with Saudi intelligence services, ”- .

Kurdishstruggle

Great War on the Threshold of the Middle East

Why is KSA taking this step? For a very simple reason - Iran is fighting against the KSA in full program in Yemen and Bahrain with proxy, using one of the methods of hybrid warfare. The Saudis decided to do the same, but closer to Iran, striking with the full consent of the Americans a blow to a very sensitive place in Tehran - the Kurds, because if Erbil holds a referendum, then Iraqi Kurdistan as part of Peters' New Middle East map plan will become a reality. This event will be a very powerful stimulus for the independence of other parts of the Kurdish people located in Syria, Iran and Turkey.

Undoubtedly, Ankara also sees this prospect, which reacted very quickly to the Qatari crisis - on June 7, the Turkish Parliament approved a law on expanding the Turkish military presence in Qatar, and already on June 8, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan signed the law.

Inflaming this conflict, the KSA most likely assumes the following. That, firstly, it is better to attack than to defend (according to the logic of a frog in a jug churning milk into butter), and perhaps this will save the kingdom from the fate that is in store for him with the Peters card (although this is unlikely, rather speed it up). That, secondly, it has the support of the United States behind its back (that is, the lesson of Saddam Hussein has not been learned, but then who is the doctor for them?). That, thirdly, the war must be waged on enemy territory. This, of course, is correct. But who said that Iran and Turkey, if a turmoil begins in historical Kurdistan, will fight only on their territories and will not think of hitting where it is most logical - at the initiators of this war?

Judging by the development of events that are going according to plan, a war in the Middle East in this format is becoming almost inevitable. What conclusions follow from this?

Firstly, such an option is undoubtedly better for Russia than if the Third World War began in Syria, in which the zone of our immediate vital interests is located, and where our Aerospace Forces are present. The start of at least a regional war in Syria would mean drawing Russia into this conflict as well. Therefore, it will be very good if we stay away from this mess for as long as possible and help it end in the status of one of the winners, coming at the final stage as peacekeepers.

Secondly, the United States, of course, will make good money on the supply of weapons to hot Arab guys. We need to do the same. In addition, countries that encourage terrorism, in the conditions of war on their territories, will not have the time to organize a terrorist underground and acts on the territory of other countries - they themselves would stay alive and not fall under the cleansing.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the war will make it possible to dispose of the mass of militants and thugs who for many years were created by the United States, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and others for the war with Russia and were ready to pour into the open spaces after the war in Syria. former USSR. However, Russian intervention prevented this scenario and directed it to another channel, in which others will now dig in.

Fourthly, it is necessary to show political wisdom and be as far as possible away from this conflict economically. Moreover, the longer it continues, the higher the prices for energy resources will be. The role of Russia as a reliable supplier of resources will significantly increase, including for Europe, which means extra points in favor of a favorable solution to the situation in Ukraine. And the options for implementing the New Silk Road will be significantly reduced in favor of those that pass through the territory of Russia, because a big war is likely to blow up the Middle East for years.

Valery Shiryaev

Deputy Director of Novaya, participant in the war in Afghanistan, Iranist

Hormuz is wonderful in clear weather. Any rocket will reach its middle

Ismail Kowsari, a spokesman for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said that Tehran will cut off all oil transportation through the Strait of Hormuz if the Americans block oil purchases from Iran. The Iranian armed forces have experience of military confrontation with the US military: during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88, the US fleet, under the pretext of protecting navigation, repeatedly entered the territorial waters of Iran, and the Air Force entered its airspace. During this confrontation, the United States mistakenly shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing 290 people, including 65 children.

From a purely military point of view, today, 30 years later, the situation has changed significantly. Behind last years, being in the conditions of an economic and political blockade, Iran, using Chinese licenses and technologies, has developed a whole family of quite modern small, medium and even operational-tactical anti-ship missiles of its own production with a range of 30 to 200 kilometers (at least). Their warhead is enough to sink any civilian ship or disable most of the warships of any fleet in the world. Some at the last stage (on approaching the ship) accelerate to five speeds of sound and it will be very difficult even for the American fleet to bring them down. This is very different from what it was in 1988.

Of course, the sophisticated reader will point out that the power american army since then, it has grown immeasurably that ship-based missile defense allows you to protect yourself from high-tech weapons. All this is so. But after all, the Iranians, according to their stated political goal, are going to threaten defenseless tankers, and not American missile defense destroyers at all. The Iranian military will operate on their own soil, where “native walls help”: they have geography itself on their side, to a large extent nullifying the advantages of sophisticated US weapons. Everyone who fought in Afghanistan knows the situation when one heavy machine gun on a mountain path holds a division.

The width of the Strait of Hormuz is 54 kilometers in its narrow part, which is less than the firing range of the guns of the Krasnaya Gorka fort, which played a decisive role in the defense of Leningrad.

But the navigable part of the strait is still narrower - 10 km. And in two sections of the fairway, in general, three kilometers. That is, all types of Iranian anti-ship missiles fly right through it.

It is enough to lay two supertankers (length from 230 m, height up to 50 m) on the bottom in the right place and a fuel collapse can occur in the world.

Oil platforms in the Persian Gulf. Photo: Reuters

Iranian anti-ship missiles (ASMs). Characteristics

RCC Ghader

The most modern anti-ship missiles in service with Iran. Gader is a generation of domestically licensed versions of China's C-802 Noor missile

Launch range: up to 160 km
Weight: 715 kg

RCC Nasr ("Victory")

"Guerrilla" (very light) missile, the Iranian version of the Chinese C-704 anti-ship missiles, designed to attack small mobile targets

Launch range: up to 35 km
Weight: 300 kg

PCBR Khalij Fars ("Persian Gulf")

Supersonic anti-ship ballistic missile on solid fuel.

Launch range: up to 300 km
Weight: 3500 kg

Video of the launch of a ballistic anti-ship missile of the Iranian army and hitting a target on the water

RCC Zafar ("Success")

Launch range: short range
Weight: light class, installed on small speed boats

RCC Saeque ("Thunderbolt")

Launch range: up to 300 km
Weight: average

RCC Tondar ("Thunder")

Turbojet supersonic ballistic anti-ship missiles

RCC Qader ("capable")

Launch range: up to 200 km
Weight: average

These missiles are mass produced. They are packaged in shipping containers camouflaged on trucks from various commercial companies. Such launchers are very difficult to distinguish from ordinary long-range trucks. They are able to quickly and imperceptibly move in traffic along coastal roads, including country roads. And the launch zone is the entire northern coast of the Persian Gulf. This can be called guerrilla anti-ship defense.

During the Iran-Iraq war, Fedayeen youths wrapped in white clothes of the dead shouting “Allah Akbar, Khomeini Rahbar!” with their bodies they made passages in the minefields of Saddam Hussein's army. The traditions of sacrifice, especially if you start a war with the United States, will revive quickly, they only sleep in blood. There is no doubt that Iran's anti-ship missile launchers will be based in densely populated city centers. Yes, and the launches themselves can be expected from settlements.

Patch with Iranian spiritual leader Ayatollah Khamenei on military uniform. Photo: Reuters

This is almost impossible to do without a full-scale Desert Storm-type operation. And you have to bomb the city.

The importance of oil supplies from the Persian Gulf for the world economy is enormous. It is enough for a Western expert to simply write the Gulf and readers will immediately understand what kind of bay they are talking about. I outlined the opinion of the military above, but their calculations often remain only on paper, fortunately. Because politicians have other considerations.

Alexey Malashenko

supervisor scientific research Institute "Dialogue of Civilizations"

- Whether Iran is bluffing or not, speaking about the blockade of oil exports from the Gulf, it is very difficult to say. Iranians are unpredictable people, and in addition to politicians, they also have the Guard Corps and radical Islamists, for nothing that they are Shiites. These are very risky guys, and the world knows that the Iranians have already taken risks once, went into direct confrontation with the United States and even seized their embassy. 100% I do not rule out a collision.

What can the Americans do in response? Hit on Iran? This is a big risk, with a lot of trouble, even for the current determined president. And the Iranians are playing on it. The most unexpected options and even a limited military conflict are possible. The incident, as the politicians have said before.

This does not mean that there will be a whole war. But the Americans must somehow respond, show that they are not afraid of any Iran, but at the same time behave in a balanced way. If the impulsive Trump is brought down, then some kind of armed contact is possible. It will be very unfortunate.

A significant circumstance is that all this is actually happening on the border of Saudi Arabia. How will she behave, how will she react? After all, the monarchy is under Iranian gunpoint, and there will be an indirect threat to the Saudis. They will not remain silent and, of course, will stand in solidarity with the Americans. How the conflict will develop in this part, what statements and steps will be made, it is still difficult to say. But the situation will not return to the current level of tension.

Whatever relations Russia has with Iran, and they are by no means cloudless, the same Trump will raise the question before Putin - who, in fact, is Russia cooperating with?

With an absolutely irresponsible state, which is ready for such wild steps and which prepared for this in advance. Soon we will hear a lot of such statements.

Paradoxical as it may seem, Iran is transforming in a peculiar way Soviet experience. After all, our rockets were busy railway disguised as civilian wagons. And during the Anadyr operation to send our troops to Cuba during the Caribbean crisis, weapons were disguised as civilian cargo, and the military changed into checkered shirts and did not leave the holds.

Such a sharp aggravation of the ricochet, of course, hits Syria hard. Triangle - Tehran - Ankara - Moscow, and so already something unsteady, semi-mystical. And the conflict that has begun in the Gulf will be its actual end. Politicians will certainly say: look, some adventurers support Bashar al-Assad.

Our propaganda, I think, will not stop. But all the other actors involved in the conflict need to pause, come to their senses, look around and only then make some decisions and express their position. The Iranians put both Americans and Europeans in a very difficult position.

Military parade in Iran. Photo: Reuters

After all, Europeans treat Iran quite favorably. Of the six parties that signed an agreement with Tehran on its nuclear program, five still remain, including Russia. But, as always, Iran, which has announced, albeit not at the highest level, a possible blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, behaves unexpectedly. And pardon the non-parliamentary expression, everyone will now scratch their heads.

I personally do not believe that this statement was initiated by Rouhani and his team. This proves that

fundamentalists are gaining strength in Iran, whatever you want to call them. And this is very sad.

Look at the recent history of Iran, where a radical conservative, then a moderate, then Khatami, then Ahmadinejad, then Rouhani is in power. Who do you think will win this internal struggle in an armed conflict, even a limited one?

real military operation I do not foresee the United States of the "Desert Storm" type with the landing of troops. This will not happen with a probability of 90%, even 95%. But no one foresaw the Islamic Revolution in Iran either. No one foresaw the behavior of Ahmadinejad.

In Iran, people are very emotional. If Iranians say "A", they should definitely say "B". They don't stop halfway. What would such a need be? I fully admit that after some time a critical situation will arise with some particular ship, for example.

The US military power is enormous. But I think they are not ready to bomb cities. No matter how you treat Iran, it's not an Islamic state, it's something else. Despite all the anti-Iranian rhetoric of the US and the Shia-Sunni contradictions in the region, where many would be happy to see such bombings, they can cause an extremely negative reaction in the Middle East, in the world, and in the US itself. I really would not like to see this, but if it comes to bombing, even a terrorist response to the Americans is possible. And the situation will get even worse.

(by phone)

Russia has achieved military-diplomatic success in Syria. She, using limited military activity and multi-vector diplomacy, as well as the weaknesses of a chaotic American foreign policy is effectively bringing stability back to a region that has been torn apart by conflict since the 2011 Arab Spring.

A burning Middle East is a deadly threat to the Muslim south Russian Federation. The introduction of fundamentalists there threatens Russia with destabilization. Zbigniew Brzezinski adhered to such a strategy, drawing the USSR into the war in Afghanistan, now the Americans want to achieve the same goals by exporting fundamentalists from the Gulf countries. However, if Europe, paralyzed by American pressure, is not even able to defend its interests in Iran or Turkey, limiting itself to empty statements and ineffective actions, then Russia skillfully uses its modest capabilities. Prior to Putin's meeting with Erdogan, the Russian President visited Saudi Arabia. It was more of an attempt to break the ice than a stage in the development of cooperation.

Saudi interests diverge from those of Moscow in Syria and Iran, however, with oil the situation looks completely different. The strength of OPEC is fading before our eyes, but the OPEC plus format is successfully functioning: an alliance with Russia that has been created over the past four years. Oil prices have stabilized, and speculators failed to rock the market even after Yemeni drone strikes on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia. This interaction turned out to be very profitable: the Russians estimate that they managed to receive an additional 110 billion dollars in three years. The Russian-Saudi talks are already replacing meetings in Vienna, small producers have lost their importance and are asking a cynical question: “why do we need OPEC meetings at all”?

Both sides have not only oil, but also money. It is they who feed the financial system of the West, placing the proceeds from the sale of hydrocarbons in the global financial markets. What they want is not loans, but an alternative to the current model in which they are powerless in the face of American demands. Bilateral contacts, mutual direct investment, trade without the use of the dollar - such mechanisms can protect against the greed and wrath of the overseas hegemon.

Context

Advance: Russia has become a new powerful force in the Middle East

Advance 05.11.2019

Foreign Affairs: Russia's return to the Middle East is not an anomaly

Foreign Affairs 01.11.2019

Phoenix: the meeting between Putin and the Saudi king took place at the right time

Phoenix 10/17/2019

However, breaking free of this pattern takes time and effort. The agreements being signed are being implemented only partially (the agreement signed two years ago provided for investments in the amount of $10 billion, but so far only $2.5 billion has been disbursed). New agreements for another 2 billion are also only preliminary agreements, which in the end may not be implemented.

In addition, trade looks modest: the volume of trade between Saudi Arabia and Russia is about a billion dollars, while with the United States - 100 billion. At the same time, Washington does not sleep and demands that Riyadh buy weapons, technology, and food. It will not be easy for China, let alone Russia, to enter the Saudi market, including taking a place in an attractive sector nuclear power, although the Russians are world leaders in investment and are present in the region: they have built a power unit in Iran, are finishing construction in Turkey and are starting work in Egypt. Saudi Arabia dreams of nuclear weapons, so other factors become much more important here. As one of the members of the Saudi royal family(there are a huge number of them): "We do not trade, we are looking for friends."

And even more so, there can be no talk of any “strategic cooperation” with Russia: America will not allow it, and it has the appropriate tools (much more effective than those that it used in the case of Turkey). In this context, Putin's remarks that "S-400s would protect the refineries" can, at most, give the Saudis an adrenaline rush. They know that for Washington to put up with the existence of their public education with medieval customs, you have to pay. Hundreds of billions of dollars spent on buying American weapons protect them even from having to answer for the brutal murder of a journalist. Americans are happy with any petrodollars that fall into their treasury. If only there was a lot of money, and if only no one thought about treason!

The materials of InoSMI contain only assessments of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the editors of InoSMI.

In response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's statement earlier on Friday that "the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) is ready for any threat from Iran, Iran is responding with a statement.

Second Deputy Commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Hossein Salami, is threatening to strike Israel in plain text:

“Do not rely on your air bases for they are within the range of fire. Our fingers are on the red button and the rockets are ready to launch. When the enemy decides to act against us, we will press the button and launch rockets.”

Since The Jerusalem Post is an Israeli publication, we rightly assumed that the Israelis shortened the fiery speech of Mr. Hossein Salami a little, so we turned to an official Iranian source:

“We are well aware that you are exceptionally vulnerable! You have no operational depth to maneuver, no “backyard”. Your entire country is the size of our Beit al-Moghaddas operation. You have no way out to escape and you live in the mouth of the dragon. You will not be able to resist us and your entire defense will collapse like dominoes when your soldiers and citizens start to run away. You have no choice but to retreat straight into the sea, trying to swim across it.

Operation Beit ul-Moqaddas is one of the most famous operations of the Iran-Iraq war, the goal of which was the liberation by Iran of the key city of Khorramshahr in southwestern Iran. The operation began on April 24 (1982), when Iranian troops in the amount of about 70,000 soldiers went on the offensive along the entire front. They reached the outskirts of Khorramshahr in less than a week, by April 30, having fought a territory much larger than the size of Israel in one direction or another:

The modern Israel Defense Forces is, of course, not the Iraqi army of the 1982 model, but today Iran is completely different. Therefore, without the use of tactical nuclear weapons by Israel, which Israel most likely has, Iran's offensive cannot be stopped. However, Iran has chemical weapons, probably something like a “dirty atomic bomb”.

It is possible and most likely that Iranian aircraft of the Israeli Air Force will be destroyed, however, no missile defense system can shoot down Iranian missiles filled with chemical warfare agents, and in response to nuclear strikes either from Israel, or from the United States and allies, Iran WMD will definitely apply, which General Salami does not say very ambiguously.

As he explained on his Twitter, helping Israel from the United States would be “like an ambulance sent to an already dead person and all it can do is take him to a cemetery.”

The use of WMD is a very serious and most extreme measure for any state, so if Iran as a state is threatened with destruction by the combined forces of NATO, it will definitely use WMD. His missiles will not reach the United States, but it will definitely be finished with Israel, there will be no one to escape even in the sea. The Israeli military, despite the rhetorical bravado, is well aware of this moment. Nevertheless, Israel's political leadership is stubbornly pushing the country towards collective suicide.

At the same time in Jordan, for the so-called “joint exercises” Eager Lion, for some reason, about 3,600 US military personnel have already been assembled, including approximately 1,800 marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Group,

and USS Harry Truman, escorted by 7 ships, has already entered the Mediterranean.

Around April 22, it will be in the eastern Mediterranean, as we reported earlier. In addition to the missile cruiser, nuclear submarines and destroyers that came from USS Harry Truman, the US Sixth Fleet is already in the Mediterranean Sea, which was reinforced on the eve of attacks on Syria by several nuclear submarines and allied ships.

However, the most important news comes not from Gibraltar, but from the USA.

On the eve of the US strikes on Syria, all military analysts almost unanimously said that the atoll of Diego Garcia, where the US has a colossal outpost base in the Indian Ocean, will be a key element for an attack on Syria or, if another command comes to the Pentangon, on Iran .

From here, as soon as it is noticed that a shock fist has begun to gather there, that is, bombers (especially the Northrop B-2 Spirit) will start to overtake Diego Garcia - it means that soon there will be a war in the Middle East.

However, neither we nor anyone else from the general staffs does not have satellite images of the atoll, that is, we cannot say: what is happening there and whether additional bombers are being transferred there? However, we can trace the transfer of these aircraft as they were lifted from their bases in the US:

America is a very large country with a huge army and a very strong air force. Naturally, bombers sometimes fly over the USA. But there are only 20 Northrop B-2 Spirits in the United States, of which some are experimental prototypes, some are being repaired and modified at factories, some are in full combat readiness with nuclear missiles under their belly, some are distributed to military bases around the world. Therefore, to see at least one such aircraft in the sky for aircraft lovers in the United States is a great rarity and joy. And here is not one, not two, but 10 pieces! Half of everything the US has!

It doesn't look like any teaching. This is the transfer of Northrop B-2 Spirit from one place to another. And, we believe, they flew to some new military base. It is very possible that their final destination will be the Diego Garcia airbase. In this case, we can confidently think that there will soon be a BIG WAR in the Middle East. Whether it will be a US strike on Iran or a new NATO strike on Syria, we do not know. However, for now, it looks like the clouds are gathering over Iran.

We are following developments.

The article was published in the journal "Modern Islam" (May-June 2012, pp. 24-28)

The entry of the world economy in 2008 into the downward wave of the sixth Kondratiev cycle (VI K-cycle) significantly accelerated all economic and political processes, aggravating them to the limit. In the past, the world community passed a similar historical phase of development between the two World Wars, when the British systemic cycle of capital accumulation was replaced by the American one, and Great Britain was replaced by a new leader of the world economic development- The United States, which formed a unipolar world order at the end of its cycle of accumulation under the conditions of the process of globalization. During the current phase historical development there will be a new change in the systemic cycle of accumulation, and the American cycle will be replaced by the Asian one, and China will replace the United States as the leader of world economic development.

In the process of transition to the Asian system cycle of accumulation, globalization is being replaced by the process of "glocalization" (in the terminology S.Yu.Glazeva) or regionalization of the world economy. And the previously unified global economy with one center of power - the United States, and one reserve currency - the US dollar, will break up into several regional unions with a consumer market of at least 400-500 million people, with their own regional leaders and regional reserve currencies. Already now there is an intensive formation of these regional unions. The formation of the European Union based on the euro is being completed, NAFTA is being created: the USA, Canada and Mexico (most likely the UK will join it). China has already formed a free trade area based on the yuan with the ASEAN countries (whose economies are dominated by huaqiao people from China). An alliance of countries is formed Latin America and the Eurasian Union (however, it has a clearly insufficient volume of the consumer market, even taking into account all the CIS countries). They will be followed by India, Islamic and African countries, and by 2020 the world community will represent several powerful regional alliances capable of resisting the omnipotence of Western TNCs.

Objective preconditions for war in the Middle East.

As the leader of the Western world, the United States is trying in every possible way to prevent the transition to a new systemic cycle of accumulation, because. as a result, they will have to significantly reduce the high level consumption that was achieved in the West during the American cycle. After all, this level is ensured due to the fact that the West is obviously living beyond its means - at the expense of "accumulation through withdrawal", i.e. robbing the population of other countries with the help of non-equivalent trade, when developing countries receive unsecured "wrappers" - euros and dollars for real goods. The US and Europe actually live in debt, without accumulating funds for further development, they live in the present, eating away the future of their descendants. While Asian countries, and, first of all, China, spend up to 40% of their income on savings, because they think about their future development, and not just about the growth of momentary consumption. Concern about one's future development is the main factor in the inevitability of the transition to the Asian cycle of accumulation.

And American consumption standards will never become a role model for Asian countries, because. these are "Samoyed" standards that will inevitably lead to the rapid depletion of the resources of our planet, and they simply have no future. And this is also one of the most important factors why the Asian cycle of accumulation, which has fallen into the civilizational dead end of consumerism, is replacing the American cycle of accumulation. That is why the centers of consumption of the future world order are rapidly moving from Western countries to Asian and other developing countries. By 2020, the number of people who can classify themselves as "middle class" will grow in the world by 2.7 billion people: 98% of this increase will come from developing countries, according to the Goldman Sachs report on consumption in emerging economies. Consumption growth in nine years will increase by 10 trillion dollars, by 2020 this figure in developing countries will reach 13 trillion dollars and will amount to 43% of the total world level.

Analysts at Goldman Sachs believe that consumption will grow by 10% every year. And the data of structural changes by 2020 in the composition of the "middle class" (with an income of over $ 6,000 per year) are very indicative: its total number worldwide will be 3.85 billion people, of which the share of the G-7 countries will decrease to 21%, while the share of the BRICS countries will rise to 44%. And by 2030" middle class"the world will be 5.2 billion people, of which more than half (52%) will be in the BRICS, and the share of the G-7 countries will fall to 15%. Thus, according to Goldman Sachs, world consumption will move from developed countries to developing ones. But the current unipolar world order with the leading role of the United States and other developed countries is an objective brake on further world development.

In the same way, the outdated Jamaican world financial system based on the US dollar, which Western countries do not want to change, is a brake. it ensures the free flow of capital from developing to developed countries. In the process of the new global crisis beginning this year, it is the developing countries that should seize the initiative, and first of all the BRICS countries, which unite five of the eight future potential leaders of regional unions. And since the US and the EU are the leaders of the American cycle of accumulation, and there is no clear leader among the Islamic countries, it is the BRICS countries that will have to formulate the political and economic agenda for a new stage of world development for the next 30-40 years. And first of all, they will face two most important tasks:

1. Develop and form a new global financial system, since the current Jamaican financial system, based on the US dollar and free market conversion of all currencies, has proved its complete failure during the crisis, and will collapse in the next 2-3 years.

2. To oppose in every possible way the attempts of the US and the West in general to create a situation of "global chaos" in the Middle East and Central Asia, turning it into a new world war.

The Delhi BRICS summit has already begun to tackle the first task in the right direction by signing an agreement on trade between the BRICS member countries in national currencies and on the creation of a single Development Bank. The second crisis of the big K-cycle downward wave starting this year will inevitably accelerate this process. But it will be much more difficult to resist US attempts to unleash a new world war, because. The "Big War" is vital for the US. Without it, the US government will not be able not only to bring the US economy out of depression, but, most importantly, to force the world community by buying US Treasury bills, thus paying the US bad public debt, which this year could reach a fantastic figure of 17 trillion dollars.

Even such a "dove" as a laureate Nobel Prize Paul Krugman believes that money should now be spent on the same scale as during the last world war. "What we need now," he argues, "is the economic equivalent of war. In fact, the Great Depression was brought to naught by a program of massive public spending, better known as 'World War II.' He stated that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, though costly, too little to stimulate the economy.Recently, Paul Krugman called for a space invasion trick to play: "If we suddenly find that aliens are planning an attack, and we need to organize defense to counter the threat from space, then deficits with debts will fade into the background, and the recession will end within a year and a half. And then we will say: oh, we made a mistake, there are no aliens. "By the way, R. Reagan played such a trick in the 1980s, and it was called the SDI program or" star wars". It was she who contributed to overcoming the downward wave of the V K-cycle.

Who benefits from the Great War in the Middle East?

But wouldn't it be easier for American "hawks" not to "play a trick" with an alien attack, but to kindle a fire of war in such a restless and torn by numerous contradictions region of the world as the Middle East and Central Asia. Moreover, it is located far from the United States itself, but close to the borders of the three main BRICS countries: China, Russia and India. A war close to their borders will be a factor that will hinder their economic development, while for the US, the supply of arms to all warring parties will stimulate the American economy. This is exactly what the Americans did in the two World Wars. Neither Europeans, nor Americans, nor other Western countries want to fight themselves, and they have already forgotten how, despite their very high technological level. The majority of Islamic peoples "do not feed with bread", but let them fight.

As for war, this is really the most profitable investment of capital in terms of its growth, providing endless demand: the plane will be shot down, the aircraft carrier will be sunk, the bridge will be bombed, and everything will have to be done AGAIN. But there is a very important nuance here - every war leads to a sharp increase in public debt, because the state is both the customer and the consumer here, because. it itself orders and itself consumes military products. Both expanded reproduction and capital growth are 100% ensured here, but a sharp increase in public debt is also ensured. So it was during the First World War, when the United Kingdom, which organized it, turned from a net creditor into a net debtor, and during the Second World War, when the US national debt skyrocketed, and during the Vietnam War, and during the Star Wars period. Wars are always a multiple growth of public debts.

But in all cases, before the start of the promotion of the military debt pyramid, the US government debt was practically absent, and now it is simply prohibitive, and increasing it at a military pace is definitely destroying the current American financial pyramid based on the US dollar, and the American economy, which has actually lost its industry . After all, Great Britain never managed to get out of the financial crisis after the First World War. The same fate awaits the United States if they organize a war in the Middle East. A characteristic fact is that during the Libyan events, after a month of bombing Libya, the Europeans ran out of ammunition, and increasing their production meant additional spending on state budgets, which the EU countries have recently reduced as much as possible due to the prohibitive debt burden. As a result, the Europeans, who carried out the main "bombing" in Libya, turned to the United States for help, and former US Secretary of Defense R. Gates was indignant that the Europeans were trying to shift their problems onto America. The same problem will arise in the future: where to get the money for military spending, when all Western countries are in a debt trap and are pursuing a policy of fiscal austerity. For them, it's a dead end.

But if you set some Islamic countries against others, then you can make money on the supply of weapons to all the warring parties, especially since the contradictions in this region of the world are so aggravated and confusing that it is difficult to determine possible specific warring parties. The Arabs are against the Persians and Israel, but the Persians are potential allies of the Arabs against Israel, and the Shiites (mostly Persians) are strongly against the Sunnis (Arabs). The largest and most powerful economic and political player in the region, Turkey is set against Syria and Iran on the one hand, against Israel on the other, and against Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf monarchies that oppose Iran on the third. At the same time, Turkey is fighting against the Kurds, who are the basis of the new "democratic" Iraq, and are fighting for the creation of their own independent Kurdish state, while Iraq itself is moving closer and closer to Iran.

A special role in this region is played by the Palestinians, who, together with the Lebanese Hezbollah, are a symbol of the struggle of Islamic countries against Israel, supported by the United States in every possible way, while the Palestinians and Hezbollah are supported by Iran. And what position Egypt will take after the Islamists take power there is a big question. On the other hand, al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri called for armed struggle in Syria, and al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations are already coming from all over the world to Syria and want to turn Syria into a battlefield. In addition, at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. Trotskyism has had and continues to have a significant influence on part of the American ruling and intellectual strata. He strengthened their focus on violent action on a global scale, not just for the left, as with Trotsky, but for the right. And it is no coincidence that there are so many former Trotskyists among American neocons: there is even a certain evil irony of history in the fact that the main assistant to President Barack Obama is Trotsky's great-grandson Axelrod.

Therefore, it is not surprising that Hillary Clinton's deputy at the State Department, Robert Blake, a year ago, speaking at the John Baker III Institute for Public Policy at the University of Houston, Texas, where the elite of American energy companies were present, unveiled the US strategy in the Central Asia region, calling this region vital to the US. The main idea of ​​his report was that the border with China, Russia, Iran and Afghanistan does not just pass here, but the future of Eurasia is determined. And it must be brought under American control in order to prevent unwanted cooperation between countries of a strategically important region. Interaction here should be carried out only with the mediation of Washington, and only to the extent that it will meet the interests of the United States.

Formation of future models of economic development.

Between the two World Wars, in the previous phase of the "Great Shocks" (transition from the British cycle of capital accumulation to the American one), three main development models were formed in the world economy:

The militaristic totalitarian pseudo-market model, which was developed in Nazi Germany, imperial Japan, Italy, Spain and other countries.

The Keynesian market model of stimulating consumer demand with the help of the state, which was developed in the United States, and after the Second World War in other developed countries of the West, which created "welfare" states everywhere.

The totalitarian non-market model of directive planning that existed in the USSR and other countries of the socialist bloc.

The first model, as a result of the Second World War, crashed, because. it was the Samoyedic model of economic development, which was fueled by war, in which demand and consumption were carried out by the destruction of everything produced in the crucible of real military battles, and which could not exist without war. The second one lasted until the new downward wave of the fifth K-cycle, which began in the 1970s, and then transformed into a neoliberal model of economic development due to the high adaptability and flexibility of the market economy. The neoliberal model was able to form during the downward wave V of the K-cycle V a technological mode (TS) based on microprocessor technology, personal computers, the Internet and mobile communications. And the 5th TR, in turn, allowed the United States and other Western countries to bring their economies from the downward to the upward phase of the K-cycle, thus ensuring the survival of the entire Western market model of economic development.

The non-market Soviet model of directive planning lasted until the end of the 1980s, when the Western economy, having formed the 5th Soviet system due to the extreme inflexibility of its model of directive planning, it could not in the 1980s. form V TU and lost the economic competition to the West. Therefore, the collapse of the socialist camp and its leader, the USSR, was actually due to its technological backwardness. Interesting fact: the previous IV TU, based on the internal combustion engine and conveyor production, began to form during the First World War, and the peak of its formation took place in the 1920s and 30s. And the Soviet industrialization of the first five-year plans formed the IV TU in the USSR simultaneously with the most advanced countries of the West. That is why the USSR was able to win the Great Patriotic war, create nuclear weapons and be the first to send a man into space. And in the 1970s. due to high oil prices, the USSR “overslept” the formation of the V TU, losing the economic competition to world capitalism.

At present, the world has entered the downward wave of the VI K-cycle and is again going through the same historical period that was between the two World Wars, only at a new, higher round of historical development. And we are again present at the birth of three main models of future economic development:

This is the neo-liberal model of the American neocons.

The Chinese model of a flexible and pragmatic combination of plan and market, with strict state control and market regulation.

The Islamic model of a traditional society with the decisive influence of the religious factor, embodied in a theocratic state.

At the heart of the confrontation between these three models of economic development is an essential difference in attitudes towards the social structure. On the one hand, under the dominance of a traditional, primarily Asian society, which is strong in its traditional ties of communal, caste, religious and other collective forms of self-organization, state and public structures are being formed with traditions rooted in centuries and behaving like a collective social individual. . On the other hand, an atomized and selfish Anglo-Saxon society mixed with Protestantism, which is based on an individual who is not connected by any traditional framework with other individuals like him. The first ones are demos, i.e. a people that can be controlled only through the structures of its internal self-organization. The second is ohlos, i.e. a crowd that can be manipulated very easily.

At the end of each of the last three centuries there has been an increase in finance capital, and its powerful financial expansion has begun. In the process of expansion of financial capital, each time there was a sharp increase in information flows in the conditions of Western atomized society and the mass consciousness of atomized-aggregated human material. The mass individual is easily manipulated, and the appearance of the masses on the stage of history and the formation of an unstructured mass consciousness provided financial capital with enormous opportunities for manipulating the mass consciousness. Who pays, he orders the music.

Recently, the manipulation of public consciousness and the mass brainwashing of public consciousness has reached simply universal proportions. Some events are being promoted by transnational media, while others are simply ignored or turned inside out, when black is presented as white and white as black. Let us recall, for example, the situation around Georgia's attack on North Ossetia, when the Western media showed Georgian "Grads" and said that it was Russian troops that were shelling defenseless Georgia. The same thing happened around the events in Libya, Syria, etc. Or when stories about opposition actions in Russia were accompanied by television pictures of Greek pogroms. The next stage of mass brainwashing will be the mass chipization of people, when ordinary citizens, under some plausible pretext, will be "sewn in" with chips, with the help of which full control of their consciousness will become possible.

The Chinese model of a flexible and pragmatic combination of market and plan, perhaps, has the greatest viability and survival in the process of further historical development. More than 80 years ago, the prominent Russian economist Nikolai Kondratyev argued that without planning, stable and crisis-free development is simply impossible. But the plan must be confirmed by the market, and the market elements must be strictly limited and regulated by the state in order to avoid the severe and destructive consequences of economic crises, which are generated, first of all, by the lack of control and greed of financial capital. It is this principle that is embedded in the Chinese model of economic development.

Another model of economic development is the Islamic model, which is based on a rigidly structured organization of society, built on the basis of Islamic religious dogmas. In terms of economic development, "Islamic banking" plays a particularly important role in this model, which is the main alternative to Jewish usurious capital. The Chinese model uses the old Western banking system, founded by medieval Jewish capital, only tries to control it more or less tightly.

In "Islamic banking" there is no place for (inherently usurious) bank interest, and banks act as equal partners real business, being a worthy alternative to the modern Western banking system. And that is why his successes and achievements are carefully hushed up, and it is against him, and not against Islam as a religion, that the main blow of Western financial capital is directed. The current crisis of the downward wave of the VI K-cycle will convincingly show more high efficiency and the resilience of "Islamic banking" against the Anglo-Saxon system of old Jewish financial capital centered on the private US Federal Reserve and other "independent" Central Banks in the face of the global crisis.

<>And here it is of great importance which side Russia will take, which 100 years ago already made a strategic mistake by taking the side of the Entente led by the British Empire. This error resulted in: First World War, revolutions of 1917, collapse Russian Empire And Civil War. One wrong strategic decision, and a sea of ​​blood and suffering for millions of people - that's the price for Russia's wrongly chosen allies by Nicholas II. In addition, he himself paid a very high price for this mistake - his life and his entire family.

And now the Russian leadership is facing exactly the same dilemma: to support the receding, but still very powerful, now dominant center of world economic development in the face of the Anglo-Saxons and Israel, or the rapidly developing new centers of the world economy, behind which the future lies. BRICS, SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union are all moving in the right direction. But Russia needs to make a definitive decision as soon as possible, and for example, within the framework of the SCO, it is necessary to include the current observers in the SCO as full members: Afghanistan, India, Iran, Mongolia, Pakistan, and possibly Syria. And thus, once and for all, to discourage Western lovers of "playing war games" desire to unleash a Great War in an extremely explosive region of the world - in the Middle East and Central Asia. By this act, China and Russia would show the West that this is not their sphere of influence, and Western countries are not allowed to enter here. Thanks to such a strong political move the unleashing of a "Great War" in this region of the world could have been prevented. But so far, the decisive, firm and sober voice of Russia is not very audible.