No? This just isn't true.
Russia invades Ukraine
- Thread starter Perun
- Start date
____no5
Free Man
@Azas
I don’t know about then but it seems to me reversing the de-dollarization trend would be very nearly impossible to achieve even if West wins the war.
Weaponization of dollar is nothing new but the way it applied to Russia scared the hell out of the global south.
Care to expand your arguments?
I don’t know about then but it seems to me reversing the de-dollarization trend would be very nearly impossible to achieve even if West wins the war.
Weaponization of dollar is nothing new but the way it applied to Russia scared the hell out of the global south.
Care to expand your arguments?
The growth of the US dollar as the global reserve currency is based entirely on the size of the US economy and the lack of availability of suitable alternatives. The decline of the pound in the 1970s as a global reserve currency caused the US to grow in importance. It has nothing to do with a US-Saudi alliance. The power of the dollar is entirely because multiple government and banking agencies hold the US dollar as a reserve currency due to the perceived stability of the US economy. The change in this over the past 20 years is due to 1) extreme US deficit spending 2) bad governance by the US government and 3) the rise of the Euro as a viable replacement currency.
____no5
Free Man
Agree with some of your points but the importance of petrodollar to current USD state is not to be understated.
After WWII USA was a formidable manufacturer power and dollar dominance was well earned. This started to change by late 60s and Nixon brilliantly moved way from Bretton Woods early 70s when US policimakers opted to move into services /finance model of economy. Enter petrodollar around the same time where all countries had to buy the energy in dollars and US /USD dominance became hegemony by early 90s without needing to be backed by the manufacturing sector anymore.
After WWII USA was a formidable manufacturer power and dollar dominance was well earned. This started to change by late 60s and Nixon brilliantly moved way from Bretton Woods early 70s when US policimakers opted to move into services /finance model of economy. Enter petrodollar around the same time where all countries had to buy the energy in dollars and US /USD dominance became hegemony by early 90s without needing to be backed by the manufacturing sector anymore.
Yeah, but you see here's the thing: Outside China, the dominant global markets are shifting away from petroleum as the main energy source. This may take another two decades or so, but eventually, the importance of a petrocurrency is going to drop if petroleum isn't such a dominant trade good anymore. And countries like Saudi Arabia know this - this is why the Saudis are shit-scared of losing their source of income (and with it their political stability) and why they are suddenly making friends with Iran and China.
To get back to this point, that may be so, but then it's happening at a snail's pace, at best. BRICS will not outperform G7 or even the US alone economically for many years. The nominal GDP of all BRICS countries put together is just barely equal to that of the US. The US economy has many problems, but its worldwide influence most definitely isn't one of them.
BRICS is also not something I see persisting as a political force over the long term.
Jer
A window to the west, a blazing star above
Yeah, kinda difficult to have sleepovers when South Africa’s participation in the ICC would compel them to detain and extradite Putin if he ever set foot on their soil again. And China and India hate each other’s guts, which doesn’t help.
Brazil might have been interested in Russia when Bolsonaro was in charge, but Lula is going to be less interested in that alignment as well.
____no5
Free Man
Yes this is a very good point, decarbonization.
There’s the pathway to 2030 then 2050 but we don’t know how this will play out, especially since the war in Ukraine.
By some metrics China’s economy is already bigger than US’s. Using the purchasing power parity measure, China’s GDP passed the US GDP around 2014.
But this is not the point. The trend of global south to form an alternative pole alone, is what should worry the US /West, no matter the numbers.
Azas
Distant Horizons
Delusional all the way. ruzzians trying to preserve their troops??? what mushrooms do you consume, man
Ever heard of cannon fodder and meat attack waves???I am getting strong impression that your information channels are directly attached to ruzzian propaganda.
____no5
Free Man
It may never take off as such. My reading is that India is the one state that could make or break it. Without India BRICS won’t make too much sense in my opinion.
Thus China has a big interest to solve their territorial issues and even make serious concessions to keep India happy and within.
I’m very well seeing India playing a role similar to what Turkey is for NATO, an all around player flirting with both sides constantly bargaining to get maximum gains.
And I’m very well seeing US trying to exploit that for now, i.e., offering a permanent seat to UN.
Azas
Distant Horizons
There's news on Twitter that musk ordered to disrupt starlink for Ukrainians in last october. To prevent them attacking Crimean targets. Like I said, complete moron, m***ker and useful idiot. I will be not surprised when there will be news that he has some monetary ties with kremlin.
Last edited:
katatoniq
Invader
Yes, the idea that "Crimea is a step to far" and naval drones in the black sea are an "offensive action" reflects his knowledge of the situation perfectly. He's a fucking moron.
____no5
Free Man
Clearly something is going on in the background. Blinken, Mette Fredrinksen, Boris Johnson & Baerbock have visited Ukraine during the last week alone. Reading behind the lines, it seems that the West is working to convince Ukraine to accept some sort of frozen conflict in the likes of Korea. Which would meant Ukraine cedes territory but it's not recognised as Russian by the West. Kind of smart thought as it will give them time to get on with the US elections, increase ammunition production and even provide serious security guarantees (or even NATO membership) to Ukraine during "peace" time. But also this could take decades to resolve and this is the supposed carrot for Russians.
Remember mid-August statement of NATO's secretary chief of staff? "I think that a solution could be for Ukraine to give up territory, and get NATO membership in return"
Problem is nor Ukraine (check podcast Zelensky interview) or Russia seem to buy in that idea. Even worse, there are no evidence that Russia was even asked for this lately except from some unofficial secret talks between US -Russian policy makers before or at the start of the counter offensive. (see article)
Blinken: As to negotiations, it takes two to tango. And thus far, we see no indication that Vladimir Putin has any interest in meaningful diplomacy. If he does, I think the Ukrainians will be the first to engage, and we'll be right behind them. Everyone wants this war to end, but it has to end on just terms and on durable terms that reflect Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Zelensky: I have this intuition, reading, hearing and seeing their eyes [when they say] ‘we’ll be always with you, but I see that he or she is not here, not with us.
shows.acast.com
www.nbcnews.com
Steven Myers, State Department advisory panel member: "There is no effective counterstrategy available to the Ukrainians, The Ukrainians are in deep trouble." [...]
"They don’t talk about the counterstrikes by the Russians, who don’t care about gaining or holding ground in the kill zone and are experts at laying traps" [...]
"Europe is in more economic trouble than we are. Germany’s in deep recession. The Europeans are not going to shoulder more economic burden. They need an off-ramp."
Remember mid-August statement of NATO's secretary chief of staff? "I think that a solution could be for Ukraine to give up territory, and get NATO membership in return"
Problem is nor Ukraine (check podcast Zelensky interview) or Russia seem to buy in that idea. Even worse, there are no evidence that Russia was even asked for this lately except from some unofficial secret talks between US -Russian policy makers before or at the start of the counter offensive. (see article)
Blinken: As to negotiations, it takes two to tango. And thus far, we see no indication that Vladimir Putin has any interest in meaningful diplomacy. If he does, I think the Ukrainians will be the first to engage, and we'll be right behind them. Everyone wants this war to end, but it has to end on just terms and on durable terms that reflect Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Zelensky: I have this intuition, reading, hearing and seeing their eyes [when they say] ‘we’ll be always with you, but I see that he or she is not here, not with us.
Preparing for the long war: an interview with President Zelensky | The Intelligence from The Economist
Listen to Preparing for the long war: an interview with President Zelensky from The Intelligence from The Economist. As the counter-offensive continues, Ukrainian forces are running out of time to make substantial gains. Diplomatic attempts to isolate Russia have failed and progress on the front...
shows.acast.com
Former U.S. officials have held secret Ukraine talks with Russians
The aim of the discussions is to lay the groundwork for potential negotiations to end the war, people briefed on the talks told NBC News.
www.nbcnews.com
Steven Myers, State Department advisory panel member: "There is no effective counterstrategy available to the Ukrainians, The Ukrainians are in deep trouble." [...]
"They don’t talk about the counterstrikes by the Russians, who don’t care about gaining or holding ground in the kill zone and are experts at laying traps" [...]
"Europe is in more economic trouble than we are. Germany’s in deep recession. The Europeans are not going to shoulder more economic burden. They need an off-ramp."
Ukraine 'in deep trouble': Some experts say $1B more from US won't matter. Live updates
A new defense minister, an encouraging visit from a U.S. official and more U.S. aid. Will they have an impact on the Ukraine war?
eu.usatoday.com
Last edited:
Azas
Distant Horizons
I hope it's ATACMS. Ukraine will not agree to ceasefire, because it would give time for russia to regroup. In the eyes of russia and russians, even by China, any ceasefire would be seen as a West's defeat and fail. So, a big no no here. All Ukrainians need now, to achieve their goals is more weapons. Negotiations is kremlins wish and narrative.
Last edited:
____no5
Free Man
I’m certain that Ukraine will take ATACMS but quantity is limited.
For sure if there are negotiations it’s more on Russians favor but as we can see West is the one that pushing for it (for their own interest) in the background.
Ukraine has little sovereignty as they are depended on West to function as state. Anyway, we are far from ceasefire.
Russians will eventually go on the offensive and then the things might be not so good for them as offensive operations result typically to more casualties. Then the balance might change again.
For sure if there are negotiations it’s more on Russians favor but as we can see West is the one that pushing for it (for their own interest) in the background.
Ukraine has little sovereignty as they are depended on West to function as state. Anyway, we are far from ceasefire.
Russians will eventually go on the offensive and then the things might be not so good for them as offensive operations result typically to more casualties. Then the balance might change again.