Amarynth interviewed London Paul for the Saker Blog
London Paul from the Sirius Report has a story to tell. This is the story of the history of multipolarity and the global move to a new multipolar structure in our world with the old single polarity hegemon now collapsing.
He graciously agreed to this 5-question written interview to bring Saker readers up to date and we are grateful for his time.
Paul will probably not be a new voice for some of our readers, but for others, you can read his background here: https://www.thesiriusreport.com/about/
His work was some of the first that was scrubbed from the internet and for years, he was laughed out of the house, as what he was observing was just too different to be true. To avoid the continual internet scrubbing games, he set up a monthly subscription podcast, where he discusses current affairs in relation to economics. Yet today, we are in this process and we can visibly see the progress and effects of this massive move to a multipolar world.
At the Saker Blog, we’ve focused on the Russian military action in the Ukraine. We understand that this is a fight not against the Ukrainians but against the US-led NATO military alliance, and the single power center, west. The Ukraine is but a proxy. In the bigger picture, this move toward multipolarity is one of the reasons if not the major part, for this military action.
With that short overview, we move straight into the questions.
Question: Paul, give us the background. How did you arrive at your understanding? What drew you to this specific study and what makes you excited about it, even today? Where do we stand as a world community? What do we stand to gain by changing the complete underpinnings of our world to a fairer system, where each country has a voice?
Response: I was originally an academic who studied Physics at degree and PhD level. I then moved into the financial services sector, so that’s when my interest and understanding in economics and finance started in earnest. It was around the time of 9-11 that I developed a serious interest in geopolitics.
In the immediate aftermath of the 2008 Global financial crisis, which I predicted in 2006, it was immediately apparent that the West had not implemented any policies which would resolve the causes of that crisis. They merely decided to bailout the financial system and then implemented QE and ZIRP which should only ever have been implemented on a very short term basis. I wrote to Western governments at the time advising them not to implement these policies for more than a few short months because the consequence of long term implementation is unsustainable asset bubbles, failing economies addicted to – and propped up by – cheap credit, and a completely unsustainable financial system. Developments made by China, Russia and other nations, which we will come to in the next question, were the first genuine suggestion that those nations saw the need for an alternative to what had become the utter failure of unipolarity by the 2008 GFC.
It was around a decade ago that I came to know the architects of what is now known as the multipolar world. They understood back in the 1990s that US hegemony and the US Dollar were in terminal decline. They advised the Chinese and Russians that they needed to develop a multipolar world, the resurrection of the Old Silk Road, to seek win-win cooperation with other nations and to develop sound monetary policies and currencies backed by real wealth, such as gold and commodities. From discussions with these architects I began to study China, Russia and the wider Global South in great detail as we began to see the embryonic development and implementation of the multipolar world.
Given these are fundamentally game changing developments in the so-called global order, my interest remains as strong today as it was a decade ago. We are now seeing a world that operates in two distinct spheres: a rapidly developing and ascendent multipolar world and a unipolar world in terminal decline. When these two worlds collide as the latter seeks to retain its relevance, we then see the risk of serious conflicts developing such as what we are now witnessing in the Ukraine.
Whilst the developing multipolar world is a decades-long project in the making, its adoption and the benefits that will be accrued are multifold, in that it seeks to develop nations domestically, bilaterally and in multilateral formats. It strives to promote true globalisation, not the highly abusive Western adoption of this theory. By promoting win-win cooperation and the development of vertical poles across the entire world, it will provide prosperity and security for everyone.
Many will argue that this is a nonsensical pipedream but it is already becoming a reality. Challenges will remain, not least in the ideological bias that exists between nations and in deep-seated historical grievances. However, all journeys have to start with the first step and that is what we are already beginning to see across the Global South. The sum of our parts can be infinitely greater than the individual components and that is something we, as responsible custodians of this planet, should be striving to achieve. It is for these reasons that my understanding of this paradigm shift remains as strong today as it was a decade ago.
Question: Is it only China and Russia that designed the concept of multipolarity for us, or were there more involved historically?
Response: Whilst I think it would be fair to say that China and Russia were the trail blazers for multipolarity, we should not forget the role that has been played by many other nations in the last decade which is equally as important and significant.
Firstly, there was the announcement of the BRIC alliance, which became the BRICS alliance, namely Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa in 2009, in the immediate aftermath of the GFC of 2009. We also saw the foundation of the SCO or Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in 2001, which included Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Full membership was granted to India and Pakistan in 2017. There are also four observer states: Afghanistan, Belarus, Iran (soon to become a full member), Mongolia and 6 dialogue partners.
We also saw the creation of the EAEU in 2014 which now includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia. In 2016, there was the formation of the AIIB or the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which is a multilateral development bank focusing on developments in Asia. The bank currently has 105 members, including 16 prospective members.
We have also seen the modification of long-term institutions such as the ASEAN alliance or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations which was founded in 1967 and is a political and economic union of 10 member states in Southeast Asia, which promotes intergovernmental cooperation in the realms of economic, political, and security integration between its members and in a wider context throughout Asia.
One development which has been years in the making was the adoption of the RCEP or the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership in early 2022, which is a free-trade agreement. It includes Australia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam.
These are just a few examples of developments in multilateral formats. There have also been many developments in bilateral and trilateral formats which are all pieces of the development of this multipolar world.
Question: What do you envisage as we move further into this world configuration in terms of trade? What could be the everyday currencies? As we are a Russian-oriented site, there is much concern about the Russian Central Bank. Will we end up with Central Banks? Has Russia’s move to set a price standard for gold ended in a gold backed Ruble, or a commodity based currency? Explain to us what it means in broader terms for the ordinary person? Why should we be interested?
Response: Global trade, finance and ecoomies will literally go through a revolution. The BRI (Belt and Road Initiative) has laid the foundation for a global trade system but it is fluid and subject to change. There is no doubt that banks and the global financial system are going to undergo radical changes, including their investment arms. There will be a radical overhaul of the function of governments and financial institutions to include central banks. We expect to see the adoption of sophisticated barter systems which will facilitate trade whereby the respective counter parties will set transaction prices as they see fit, free from government interference.
Blockchain and other technologies will totally change the way business is conducted. The multipolar world will seek to facilitate trade and allow trading partners to generate and keep their wealth. There will be a radical overhaul of how basic needs are managed to include healthcare, education, food and energy security. The domination of unsustainable cartels and cooperations will come to an end and we will see an explosion of creativity in terms of industry, medicine, science and the arts. Ultimately, it requires a complete overhaul of all existing Western institutions which have ruthlessly abused their responsibility for self-interests.
We will see, in a very broad sense, the marrying of true capitalism and socialism into workable models for nations and alliances. The ongoing challenge to US unipolarity will continue via the Global South and, in essence, the Eurasian Trade Zone. Existing Western institutions will continue to unravel and the insidious practices that have underpinned the world since WW2 will continue to be exposed.
In terms of future currencies, we are going to see the adoption of new payment mechanisms outside the purview of the USD / UST complex. This will include nations trading in local currencies, adopting future cryptocurrencies or digital currencies in multilateral formats such as the EAEU and the ASEAN nations. The backbone of future trade will be in currencies which are backed by real wealth, to include gold, perhaps silver and a basket of commodities. There will be no single world reserve currency in the future. China has always made it clear that it doesn’t seek to make the yuan a world reserve currency but merely to internationalise its currency. Russia also has that possibility via its vast commodity resource base, for the future global adoption of the ruble in terms of trade, particularly with the Global South but also the West and not just in terms of demanding ruble for gas as we are currently seeing.
The 5000 ruble per gram price fix was merely meant to stabilise internal markets and miners. It has now been removed because that stability has been achieved. Unfortunately, in the West, that announcement was interpreted as meaning that Russia had backed the ruble with gold and it was wrongly conflated with a far bigger story which we have discussed for years about the future role of the ruble in international trade.
For Russia, the stability and global adoption of the ruble in terms of trading commodities will be beneficial to the Russian economy, its financial stability and enable it to access markets free from the potential interference of the US via the weaponization of the dollar. It will also permit Russia to continue to implement further domestic changes, not least including the development of the Russian Far East and its integration into the BRI. A stable ruble and the benefits that will accrue will also see greater international investment in Russia in the future.
Question: People talk about food scarcity and prices are rising everywhere. So, is this purely sanctions blowback, or the result of years of fiscal mismanagement? And then how is an ordinary person to hedge. Where are we going to see major country defaults on their debts?
Response: We have spoken about food and energy insecurity for a number of years. The sanctions blowback has merely exacerbated a long-term problem caused by utterly failed policy decisions. Firstly, nations should have long since been aware of the flaws of a global ‘just-in-time-system’, in that if one aspect of that mechanism fails it can have damaging consequences.
We have seen during the pandemic how global supply chains were impacted in very serious and sudden ways. The just-in-time-system was the primary cause of this. Whilst we are not advocates of protectionism, because we see that as being equally flawed, nations need to understand that they need to become more self-sufficient where possible, in terms of food and energy security. There also needs to be a radical overhaul of this just-in-time-system because the pandemic highlighted eloquently why it is quite simply unfit for purpose.
This also highlights the need for nations to adopt a new approach via multipolarity which seeks to find mechanisms to address the future disruption of supply chains, how nations can begin to address some of those concerns domestically, particularly in terms of food production and via their energy needs. There also needs to be an understanding that this Western ideological zero-sum game mentality is contributing to global food and energy instability because of its very weaponization by Washington and its vassal states.
In terms of energy security, the desire to push ahead with the utterly flawed green revolution has also led to unnecessary imbalances in the energy mix, putting even Western nations at serious risk of future energy and food insecurity including rationing and perhaps even the complete absence of basic sustenance food items. There needs to be a radical global overhaul of how we address energy needs and how we can address this via a mix of traditional fossil fuels, nuclear reactors to include a global drive for commercial fusion development, hydroelectricity and the adoption of viable renewable energy sources because currently the renewable sector is appallingly myopic and fails to address obvious issues such as the cost in terms of energy, resources, commodities and the environmental impact to implement e.g. solar and wind farms. In very basic terms the cost-benefit ratio of seeking to implement such technologies has not been adequately addressed.
In terms of how people can manage the current risks of food and energy insecurities, that depends on their individual circumstances. If possible, they should look to stockpile non-perishable foods, grow their own fresh vegetables, utilize alternative off-the-grid energy sources for cooking, heating and lighting. However, this is often not possible due to financial and domestic constraints. What is clear is that we are expressing a global crisis in terms of food and energy security and currently we don’t sense that Western nations are taking this seriously enough. The consequences are potentially catastrophic and not just in terms of the global South. The West is now highly vulnerable to similar shocks and we are simply unprepared, not least in dealing with the societal impact this could and will cause.
Question: What is the question that you would have liked people to ask you, initially, in the early days, when your message was not taken seriously. And of course, if you can answer that question as well.
Response: Ironically, this is a question within a question. I was asked back in 2014 what I regarded as my fundamental observation for the next decade. My response was that we should all pay attention to what China and Russia do domestically, bilaterally and internationally. This was greeted with utter disbelief, ridicule and anger. Instead of reacting in such a manner, the next question should have been why I gave such a radical response and what was my reasoning, instead of being summarily dismissed.
If I had been asked why I believed this to be the case I would have explained why the GFC in 2008 was the signal that US hegemony, the US dollar and unipolarity were in rapid and terminal decline. Why – as I stated at the time of the Kiev maidan in 2014 – this was the final nail in the coffin lid of the US hegemony and the USD and Russia would play the long game to see this reach its inevitable conclusion. Why I stated that the major energy deal between China and Russia for the Power of Siberia, signed in 2014, was a major catalyst for the acceleration of the multipolar world and de-dollarisation. Why post GFC 2008, the US burnt its bridges with China by printing trillions of dollars instead of asking China to buy their debt. Why the rollout of the multipolar world was baked in the cake in 2014 and the US weaponization of the dollar would continue to erode global trust in the US and the USD leading to the collapse of unipolarity.
My reasoning was based on an unfolding reality which Westerners have continually, for the last 8 years, failed to see, often because of their arrogance and ignorance. Even now, many still regard the US as the hegemonic power it was in the 1990s and China and Russia as they were in the 1980s economically, societally and military. They also tend to see China and Russia through the eyes of the West, which is a very myopic perspective and makes the assumption that neither nation is capable of offering a better alternative to unipolarity. A failure to grasp these fundamental issues will continue to see Westerners fail to understand the unfolding paradigm shift and therefore to continue to dismiss it as being an irrelevance.
Thank you Paul! for your time and your complete responses. But, I feel we’ve hardly touched the subject and this is most probably the one issue we will be talking about far into the future.
We open to the Saker commentariat and if you have a question for Paul, please put that in the comments. We will choose another five questions and do another interview in written form. It is now your turn, dear reader.
- The Sirius Report Website: https://www.thesiriusreport.com/
- Telegram: https://t.me/thesiriusreport
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/thesiriusreport
Dear Saker,
I’ve been wanting to touch the subject of Finland joining NATO soon. I would like to hear your opinion. Do you think Rusia is going to do anything about it? What would the implications regarding security for Rusia and on the new multipolar world?
Thank you.
MARS
Russia will stand up a special force to point nuclear weapons at the head of Finland at the shortest of ranges with their triggers half pulled back and jumpy trigger finger so even the slightest mistake can lead to millions dead within seconds. And that’s in addition to adding Finnish targets to its automated “perimeter” second strike system that automatically does a Global Thermonuclear War without human assistance if the right (read: wrong) circumstances are detected.
I saw some missile baring trucks heading for the Finnish border on Telegram today, some guy took a video of them moving in that direction along with the sign post. Don’t know if its legit. Stupid move though, I mean RF has a decent enough relationship with both countries, why would they want to put themselves in the crosshairs for the US. Idiocy seems to have run rife in Europe.
We must feel sorry for Finland and also Sweden. By the time they join NATO, Russia – backed by a huge military alliance of more than %80 of the world population – will make them regret ever making the decision of joining NATO in the first place. A massive momentum is gathering amongst the countries of the world to crush the evil west once and for all, with Russia – Iran and China in the lead followed by others.
Hopefully they will. The European and American population have had 100 chances, decades and open hands, but rejected them all. The International Russian Oligarchs were also invited home several times, offered forgiveness and got every, chance but made their preference. They cant claim innocence.
I guess Finland has an identity problem vis-a-vis Russia because of the issue of Findlandization:
“the process whereby a country is induced to favor, or refrain from opposing, the interests of a more powerful country, despite not being politically allied to it (originally with reference to the influence of the former Soviet Union on its neighbour Finland).”
Perhaps the Finns think that by joining NATO they can finally be “free” of the existential situation of being a small country overshadowed by a powerful neighbor.
It’s kind of like being a younger sibling.
You just can’t change your fate.
Hopefully Finland with come to its senses and accept the current realities—also, that they are better off remaining on good terms with Russia.
The Finns have also gotten kind of a rotten deal at the hands of other Scandinavians, in particular, the Swedes.
At least, I know first-hand of a Finn who complained bitterly of the treatment meted out to the Finnish minority in Sweden (stuck there because of some obscure arctic war, when current Finland ceased being part of Sweden and became part of Russia).
I hope Russia will make some sincere diplomatic efforts toward Finland.
Being born Finland wasn’t the Finns’ fault!
There are still (very) old Finns, and resentful descendants, who want the return of ancesteral estates around Vyborg, and believe somebody (else) should fight and die to recover them from Russia.
The american definition of “democracy” is “we get to buy a new government every three or five years”.
Green politicians are, well, green in the sense “inexperienced” and “ignorant of history”.
Finland escaped WWII and The Winter War relatively unscathed, despite its alliance with The Third Reich, by conceding some land, by paying reparations, and by declaring strict neutrality. The Soviets, having better things to occupy, and doubtless remembering The Winter War, settled, and even allowed Finland to join EU … but not nato. Finland did quite well, becoming modestly prosperous, and remaining inoffensive.
[I am very unsure about the details in this paragraph — the fog of war and age …]
A few year ago, there was a scandal. Somebody discovered nato troops exercising with Finnish troops, in Finland. Jeopardizing Finnish neutrality. The Defense Minister had neglected to inform Parliament, or anybody. He declared that he was not required to inform, and a bunch of other things. I did some reading and decided that Ministers of Defence ought to keep some secrets, but not this one. And, also, Finland did not write on paper a lot of Rules; but relied on people and leaders to be sensible. america is well-known for finding ways around laws and sense. Also, people and leaders seem to have found ways to shed sensibility; and to not notice themselves doing so. Therefore, one should not be surprised to hear a prime minister has, without asking around for public opinions, decided to join nato, the mortal enemy of her nextdoor neighbour. (and the fence is more tacit than physical.)
I like to think that, besides being busy elsewhere, The Soviet Union was a little bit grateful toward Finland for showing them that they were totally unprepared to go to war against any nation bigger than Grenada.
I somewhat admire the Finns; so, I really, really hope that when Lavrov calls she picks up the phone and listens carefully.
“I somewhat admire the Finns; so, I really, really hope that when Lavrov calls she picks up the phone and listens carefully.”
It’s my understanding that she has been through WEFs Young Global Leader program, I wouldn’t expect to much.
The scandal was about the President and the Defence Ministry bypassing the Parliament when agreeing to sign the MOU on Finland becoming a Nato host country in 2014. Apparently the parliament was informed ahead of time about the MOU but didn’t get to debate it or have any input on it. At least this time it is the parliament that makes the decision on the Nato membership. There has been lots of verbal aggression in debates toward the ones opposing or questioning membership. My thinking is that it’s a done deal, the ones opposing will cave in. I sure hope I’m wrong…
But anyway, imo, by being a Nato host country Finland already is a Nato member for almost all practical purposes. They’re just wanting to make it official now.
There is long standing majority popular oppsition to NATO in both Sweden and Finland. The moneyed interest are now trying to push through a NATO kapitualtion without a vote. since ‘surveys’ show how peoples sentiment have turned. It’s a fraud.
America is hi-jacking what little was left of Swedish and Finnish sovereignity. Seems that regular assasination of Swedish ministers that where critical of America is finally paying off. Not to many who dare put their political neck on the chopping block in this matter.
The fact that Russia take still less that 3% share of China’s import is not suggesting any kind of great shift even though that 3% share is hard core real economy production, namely energy and raw materials. Russia’s share of global population is less than 2% and steadily shrinking. It looks like the romantic picture of Russian influence has lured too many to see more modest reality. Europe will shift in longer run from gas and Russian oil though not of course completely. The gas Russia have to sell Asia is much more cheaper than that to Europe.
When it comes to India even Russia military export share has shrinked from 88% to just 34%. At the same time US and its Allies has conquerred 65%. Another fact seldom talked in this fine blog.
@Ernest
“…even though that 3% share is hard core real economy production…”
That’s because real economy was depreciated, and it is all gonna change.
“When it comes to India even Russia military export share has shrinked from 88% to just 34%”
If you’re gonna need weapons for yourself, you won’t sell it, right?
“I’m always frank and earnest with women. Uh, in New York I’m Frank, and Chicago I’m Ernest.”
Europe in the long run – Europe in the short run, will be economicaly dead.
Where will Europe shift energy wise? To green Utopia?
I will be pretty impressed, if they produce one single Aspirin, from air and light.
Hi Paul,
Where do you see gold headed over the next 2-3 years I terms of price? Will it move with inflation say up 8-15% per year, or will it gap up and be reprised? If the later what kind of price range do you forsee?
Thanks
PS I joined the Sirius report recently
I wouldn’t expect the population drain in Russia to continue. For one thing, being/feeling under assault and engaged in an existential battle on behalf of one of the world’s greatest and oldest cultures, a big change from being and feeling like a global failure and pariah, will likely have the effect of increasing population, perhaps dramatically. Perhaps more important is the explosion of a pro-life and pro-family Church. Go to a Latin Mass in the US and you will see loads of children and families with many children, just like was the case with Catholic families in 1930’s America.
After seventy years, an optimistic outlook for the future and a sense of purpose in building a just world order will give Russia the strength and energy to overcome its current handicaps once again.
I assume that rapid all-round development will also overcome the fascinating pace of the first half of the last century – the transformation of one of the most industrially and technologically backward European states into a country that won a world war and sent the first man into space.
Lavrov:
“Our special military operation is designed to PUT AN END to the reckless expansion and course towards the complete domination of the United States and the rest of NATO countries (…) built with a gross violation of international law according to certain ‘rules’.”
To repeat Nth time: Ukraine is only a stepping stone on a murky road to freedom.
We ain’t seen nothing yet.
Question for London Paul:
We have seen frequent denunciations by Russia and China of the so-called U.S. rules-based international order which has subverted and ruined international law. Presumably the newly emerging multipolar world will have a definitive reply to the U.S. and Western abuses. How do you see the multipolar world developing new international political and diplomatic institutions to fill the void created by the U.S. system?
There is already a system of International Law, based on the UN. The US so-called ‘rules based’ system is a system of self-serving made-up rules, and is merely an attempt to bypass International law.
I really enjoyed that.
Paul never fell into the mainstream economic pitfalls that clogs up the internet.
Just like MMT’rs and Michael Hudson takes a completely different view point to the mainstream which is nothing but propaganda to trap nations.
Regarding digital currencies and blockchain there is no better expert on the subject than Rohan Grey.
https://moneyontheleft.org/2021/07/01/digital-money-beyond-blockchain-with-rohan-grey-2/
It is not as private as you think.
If you asked him he would do an interview for the saker regarding the Russian perspective.
Solar, wind, are these net energy positive yet? Under what usage conditions—Arizona desert, Georgia sun-belt, New York four seasons? If net energy positive, shouldn’t countries invest continually in an ever-increasing virtuous cycle? If not, can Western countries still buy solar from China by printing infinite Monopoly money? What happens if US goes to war against China, or Russia, and rare earths/molybdenum for generator-motor magnets/lithium for storage/solar cells get cut off? What do you think of thorium/salt reactors? How many jobs would paving a nation’s roofs with solar cells produce? Since energy is real wealth, won’t the first nations to become energy positive and export their excess, attain strategic power in the world?
Could this be done by declaring energy of strategic importance, and focusing the MIC and the army on energy installation for the homeland, instead of war?
@ imagine
great video from Prager University on wind and solar
https://industrialprogress.com/prager-university-can-we-rely-on-wind-and-solar-energy/
“It was around a decade ago that I came to know the architects of what is now known as the multipolar world. They understood back in the 1990s that US hegemony and the US Dollar were in terminal decline”
EIR LEAD EDITORIAL FOR TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 2022
LaRouche Guides a New Economic Architecture
https://larouchepub.com/pr/2022/202200412_lead-editorial.html
For those willing to have a look at multipolar economics, today.
It seems that American LaRouche, who proposed the New Silk Road and the SDI, is even more feared than Russian Vladimir Putin. Maybe because of Glazyev?
“It was around a decade ago that I came to know the architects of what is now known as the multipolar world. They understood back in the 1990s that US hegemony and the US Dollar were in terminal decline”
This statement comes off as quite condescending to me, considering that China and Russia for that matter were in a multi polar world for centuries beforehand. As of it requires an American group to be the “architects” of the “new” order.
Am i misunderstanding what he is saying?
How digital currencies would work and how to protect privacy
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4241801-macro-musings-podcast-rohan-grey-on-digital-currency-privacy-and-modern-monetary-theory
An excellent discussion ……
Get Rohan on the Saker blog. I know him very well. He’ll happily talk about the Russian perspective in a video interview.
Like he talked about what China is doing in this link.
Question:
Is the global South really suffering, through the change in global financial system?
Should de-dollarization not even be sped up to the South’s advantage.?
Since Russia, Belorussia and the soon have been Ukraine, are the worlds biggest suppliers of grain and fertilizer, poor countries wouldn’t be subject tu US blackmail, if they are free to trade in the currency of their choice.
They could buy more for less.
About national debts to the IMF, they could show a certain finger or do like Russia – my local money or nothing.
I really don’t see the South suffering that much in the short run, than they already do, thanks to the economic war through the plandemic. They probably could be better off instantly andd become more selfsufficiant (Chinese infrastructure program).
“Is the global South really suffering, through the change in global financial system?”
Change produces losers and winner; however, since “competition is good for you”, we can expect there to be benefits from the diversification of the financial system. The US will no longer have the monopoly of deciding about what governments should or should not do if there is a alternative to the dollar economy.
“my local money or nothing.”
There is the economy of scale. The worldwide financial system presided over by Wall-Street and the City of London can provide financing at advantageous terms not possible in most local markets.
The first person to champion a multipolar world was the French president Jacques Chirac in the late 1990s
https://signal.sciencespo-lyon.fr/article/76769/La-France-dans-un-monde-multipolaire
The Belt and Road Initiative has the potential to revolutionize transport and trading in the way the internet did to communications.
It could also drastically reduce carbon emissions, reduce poverty and eliminate much of the waste and excess currently produced.
How do you see this developing over the next 25 years?
The lack of any numbers or specificity in the above “economic” analysis greatly undermines the credibility of the interviewee.
For example: While Russia has 75% more people than Germany, its purchasing power parity, gross domestic product is smaller than Germany’s.
And yet Germany isn’t stand-alone: it is one of 2 principal drivers in the EU.
So while neither I nor anyone else would disagree that Russia would benefit from other nations’ keeping rubles as reserves, it is not the least bit clear to me that amount of these reserves would be significant.
Nor are reserves the principal means by which the USD/Washington Consensus benefit the US. Foreign CBs hold $4.17T in USD in the form of Treasuries, but the eurodollar market is $15T alone. IMF/World Bank loans, dollar volume of SWIFT etc all add more “monetary mass” to the USD.
Long before the Belt and Road.
Bashir Assad of Syria announce his “Four Seas Policy”.
Iran already planned 2 pipelines going east to Pak. India and Afgh and China.
Assad arranged pipelines going east to Damascus then branching to Africa and Europe. Along side the pipeline of oil would be added: pipelines for gas, water, an internet trunkline (un tappable) electricity, two high speed and two normal speed sets of train tracks a pair going east and another going west. A bank in Damascus would fund cost and insure shipments. The bank could buy cargoes directly at any location on the line and manage them to sell on open market at any other location on the line.
Irans I’maDinnerJacket (President) announce he would sell oil and gas through the pipelines at a flat price of $20/bbl in unlimited quantities to all who wanted to buy.
Assad got all the countries to sign the deal
It was exactly 4 day after Assad announce this “Four Seas Policy” the West initiated its proxy war on Syria.
My questions to Paul are the following:
1. How do you think the West will solve the mighty public pension funds deficit problem to the tune of ca. EUR 44 trillion only in Europe, where for example countries like Belgium and Luxembourg enjoy IOUs to pensioners roughly 4-5x their GDP?
2. How long do you think they can be able to kick this debt can down the street?
3. The West has effectively destroyed the bond market (they must perpetually roll it over or seek redemptions by central banks as a part of numerous quantitative easing programs). Who do you think might be their marginal buyer to fund compounding public debt deficits if existing creditors like for instance China change their credit risk strategy?
4. Do you think the debt forgiveness, UBI concept (universal basic income), MMT concept (modern monetary theory or rather “magic money tree”), social scoring system linked to new digital currency (CBDC) are the only options the West face to extend and pretend the illusion of wealth in its gigantic house of cards?
Thank you for your thoughts.
In Europe
The smaller currencies will fall first, with flight to the US Dollar and thus making the Dollar stronger over the short run. Expect the Euro to fall before the Dollar. “Lockdowns” can slow price inflation through demand destruction. Biological weapons aimed at livestock can take a chunk of food chain out in the Autumn to coincide with depletion of energy supplies over next winter.
As for America
So long as idiots around the world take US Dollars in trade for valuable stuff, US Dollars will be printed into oblivion.
No amount of zeros on the currency will make a farm disappear, so do not expect much starvation in the US, unless the power grid and interwebs are taken down.
Great interview. I made a point to travel to Russia and future BRI locales in 2008/9 and ‘11. The energy and purpose I witnessed then was eye-opening. I spent the last decade trying to warn anyone who would listen that the west better get on the bandwagon, but they gambled all or nothing. Nothing is where we are now.
Given the paradigm shift in global economics – how does the average Ivan benefit? Where are the initiatives to move from the current oligarchic system to one of less inequality of wealth? London Paul briefly touches on a new (and better?) mix of capitalism and socialism – any details of how this will be achieved?
Putin has often said that the living standards of the Russian people need to be raised. He is correct. Social care (pensions, disability, unemployment) urgently need addressing but Russia follows a European capitalist model to a greater or lesser degree. Since the break-up of the Soviet Union housing has become steadily more privatised forcing the current generation of young Russians into the Western rentier system of mortgages.
If the global financial revolution just means paying increasingly high bills in yuan or rubles (you get to choose!) while jam is forever promised tomorrow then there is no great advantage. Unless change is forced upon them the current crop of (international) oligarchs will maintain the status quo – turkeys rarely vote for Christmas.
” … It was around a decade ago that I came to know the architects of what is now known as the multipolar world. They understood back in the 1990s that US hegemony and the US Dollar were in terminal decline. They advised the Chinese and Russians that they needed to develop a multipolar world … ”
Who are the architects ?
See my link above. Glazyev knows the architects.
bonbon, you’re coming to conclusions here and making statements that you do not have real proof for.
A bunch of papers and statements from the LaRouchies cannot be evidence.
The story that Helga LaRouche started the Silk Road is not a story. She made a speech, that is all. And then the time periods do not fit.
Sorry, but no go here.
The dates, speeches, conferences are clear.
It is “just” an idea, for sure.
Politicos are now busy implementing. Ask “London Paul” – he knows full well who the architects are.
LaRouche is even more feared than Russia and China together in WallStreet and London.
Pity people are so afraid of the power of ideas.
@ Гру
Poor Glazyev, you will want to read whats here, in fact I highly recommend the entire thread!!! the take about Nazi Gold will be of great interest surely!!!
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2022/04/09/russia-is-back-and-so-is-history/#comment-350229
Move to Multi polarity? It seems to me we will see this all backfire when the QR Code and digitized money goes global. Nothing has the power to unite a world into one cohesive whole than funneling the entire world into what was it that Gazyiev said an ‘electronic concentration camp.’
A multipolar world was a deadly business responsible for two world wars and talk about the need for a new medium of exchange!!! The computer and internet has turned us all into a truly global village but at what cost ultimately your privacy and individual soverignty?
Here is some interesting history to sink ones teeth into….
Why did the people of Europe and Britain crowd hysterically into their banks on March 14,1968, to exchange $240 million in paper for 200 tons of gold? They could not eat their gold for food They could not wear it for clothes. It was too heavy to carry on the streets as a legal tender or medium of exchange. Why did they prefer to have the precious metal in place of their paper money?
The answer was extremely clear. They were afraid that their paper would be canceled with the stroke of a legislative pen. It would be as worthless as the German marks of 1923 when it took a wheelbarrow load to buy a simple sandwich or hot dog. The average man knew his paper money was becoming of less and less value. Americans could recall 1937 when $30 a month would put food on the table for a family of four. By 1947, the same food would cost $43. By 1957, it would cost $72. Then $100, and inflation continued unchecked.
The British, too, looked at their paper with its diminishing value. The record was indeed far from encouraging. The monetary facts offered little hope for the survival of their paper. In 1930, the official value of the pound was $4.86. In 1952, $2.82; in 1967, $2.40. In May of 1973 on the streets of Tokyo, I stared with incredulity at the spectre of inflation in Japan. Ground beef that was selling in October for $1.40 per pound was now $2.87; orange juice was over $3.00 per glass; steak, $ 16.00 per pound. In less than a year the price of real estate had doubled, and wool had tripled. Hashimoto, Secretary General of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party tried in vain to reason with the flnancial giants of his country. He concluded that those in a position to affect the inflation were too strong and beyond control.
The problem of inflation was worldwide. Since World War II, the currencies of over 100 nations had been devalued, some many times. I recalled a 1959 address by Robert Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury. He bluntly spelled out the technique of inflation:
Suppose tomorrow morning I want to write a check for $100 million, and the treasury does not have the money. I call the Federal Reserve Bank and ask, “Will you loan us $100 million at 31/2% for six months if I send you over our note to that effect?” The officer of the Federal Reserve Bank would naturally say, “I will.” He would merely create that much money subject to Reserve requirements by crediting our account in the sum and accepting the government note as an asset. When I finished writing checks for $100 million, we would have added 100 million to the nation’s money supply. This, he added, is one of the principles by which the 1940 dollar has shrunken to 47% with a quadrupling of our money supply.
Nations continuing programs of war and welfare and other costly programs, were forced to continue borrowing money. America increased her federal budget 84% in a five-year period. By going deeper in debt, she also increased her money supply 47%. Consequently, the buying power of the dollar continued to fall ever lower. In certain countries of the world, it was overwhelming. In Argentina, inflation increased 289% in a five-year period. In Brazil, over 500%. In Java, l000%. As the cry of inflation was heard around the world and received with genuine alarm, governmental leaders strove in vain to curb this economic disease that would spell death to all systems eventually.
In September 29, 1972, the Dallas Times Herald showed that in that particular year inflation had increased
Japan-7.5%
Great Britain- 12.5%
France – 5.7%
West Germany – 6 %
Ludwig Erhard, Germany’s Minister of Finance at the close of World War II, had said,
Give us depression or problems, but not inflation, for it spells eventually certain death to any economy.
Erhard knew that inflation, allowed to continue, was like sending a pilot across the ocean with a plane in which was
insufficient fuel. There came unavoidably a point of no return when the pilot found he had insufficient fuel to take him to either shore.
Too Much or Not Enough
In spite of the fact that the U.S. government had in_creased its money supply 47% in a five_year period, and other nations were doing the same thing, still there were those who cried it was not enough. Between 1954 and 1965, world trade had doubled. I sat with a thousand delegates in the International Board of Trade in the Waldorf Astoria Hotel of New York listening to the speakers struggle with their unsolved problems. world trade had reached the staggering figure of $159.2 billion. The currencies and credits with which they had to carry on this volume of trade was little more than $67.3 billion. By 1973, the volume of trade in the free world was $367 billion. I talked with Mitchell Sharpe, then Minister of Finance for Canada, and some of the American leaders. These men realized that the currencies being used were outmoded and insufficient for the modern day. They pointed out that the system was medieval, serving acceptably in the olden days when communities were small and self-contained, but thoroughly in-adequate for the present. The leaders of the nations involved in trade spoke of the nightmarish task of trying daily to adjust the varying exchange rates between the currencies from country to country on a day-to-day basis. They clamored for a single system of standardized value large enough in volume to allow world trade to move forward in
an orderly fashion.
ln 1967, two years following that International Board of Trade meeting in New York, the world leaders met in Rio. In discussing the inadequacy of the present world money systems to carry on world trade, Guido Carli from Rome suggested ersatz money which would resemble paper gold which was to be presented to the world the following year. I was back in America when the announcement came.
It was March 31, 1968. Most of the world reacted with amazement at the announcement that came from Europe stating that the nations of the world were ready to transact business with a new medium of exchange known as “paper gold.” But to all who follow the trend of monetary matters, the announcement was no surprise. For days there was a feeling in the air that something momentous was coming.
An editor wrote in the Financial Times,
Something sinister is going on.
With great interest, I followed the comments and reactions of world leaders. Carl Schiller, Germany’s financier, stated,
There’s a worm in the apple somewhere.
Pierre Paul Schweitzer seemed pleased. Schweitzer, the nephew of Albert Schweitzer, was an elite Protestant,
born in Alsace-Lorraine, who had served as number-three man in the Bank of France, and had been elected managing director of the International Monetary Fund. Some declared that when paper gold was presented to the world on that March morning, Schweitzer declared,
Gentlemen, we are right on schedule.
72% of the nations in the IMF were considered under_developed. Schweitzer seemed especially dedicated to the
task or policy of taking from the rich to give to the poor. This naturally made him popular with the majority in the
IMF, who were elated at the prospect of acquiring some of America’s wealth regardless of the measures.
Why the Announcement from Europe?
Many Americans, startled by the announcement of paper gold, were asking,
“Why has this declaration come to us from the bankers of Europe? Why did we have to hear it first from the lips of the spokesmen representing the gold pool so integrated with the World Bank and the Inter_national Monetary Fund?”
The attitude of the average man on the street was one of absolute helplessness. In olden days, banking had been a rather personal matter between himself and a trusted friend. It had changed with the passing of time until it was with an institution equally trusted and respected. The local banker was indeed his friend and would discuss with sincerity the personal financial needs of any of his clients. But banking had become much more than a localized or even nationalized institution. In a single lifetime it had seemingly taken on an ominous new form of world control.
A question began to arise in the hearts of millions of Americans. “Why can’t we retain our financial destiny in our own hands? Why can’t banking be a personal matter between man and his banker as in the past? Why must it be in the international courts and the arenas of the world?”
In searching for the answers to those questions, I seemed to find a twofold answer. Logic and wisdom could explain with clarity the reasons for a world bank. But there was a dark side, which, when properly considered, revealed an invisible government with an amazing power that planned world control in a sinister fashion. Cantelon 1973
Heres an interesting conundrum about current exchange rates and a multipolarity world which from my perspective raises many questions and concerns. As I work in the oil and gas sector we build compressors for the natrual gas industry and many of our sales just sit waiting to be shipped to customers. When asked as to why this is lol I get a number of reason one in which stopped me. Due to exchange rates what cost last year 225,000 for our customer went up by 30,000 dollars sometimes practically overnight? Also Government incentives come and go? So companies seek for ways around this conundrum. Gail Tverberg is right about the affordability issues/crises across the board. From the boardrooms right down to the non elite workers who are finding it more and more difficult to afford to life.
Saker,
thank you for this opportunity to learn more about Mr Paul. I’d been peripherally aware of the Sirius Report but this shows his analysis is deep, vast and to me completely on point. it dovetails nicely with your analysis on military as well as geopolitical events affecting Russia, his economic background is priceless. an understanding of what Paul and Hudson are saying can lessen the predilection many here have for countering US propaganda with equally baseless conspiracy bs (covid not real, microchips in vaccines, blm/antifa unleashed by biden, no such thing as climate change, stolen election). the truth is awful enough.
The folks that want to tell us the La Rouchies did all of this, must please go and read the interview again. I asked directly and I quote:
London Paul did not actually answer the question – who were the architects?
He heard of them before he studied China.
Let London Paul answer that question.
He may be afraid to because of the vagaries of history.
Hey, it is really rough out there in the jungle!
The FBI imprisoned LaRouche, hunted down by Mr. Mueller, the very same legal assassin that hunted Trump.
Anyone who foretells the implosion of the transatlantic uni-polar economy, let alone showing the way out – the New Silk Road – gets in real serious trouble. And that long before Russia and China moved like now.
Anyway the idea of linking Europe to China via Russia goes way back to Leibniz, and later to Colorado Governor Gilpin – see his map from mid 1800’s :
https://i0.wp.com/canadianpatriot.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/7bfd1-image838.png?ssl=1
High time to make this a reality!
The sheer irony escapes one – “many other nations” actually includes the USA and Germany!
Impossible to imagine, and even deadly dangerous, under Biden or even Trump.
It is that USA that Russia would like to talk to.
At the moment extremely difficult.
That is the way the world is right now….
Interesting read. I’m particular fascinated by this tidbit: “My response was that we should all pay attention to what China and Russia do domestically, bilaterally and internationally. This was greeted with utter disbelief, ridicule and anger.”
I wonder who had that kind of response? The end of “US Heg” and rise of the multipolar world was the conversation in political economy in the US in the 1990s. There was general consensus among people who paid attention/were modestly interested in these things that US soft+hard power would peak in the mid-2000s and then slowly be displaced by the multipolar world in the 21st century. The main question was (remains) what exactly would Beijing do with power once it was entrenched as the center of the global system?
One school of thought was to go to war with China then, before Beijing became too strong, to prevent China’s rise. Another was to embrace China and help them transition collaboratively into their role as the leading (or at least peer) power. The US power structure coalesced on the latter with MFN status, supporting WTO entry, moving factories/supply chains and related IP/operations to China, using Tibet/Taiwan/Hong Kong as vague leverage but never concretely supporting self-determination, etc. China, meanwhile, picked up the slack from Europe in supporting the dollar-based financial system and buying US treasuries and soft-bribing US politicos and conveniently never making much of a stink in global institutions about actual human rights for ordinary citizens around the world.
Plus, there was all the ‘Fourth Turning’ conversation/perspective and a variety of attempts to settle internal/domestic conflict about the US role in the post-Cold war era (such as PNAC – Project for a New American Century). Clearly the MIC and expand NATO crowd obliterated any leftist peace dividend dreams. The US has been thoroughly occupied, with no semblance of Constitutional governance left, for a quarter century now.
With this depth of both debate and policy action for decades, I’m quite curious who would have been oblivious to the notion of paying attention to Russia and China as late as 2014?
All of us. I still get it when I do the China Sitreps which are a little overdue now. I have one in the oven though.
Can you post a link to your China Sitreps?
Go to the right of the page and find the search bar .. type in China, and you’ll find a bunch of material.
Paul’s reply to Question #2 is quite wrong “While.. China and Russia were the trail blazers for multipolarity, we should not forget the role that has been played by many other nations in the last decade which is equally as important and significant.”
Not true, those previous attempts, sadly, were abject FAILURES since they were not backed up by MILITARY and ECONOMIC power. Just two years ago, India, a major part of BRICS, joined the Empire’s Quad alliance!
That is why now we pray that Russia will decisively win this Ukraine war and that the Russia-China alliance will stay strong and that other countries like Iran and India will join in.
See Andrei Martyanov’s Blog https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2022/03/news-of-world.html
3/15/2022
Now, the monumental task is to connect the dots for morons from Wall Street and State Department in explaining to them how military power works and how it shapes geopolitical reality.
I can guarantee you that the rest of the world waited until the West and, especially, the US would be shown its proper place and this moment has arrived, and operation in Ukraine has everything to do with it.
I mean 100% because as I am on record for years THE ONLY pillar on which the reign of the US Dollar is based was a perception of the US military power.
Thomas, you’re saying that BRICS, SCO, EAEU, AIIB, ASEAN, BRI and the raft of other multilateral alliances are all failures?
And this does not exist? Joint Statement of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on the International Relations Entering a New Era and the Global Sustainable Development
/joint-statement-of-the-russian-federation-and-the-peoples-republic-of-china-on-the-international-relations-entering-a-new-era-and-the-global-sustainable-development/
Rather late to the game – this began in the mid 1800’s :
https://i0.wp.com/canadianpatriot.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/7bfd1-image838.png?ssl=1
See the map of Colorado Governor Gilpin’s World Landbridge, which today includes the BRI, BRICS, SCO, and our 8 billion, a much vaster world.
A lot is made out of this, supposed, new relationship between Putin and Xi Jinping and the bi polar solidarity which seems to be growing between the two.
I’m not buying it.
The two men, in a fundamental way, are as different as night and day.
An example of that difference is being played out in Shanghai and the Ukraine.
Xi Jinping, without batting an eye, has brutalized 24 million of his citizens in that city. Xi Jinping thinks of his people as subjects, kind of like lab rats, not as real living human beings.
Putin, on the other hand loves his fellow citizens, using their well being as a guide to his actions. Everything about the Ukraine episode conveys that feeling.
For the sake of the U.S., the two men will put up a unified front for the time being. But, I think, they both know they are fundamentally different and, inevitably, some day that difference will surface.
“Xi Jinping, without batting an eye, has brutalized 24 million of his citizens in that city. Xi Jinping thinks of his people as subjects, kind of like lab rats, not as real living human beings.”
That is pure western nonsense. How many people from Shangai did you speak to just lately. I bet, not one.
Precisely. Johnny $Dollar is not worth my 2 $cents!
Ruplegas is the currency!
Take a look
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2022/04/11/tucker_carlson_shanghais_covid_zero_lockdown_is_a_sample_of_the_repression_covid_has_made_possible.html
Tucker Carlson is just a little nuts there. He may question Russia, but oh boy, show him a little war with China and he is in, boots and all. Tucker Carlson did not speak to anyone in Shangai either.
People have been unfair to China. It has done a lot to support Russia in this existential war. How many Chinese ordinary people ran to empty stores of Russian goods in solidarity? The government has boosted Russian imports of every commodity and good.
https://www.rt.com/business/553788-china-russia-trade-surge/
Also I agree with some astute analysts who say China’s covid “zero tolerance” policy is actually economic warfare hiding under health policy. China is the world’s workshop and without its goods, supply chains are catastrophically cut for a West highly dependent through inflexible “Just-in-time” inventories policies. In other words, it is a dagger through the heart of western model of globalization, at their weakest moment. So IMO, this a two-step coordinated dance with Russia, where one tackles the kinetic and Golden-Ruble / Rublegas, and the other breaks the economy, and bakes in hyperinflation. It is a coordinated take-down in the attempt to avert nuclear war. See the disastrous impact of China shutting down just ONE shipping port in Shanghai:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/china/the-worlds-busiest-shipping-port-is-closed/
Wait amarynth, are you suggesting that people in Shanghai all voluntarily sheltered in place? That PLA military medics aren’t deployed? And more generally, that the CCP doesn’t enforce edicts and has been fully transparent with data about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 since 2019? What exactly is the origin of COVID, by the way?
Here is how RT describes Shanghai this week:
“…authorities initially opting for partial lockdowns affecting various parts of the city separately. However, as the measures in place did not appear to contain the spread of the virus, the city last Monday introduced a two-stage lockdown, which has since been expanded to effectively confine most residents to their homes…”
https://www.rt.com/news/553251-china-deploys-army-shanghai-covid-outbreak/
The COVID narrative is empire propaganda. It’s why they keep changing the goal posts, hide information, smear critics, make it hard to obtain cheap generic medications, ignore the basic tenets of good health, etc. Basically the antithesis of science and good faith. You don’t fight respiratory diseases with broad-based population lockdowns and secret data and pushing untested medical interventions. You provide focused protection for vulnerable populations while providing transparency for the general public to make their own decisions about risk and behavior.
China’s role in all this – opposition to the empire or complicit with it – is one of the central questions of the past three years that remains wholly unanswered.
People = must entail individual sovereignty to have meaning and global sustainability for the future, economic, meaning people, individual sovereignty, money flow, and digital electronic = attaining global sustainability at the cost of individual freedom, and the placing of every persons right to live and fulfill their life without repression and enforced tyrannies, as central.
We are witness to a spiritual war, no where is that clearer than on this site, thank you Saker!
What can small indebted countries of the EU, like Greece is, do in domestically, politically, bilaterally and can we expect this to be possible in the current authoritarian supranational EU?
I doubt it’s legit. Look how quickly we gave the confiscated art back to Russia almost as soon as it hit the headlines in the world press. I also watched a Finnish expert discussion on the topic of joining Nato and one of the members of the panel said that if/when we do join, we don’t need to provoke Russia e.g. by bringing in permanent Nato troops. I do admit it’s already a provocation to join Nato but I do get the sense from following the Finnish media discussions that there’s some sense left within the general insanity.
Brilliant interview & succinct summary of economic developments over the last 30 years.
Along with the recent Glazynev speech this should be compulsory reading for commentators in the Vineyard.
Thankyou Amarynth.
Peace be to you.
The scandal was about the President, the Defence and Foreign Ministries bypassing the Finnish Parliament when signing the MOU on Finland becoming a Nato host country. The parliament was apparently informed about the signing but didn’t get to have any input. Ever since the MOU Finland has imo pretty much been a Nato country. Now they just want to make it official. This time at least it is the Parliament that makes the decision.
I have a question to add for London Paul: how is this new multipolar globalism better than the old dystopic globalism we know and detest?
Thank you.
Sorry, this world is bipolar. There is the Hegemon system on one side and there is its adversaries and victims on the other side. That makes 2 groups. In this context, Multi-polarity will not reach its full potential until the Hegemon side is cut down in size most certainly in its predatory, destructive and chaos sowing aspects.
It appears the stage where this clash appears to be being resolved is on the European mainland but… one should not be sure.