With America’s growing conflict with China and since the election of Bill Clinton to the presidency in 1992, America, for over 32 years, has consistently voted in presidents that are less interested in global affairs and the global economic system the United States created to win the Cold War from 1945 to 1989.
With the end of the Russian threat, the United States has become less interested and is uncoupling its global supply chain and its connections to other international and national economies and bringing back manufacturing jobs in the US.
The USA is doing this for two reasons. The first reason is that the public within the United States is no longer interested in being the global guarantee of global prosperity, being the global policeman and interfering in regional and global conflicts.
The second reason is the generation that fought during World War II from 1939 to 1945 or from 1941 to 1945. For US readers, primarily dead or retired in the Boomer generation born between 1946 and 1964 grew up during the most peaceful time in human history.
In practical terms, this means that generations that lived before American security and American prosperity in the global system are no longer around and within collective living memory support international and governmental organisations such as the European Union and the International Monetary Fund.
United Kingdom’s former Prime Minister John Major, who was PM from 1990 to 1997, lost the support of the UK Conservative Party.
He suffered internal divisions throughout his tenure as prime minister after 1992 due to the generation that supported European integration retiring.
In the United Kingdom, the early 1990s saw a sea change like the United States, with the election of Bill Clinton as a move away from internationalism to internal nationalism.
Oil Refinery
US Manufacturing and Processing
The United States is bringing manufacturing home; however, the US still is to build out its processing capabilities in three significant areas: industrial materials, agriculture and oil.
America will need to develop processing capabilities partnerships for materials like aluminium, copper, lithium and iron ore to support the industrialisation and buildout of industry manufacturing when homegrown United States cities like Detroit could experience a revival.
On the positive no US significant oil refineries, but there are mismatches due to different types of crude oil produced domestically within the US and refineries abroad in processing capabilities.
US refineries can be used to reduce dependency on outsourcing processing abroad.
A greater focus on processing domestic crude oil would further reduce American imports and output in the global economic environment from which America is decoupling.
Whether political, ideological, or environmental stance, developing these processing capabilities will allow the US to prop up various industries and avoid catastrophe.
For the reader unaware of the Ukraine war, it has been taking place since 2014 until the present day. This is a conflict being waged by the Russian Federation led by Vladimir Putin against the free peoples of Ukraine.
The war is being waged for many reasons, such as the expansion of NATO since the end of the Cold War in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union/USSR in 1990.
There are many diverse reasons for this conflict, ranging from geopolitical to national security and from the perspective that this war for Russia may be its last war due to only having 7 million able-bodied men to fight modern industrial warfare.
Fighting a modern war requires not only able-bodied men but also the necessary technological and industrial development that makes modern warfare possible. It is modern warfare, and the mass style Movements of World War II shall be discussed in this article as to why Tanks are not featured heavily in this conflict.
In the popular imagination when it comes to tank warfare, the popular imagination goes back to the blitzkrieg tactics of the Second World War, where the Germans outmanoeuvred the British and French armies winning the battle of France in 1940 and the conquest and subjugation of Poland in 1939.
The tank was developed during World War I from 1914 to 1918 or from 1914 to the Treaty of Versailles signed in 1919. Historically, the war is remembered from 1914 to 1918, but the blockades of Gemernone ports continued until 1919 due to fear that the war may continue.
To understand the Ukraine War and the lack of tank warfare, it is first necessary to look back at tank development and why that technology was created to overcome the fixed and entrenched positions of trench warfare during World War II, which continues to apply to modern fixed defences in the contemporary 21st-century.
For tanks to be effective in combat, they need the support of infantry and a robust supply chain that sends ammunition and fuel to the front lines, which the Russians did not have during their invasion in 2022.
Since the start of the invasion of Ukraine, the Russians have been pushed out of northern Ukraine and are focused on fighting in the defensive frontlines around Donetsk, Lyschanks, Izium and Bakhmut.
Eastern Ukraine and the region are perfect for tank battles due to their flat terrain, and some of the biggest battles in tank mechanised warfarin happened during World War II on the ground, similar to the combat zones in Ukraine.
The reasons why the Russians were unsuccessful can be seen during World War II and the German and Soviet invasions of Poland. During the invasion of Poland in 1939, the Germans had the advantage of the best technologically some of the most advanced tanks on the planet, combined with air superiority and the element of surprise.
In contrast, the Russian Federation does not have this advantage because United States intelligence agencies were able to monitor the Russian military’s movements, ensuring that the Ukrainians would not be surprised by a Russian advance.
In 1940 the Germans invaded Holland and Belgium to bypass the Maginot Line fortification, which stretched along the shared French and German border of the Rhineland.
The Germans chose to bypass the defences because, despite the superior mobility of modern mechanised armies, they still could not destroy entrenched positions that had been heavily fortified.
To be successful on the battlefield, the ability for tanks to manoeuvre and not enter killing fields where fixed artillery positions, minefields and other defences can destroy them.
Tanks work best with infantry support and air superiority so that the Air Force can remove obstacles for tank divisions. Ultimately tanks work best with the power of manoeuvre.
The British expeditionary forces or the French military did not heavily outnumber the Germans in 1940, but the Germans’ ability to use speed won them the battle for France.
In 1941 Nazi Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, named after the mediaeval German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa from the 12th century; during this operation, the German invasion of Russia in terms of military equipment was evenly matched.
The Germans were so victorious because they had superior experience, having conducted lightning war or blitzkrieg during the 1939 conquest of Poland and the 1940 battle for France, which saw the defeat of France and the evacuation of the British expeditionary forces at Dunkirk.
The Germans used the flat ground and the fact that the Russians did not prepare adequate defences to stop the German advance having the Germans overrun Kyiv and most of Ukraine and advance until the gates of Moscow through failing to take the city.
The Soviets had more planes and tanks during Operation Barbarossa and repeatedly during the eastern front side of the war between the Allied powers: the United States, the British Empire and the Soviet Union.
The Axis powers were Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy led by Benito Mussolini and the Japanese Empire. During engagements between Nazi tank divisions and Soviet Red Army forces, the Germans were often outnumbered from 5 to 1 or 2 to 1 and, towards the war’s end, 10 to 1.
One of the critical technologies of the time was the radio, and in modern battles and warfare, technology is king.
The ability to have communications with all assets in and out of the combat zone leads to more success on the battlefield because the infantry division can call on air support to destroy the enemy’s tank divisions.
The ability to communicate and coordinate is the ultimate force multiplier and a concentration of force that can lead to an inferior opponent inflicting massive damage on the superior enemy regarding numerical advantages seen repeatedly during the Ukraine war.
One great battle during Operation Barbarossa was the Battle Brody, the biggest tank battle in history, where the Soviet Union destroyed 200 German tanks out of 730 tanks.
In turn, the German tank divisions destroyed 800 Red Army tanks out of the total of 2800 tanks that were in the combat zone. The Red Army learned from these mistakes during the battle of Kursk in 1943, a German counter-attack.
The Russians won the battle due to having prepared defences and numerical superiority.
Statistics from the United States show that tank losses during World War II were caused by anti-tank guns 29%, other tanks 25%, tanks lost due to mins 22%, self-propelled guns 13%, lost to bazookas 6% and 3% due to other causes.
During the fourth Arab-Israeli War of 1973, the Syrian army rushed its tank divisions into Israel, but the Israelis, despite being unprepared fortified the positions on the Golan Heights.
The battle took place over 30 miles. With the ability to prepare their defences, the Syrians lost 260 tanks out of a total force of 750 tanks.
This shows that using fortification and time to prepare and equip defences will mitigate the effectiveness of tanks. In many ways, the tank’s ability has been overstated and overused in the popular imagination tanks are an effective tool of warfare.
Still, the artillery, mines and other warfare methods should never be overlooked. From 1990 to 1991, during the First Gulf War and 2003, the Second Gulf War witnessed the American war machine decimate the Iraqi army twice in both conflicts.
During both wars, American casualties and of its allies were shockingly low compared to the Iraqis, primarily due to the superior technologies of the West, particularly in the art of communications.
The United States expanded resources into what it calls joint all domain command and control, a web of systems that networks all US forces together.
The best example of this doctrine happened during the 2003 Iraq invasion; during the Baghdad push, an Iraqi tank division intercepted a single platoon of American soldiers.
The Marines should have been killed, being only equipped with light machine guns and other light weaponry, including armoured Humvees Marines in communication with neighbouring aircraft, which enabled them to call in an airstrike, which destroyed the advancing Iraqi forces.
This kind of network communication is helping Ukrainians to successfully fight the war in Ukraine due to American expertise, American intelligence, American logistics and American methods of warfare being used to fight the Russian Federation.
The United States is providing everything to the Ukrainian war effort apart from boots on the ground, so we are seeing Ukrainians fighting a war in a predominantly Western style which is only highlighted in a total war in a purely conventional sense without the use of nuclear weapons Western militaries will kick the Russian ass according to the geopolitical analyst Peter Zeilhan.
Yesterday we covered the key players in the US and Saudi relations. Today we’ll look at the strategic implications of this relationship over the past 40 years and what it looks like moving forward.
Saudi Arabia matters to the US more than many other US allies. Not only are the Saudis massive oil exporters, but they also have strong ties to the world’s Muslim population.
The United States’ most important European allies are the Germans, the French and the Brits.
However, British influence is seriously declining with the UK leaving the European Union.
The Germans are heading towards the collapse of its population, a trend for the past 40 years due to the German Boomer generation not having a replacement generation.
The Germans still have the option of immigration, though with taking 15.3 million people in Germany, just under one in five nationwide, immigrated there at some point in their lives, according to new government statistics for 2022. Almost 5 million more were born to migrant parents.
The German population is 79,903,481 (July 2021 est.) German 86.3%, Turkish 1.8%, Polish 1%, Syrian 1%, Romanian 1%, other/stateless/unspecified 8.9% (2020 est.).
With the influx of immigration from the migrant crisis and possibly Ukrainians fleeing the Ukraine War, Germany’s population is still declining unless the trends and courses of people not having children in Germany is the first.
Immigrants after generation tend to adapt and take upon the culture of the new nation, which means immigration short-term is merely a sticking plaster for long-term problems within Germany and developed countries.
The United Kingdom has resolved this problem temporarily with immigration from the ex-British Empire, and the French successfully had a replacement generation which all the other nations in Europe had failed to accomplish.
As for your American long-term ally, in the region providing the European Union survives Germany’s economic and political irrelevance. It’s highly debated whether or not the French care about the European Union or whether or not they see the EU as merely a means to expand the influence of France.
Over the past few decades, the US and the Saudis have partnered up to tackle a handful of critical situations, from stalling the Soviets to the war in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989 to spur economic growth in Europe and Japan; this relationship has proven vital.
The bottom line is that with major players like Russia and China already in motion, the US and Saudis won’t allow ugly politics to get in the way of geopolitical relations.
Saudi Arabia is a power centre and doesn’t need to be under the American wing, but there’s still a mutually beneficial relationship on the table. Even when the Saudis put journalists on barbecues, and that is not a joke.
In February 2022, journalist H. D. S. Greenway cited the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the 4 February joint statement between Russia and China (under Putin and Xi Jinping) as signs that Cold War II had officially begun.
The growing hostilities between the United States and the Russian Federation, including China, have been growing since early 2000.
The US is partly to blame for the new Cold War because President United States’ office focused on the Afghanistan war from 2001 to 2021.
By Understanding the American system, the American president, regarding internal issues and politics, has limited power due to the nature of the division of powers and the nation divided into 50 states.
These American states each have their legislative bodies and an elected governor to run each of the American states. This weakens the president’s office in regard to dictating internal policies.
Regarding international relations, US President has the full power of his office to do whatever he likes, providing they have the full backing of Congress regarding the budget for federal services.
One of the weaknesses of how the American presidency works is that there is only one person and their cabinet that is in charge of American foreign policy, and this was why presidents including Bill Clinton, George W Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump did not redress the expansion of Chinese power and the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008.
The New Cold War started because the United States’ political leadership was focused on the Middle East.
In many ways, the American president is like the Lord of the Rings villain Sauron; they only have one eye focus on one international issue or, perhaps more truly, one issue at a time.
American in Action
Nature abhors a vacuum, which is why the United States ignored its responsibilities to freedom and global prosperity at the end of the Cold War that lasted from 1945 until 1989/1991, with the final collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 20th century.
The Americans had George H Bush, the successor to President Ronald Reagan, who was in office from 1981 until 1989 and George Bush Senior from 1989 and 1992.
The American people had in George H Bush a president who fought in World War II and understood the importance of preserving international peace and democracy and had the most experience when it came to politics and international relations.
During the 1992 presidential elections, the American people voted out the man in favour of American actions and the deepening and reframing of what the American foreign policy would be in the 21st century.
Instead, the American public, since 1992’s, voted in more isolationist presidents and are Americans first regarding the foreign policy they are promoting, which has left early 30 years of American foreign policy operating on autopilot and being stuck in the 1990s.
China’s inability to govern itself is the cherry on top of it all, with China restricting the export of metals used in Greentech and semiconductor tech to the United States.
The US doesn’t have to worry about rare earths, but Germanium and Gallium don’t fall into that category.
While the Chinese may dominate the production of these metals, it can be attributed to subsidies and no one else wanting to do the ‘dirty’ work.
There’s nothing uber challenging about the process; it just requires someone willing to get their hands dirty.
As the bilateral relationship with China grows more hostile by the day, knee-jerk reactions like this material export ban will do nothing but encourage Americans of all political stripes to cut ties.
Americans are overly emotional and are drama queens.
Love them or hate them, the American hammer will come down on the Chinese, providing the American people stop whacking each other off in the American internal culture wars being a self-inflicted wound born out of self-indulgent madness.
Ironically, China has become the biggest promoter of the US moving as fast and far away from Chinese dependency as possible.
If the Chinese want to start a material input war, they might as well start the countdown sequence because they would be f****d.
According to the geopolitical analysis, the United States and the rest of the world have, at best, ten years to break from the China market.
According to the geopolitical analysis, author and writer Peter Zilhen to break away from the reliance on the Chinese for cheap labour and as a means to get raw materials.
In China, the next decade will have very rough and troubling times due to the failure of the millennial generation to produce children and the effects of the Boomer generation born from 1946 to 1964 not having children as well.
By the end of the century, the Chinese population may be below 400 million from its height of 1.4 billion people in the Chinese system.
In time, it will not be able to transform itself from a manufacturing economy to a consumer-led economy.
The rivals of the United States, even if they deserve to be called by that description, the Russian Federation under Vladimir Putin and China under the increasingly authoritarian and one-man state led by Xi Jinping, are running out of time.
They don’t have the population, and they won’t have the economy to survive the consequences of not having a replacement generation.
China and Russia, in their current form, have 10 to 20 years of life left in them due to their population decline, and during this collapse could be sudden or slow; they may lash out at their neighbours.
We can see this now with the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014 and the seizing of the Crème peninsula, and we may see this in the Chinese state’s decision to throw caution to the wind through everything it has at Taiwan.
The American century is often referred to as the 20th century.
Still, with the decline of so many global powers and the looming population collapse, the 21st century may very well be another American century across America as the geography, natural resources and population can go it alone.
For the rest of the world, therein for a lot more pain, and the chicken is coming to roost with their failures, according to the historian David Starkey to create a legacy for their children.
The New Cold War will not last as long as the old Cold War, lasting over four decades.
This one will be much shorter, and the legacy may be far more painful after the disappearance of the American-led world security order.
The British, French, German, and Japanese will not have the political will or the strength to secure the world’s oceans and maintain the globalisation that the USA created; only Americans have that capacity.
And with the United States increasingly becoming more insular and more withdrawn from global affairs, we may see a world reminiscent of the 19th century.
