by Batko Milacic for the Saker blog
For many, the death of Elizabeth II formally marked the end of the existence of Great Britain as an imperial power. Geopolitically speaking, Britain has long ceased to be an imperial power. However, Elizabeth II was a symbol of the power of Britain with her behavior and decisions. But, certain centers of power in Britain still do not want to accept the harsh fact for them, which is that the attempt to act as a great power for Britain carries great risks and losses. This is precisely the kind of policy that Liz Truss should be expected to lead.
Until the First World War, Britain was indeed an imperial power. However, then British analytics made a crucial mistake. Then as now, Britain worked to weaken Russia. Namely, Britain then played a double game. It formally opposed the strengthening of Germany and its military and economic power. On the other hand, London wanted to use the power of Germany against Russia. British goal was that Germany and Austria-Hungary have war with Russia.
Because they knew that Russia would not give up the Balkans, over which Austria-Hungary and Germany wanted complete control. Official London has repeatedly assured Germany that it will not interfere in the conflict on the European continent if it breaks out. This policy met with the consternation of official Paris, who knew that if Germany were to become too strong, the French state was in great danger. That is why France got closer to Russia and blackmailed Russia with loans, so that Russia would not send its army to the Far East, but that the best Russian troops were near Europe. It was the French who were exposing the British double game. And precisely at the insistence of France, Britain was forced to oppose Germany together with Russia and France when the First World War started.
However, even if Britain emerged victorious from the First World War, it paid a heavy price for it. Huge human and financial losses, which could hardly be compensated by the acquisition of a couple of insignificant colonies in Africa. At the same time, London’s glorious “imperial policy” allowed Germany to recover from defeat in just 20 years and all but bring Britain down to its knees. The British Empire with its colonies emerged from the Second World War having lost its former status of a world power. The Americans demanded decolonization, and Indians and Malays demanded independence. “I don’t want to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire,” Winston Churchill said when leaving the prime minister’s post for the last time.
However, the status of a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a small nuclear arsenal and a nuclear submarine fleet, as well as the “British Commonwealth” – a plethora of former colonies and dominions, allowed Britain to keep playing the role of a Great Power throughout the Cold War years. True, the rules of this game were now set by Washington, which took control of both the economy and the defense of Europe. By the start of the 1980s, unsuccessful attempts at social reforms necessitated tough reforms by Margaret Thatcher, which freed Britain from the illusions of state capitalism. By the way, it was the Iron Lady, who let Britons feel like residents of the Great Empire for the last time. In 1982, the British Navy (with plans for its reduction already in the pipeline), recaptured from Argentina the Falkland Islands, a British colony lost in the South Atlantic.
At the same time, London, which has been trying for decades to force the EU to recognize its special role in a united Europe, eventually left the EU, launching a lengthy divorce with Brussels. Economically, the UK relies heavily on its traditional financial sector – banking and brokerage services, insurance, consulting, etc. However, 75 years after the Yalta Conference and the collapse of its empire, London is still not ready to admit that it is just one among equal European powers – France, Italy, Spain and Germany. London has no real colonial interests that it can use to underpin its intrigues. Ukraine, whose conflict with Russia has been patiently nurtured since 2013 by US strategists at the State Department, will not bring Britain a penny of profit.
However, since the 1950s, London has mastered the role of “Washington’s junior partner,” which implies a bigger role in NATO and exclusivity towards Europeans. Decades later, Liz Truss continues to play this very card in Ukraine, just as Boris Jonson did before her. Britain has assumed an extremely tough anti-Russian position, not bothering to see into the causes of the war, or think about its own interests.
It support a president who banned the official use of his country’s most widely spoken minority language, who sanctioned the torture of prisoners and persecution of ethnic minorities, a president whom Britain supplies with weapons and military instructors, and writes off debts. Taking a cue from the Johnson Cabinet, Liz Truss will try to convince Britons that since the struggle for England and its age-old imperial interests is now going on in the Ukrainian steppes, the British people must prepare for hardships – heating problems, rising tariffs, inflation and increased defense outlays. At the same time, the conflict in Ukraine will give London a chance to put a temporary damper on such controversial issues with Europe, as fishing quotas, relations with the EU in Northern Ireland, the situation around the economic status of Gibraltar, etc.
Meanwhile, the Russian market is closed to Western countries, the Russians turned to the East, where they quickly redirected the flow of raw materials supplies. Western arms deliveries to Ukraine allow Kyiv to fight on, but the Ukrainian economy is no longer able to support the very existence of the Ukrainian state, which requires monthly financial infusions from its Western allies. British mercenaries captured in Ukraine are tried and sentenced to death in the Donbass republics, and London cannot do anything to get them out. Of course, already the second British government in six months cannot be accused of waging a proxy war against Russia, which is a time-tested way to weakening the enemy. But is Russia weakening? And how will the British gain from this war? Will Ukraine ever be able to repay all the investments that London has sunk in it since February 2022?
Perhaps, London’s long-term strategy is to create a buffer against Russia in the East in order to end Europe’s dependence on Russian oil and gas, as well as Russian fertilizers, grain and food. And, after going through several difficult years, to create the “green economy” that the Western countries dream of? Extremely radical as this idea may look, it is at least justified! What is more likely, however, is that London has simply become confused in its ambitions and the clichés about the “Russian threat” that generations of British politicians were weaned on. And these ambitions are pushing the whole of Europe to war…
The evidence is that UK Russophobia comes from the Head of State; and is founded on some irrational grievance from the past.
Evidence; A Princess was stopped from wearing a tiara at a Royal Wedding “because the emeralds which adorned it were sourced from Russia.”
Russia and Belarus are barred from representation at the Queen’s funeral.
The evidence is that Royal Favour and traditional British grovelling to one’s supposed “Betters” are the source rationale behind the ongoing slaughter in Ukraine.
What beggars belief is the open support for the vilest offshoots of Nazism, which the UK supposedly sacrificed thousands of lives to eradicate.
London wants to continue dominating the planet. USA and London have the POWERFUL soft power in their favor. China and Russia can’t make soft power like the West.
Coldplay makes colorful bracelets that change colors on show, they talk about love, about peace, and dominate the west. exuberant scenery in the shows. Many lights for the subconscious of homo sapiens.
this has to stop, this has to change. But here on the blog nobody talks about it, nobody talks about soft power.
they make melodies in the major scale, easy lyrics about love and peace, they dominate india, brazil, argentina and asia with that insight.
Coldplay, U2, Micheal Jackson, are the biggest forces on the planet, and Asia is ignoring that force.
We need to stop being silent and not perceive this reality if we want to overcome the empire of evil.
“My valve is forever sealed” – John Kennedy Toole, A Confederacy of Dunces
If and when you see west Europeans revert to peasants in rags, no amount of soft power can overcome that. Etc etc.
The Western Front of WWII was an intra nazi civil war. The Belgians, Dutch, Brits and French were no less vile to their colonial subjects (and the Americans to their non white people, to their Latin American de facto colonies, and their colony the Philippines) than the Germans were to their socialists, Communists, trade unionists, Romani and Jews. They were no less politically anti Soviet, racistly anti Slav, and psychologically anti Eastern. They were no less a political-capitalist-military complex. The problem with Hitler was that he got too ambitious and threatened their own position as the top nazis on the heap, so he eventually had to be taken down.
The British venom against Russia comes from the US who are still stuck in a cold-war mentality. Europe and Russia were getting along fine until the US intervened in the Ukraine and both Britain and the EU blindly followed US dictates.
The chaos you’re seeing now didn’t come from the Queen, it came from politicians. The same ones who also promised to change the climate, find renewable sources of energy and create a multicultural utopia.
In the funeral of the Queen yesterday, an estimated one million lined the streets to bid goodbye. I doubt Biden or Von Der Layen who are instrumental in the current chaos will be remembered five minutes after they’ve gone.
It is simpler than that. UK does what it always did — use other countries strengths and resources to advance its own and diminish its cimpetitoors, Germany emerged as the power in post cold war, and Britain in decline. But getting out of EU, and getting a big dummy, US, with ifs zealotic neocons replaying the battle of Hazaria of 800s — what an opportunity! Germany is committing economic suicide as US demands, and the whole Europe is at Brittish feet,
US will screw itself up with Chinna and Pacific, leaving Europe at UK capital mercy. What economic benefits will it get? I think none, and tge perrenial UK game will again prove Phyrric victory as in WWI. Beause upon a time Europe was an engine of innovation, science and production. Britain profited from it after Napoleonic wars — where not expanding much of its energy — gained an upper hand in France, But it wasted it in Crimmean wars, burying France Bourbons for good.
This idea of doing same thing over and over whille losing — is a definition of maddness.
US is also mad if it thinks that a collection of postage stamp sized countries will help them control the world!
Reading your first para, my opinion. From around the beginning of the 20th century, WW1, Britain became zionist in actual fact. Observation tells us that Zionism destroys everything it touches, everything, no exception, even formally invincible empires, tho they take a little longer – officer[sic] material https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2022/09/17/689375/Godfather-of-Israeli-Military
Is it completely impossible to cooperate for mutual benefit?
I mean all this securing Germany not get too strong, weakening Russia, obstructing China, undermining Balkans, making one country go to war against each other, power struggles.
What would happen if Germany got too strong? Would they attack France?? What if all profited on Russia getting strong and leading in space technology.
In WWII Russia had a military strategy I like. On the long front line Russia had losses and successes, but those who had success to break through the German lines were enforced by taking men from the losing line to the success line to increase the success.
Help those who have success to make an even greater success.
You left out the part about the Americans financing the British war effort for 3 years with loans Britain could never repay and which the Americans collected on by de industrializing Britain after the war , to the benefit of US industry.The British people took to calling the Americans “Uncle Shylock” during the interwar period
Oh come on, the British Empire has long since ended. It wasn’t the Queen who helped drag the west down it was stupefied populations who voted for clowns who promised them alternative energy sources, changing the climate and creating multicultural societies. The Queen didn’t tell the US to start wars in the Middle East, or Britain to sanction Russian energy supplies. Because the Queen is dead won’t stop idiot politicians leading us into more disasters.
@Asia Teacher
You said in reply to Batko’s article…”Oh come on, the British Empire has long since ended.”
With all due respect, please have a wee re-think on this statement. At the same time, please bear in mind that the physical occupational colonial model of the British empire, when it collapsed, was hastily replaced by the financial occupation of those same countries and many more to boot… literally as well as figuratively.
The plunder never actually ended. The Spiders Web doco…https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=np_ylvc8Zj8 … perfectly illustrates this point at the 33-minute mark.
This is just one example of financial colonisation in its most obscene guise. The Royal Family, like it or not, is an integral component of this plundering web.
Just one example… in 2008 the African Sub-Saharan countries’ combined debts stood at a relatively meagre $177 billion, but during the period from 1970 to 2008 around $944 billion in wealth had been moved to secret offshore tax havens.
As such this region was in effect a massive net creditor to the rest of the world. These funds, sent to secret jurisdictions, were starving these nations of their wealth and tax revenues, and the same nations were borrowing from international banks at high-interest rates.
Because these loans were denominated in US dollars, the inevitable weakening of their currencies from low tax revenues, and in just trying to service these loans, meant that principle repayments were nigh on impossible.
The UK and US persistently blocked attempts to set up a World Tax Organisation that could regulate how taxes could be collected across borders. Meanwhile, elites were hiding wealth off-shore and the citizens of those countries got no benefits whatsoever.
These were typical ruinous, and cynical, predatory Anglo-American loans. The Royal Family has never lifted a finger to address this type of behaviour… indeed they are financially inextricably entwined in this plunder. All of them are either too greedy or too dim-witted to ever address this.
King Charles the Turd will be the absolute pits, as like his father he is a blatant Mr Global asset. Queen Lizzy was probably quite a good little mechanic in her day, but clearly, she had neither the intellect nor the conscience to ever give a flying toss about the coloured people of her empire that have been raped for centuries… she reigned over this situation for the equivalent of three generations.
Kind regards from the antipodes
Col
If anyone is making vast fortunes in the current globalized world, it’s not Britain it’s the US and Wall Street. That’s not to say Britain never did, but Britain is now just another US colony except in name.
“Wealthy individuals, organized crime and corporations …” Add to that the endemic corruption by the new rulers. That’s not colonialism, it’s private individuals plundering the former colonial countries in much the same way as western capitalists plundered the Russian economy in the 1990’s under Yeltsin.
Can you give me instances where the Royal family have plundered a former colonial country and benefitted financially for it?
Important for Brits to read Thomas Paine’s
The Rights of Man Part I (1791 ed.)
https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/paine-the-rights-of-man-part-i-1791-ed
“t was not against Louis the XVIth, but against the despotic principles of the government, that the nation revolted. These principles had not their origin in him, but in the original establishment, many centuries back; and they were become too deeply rooted to be removed, and the augean stable of parasites and plunderers too abominably filthy to be cleansed, by any thing short of a complete and universal revolution. ”
Monarchy, despotism, the Monarch and rights, are there never better unpacked.
While a monarch might personally be kind and generous, they remain the monarch, the head of the state which fights its wars and (on occasion) commits its crimes – all in the name of the Crown.
For Her Majesty’s grand knights of treachery
https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1999/eirv26n17-19990423/eirv26n17-19990423_029-bac_control_the_raw_materials_ca.pdf
Weinberger, Powell, Scowcroft, Schwarzkopf, … what an American Entourage the Queen has in tow!
Forgot ex-Bank of England chief Marc Carney, Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, now UN Climate Finance czar.
Who will King Charles III knight first, I wonder?
Monarchical parasitism has its share of the blame for the problem is not the color of the economy, be it green, yellow or red, what destroys the system is compound interest; the number of profits just for speculating is greater every day, and it must be taken away from those who work.
Not true:
“One estimate came from consultancy Brand Finance who said that in 2017 the monarchy contributed £1.8 billion to the UK economy, of which around £550 million came from tourism.
This is a gross figure (so before the estimated costs have been subtracted). The net contribution estimate is £1.5 billion a year.”
Source:
https://fullfact.org/economy/royal-family-what-are-costs-and-benefits/
The cash starved British government would be nuts to give up the revenue gained by their #1 tourist attraction.
It is like Disneyland, if you don’t like it, don’t go.
It’s a mistake to think that A. The British Empire is gone and B. The British Empire is controlled by the British. In both cases this is wrong. For example, the City of London controls not only Wall Street and the Federal Reserve but also has an enormous amount of wealth stashed around the various tax havens plus dependencies which have been set up since 1945. The documentary the Spiders Web explains this in great detail. The controllers of the City of London are not English.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=np_ylvc8Zj8
I think you’ll find that the US is the dollar currency reserve and the British controlling anything has long since gone. The ‘controllers’ in any western country are global capitalists. The GBP isn’t a privatized currency and so doesn’t need to be hidden in off-shore accounts. Psst! Shape shifting repitiles don’t exist and there aren’t any secret cabals lurking in the White House basement. :)
The Brits can faack themselves, they will not find anyone else!!
The so called Green Economy means giving up industrial production to turn the people of Europe into a nation of poorly paid farm laborers. Such is the WEF plan of Soros and Schwab, where everyone will be penniless but supremely happy to be debt slaves to private banks.
However, Janet Yellen the US Treasury Secretary is now proposing that the Federal Reserve should create debt free digital money, hopefully to provide a universal basic income.
https://www.rt.com/business/562972-us-considers-digital-dollar/
US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has called for President Joe Biden’s administration to consider creating a central bank cryptocurrency and to start laying the technical groundwork for the so-called digital dollar right away.
The new digital currency, as proposed by the Treasury Department, could “help preserve US global financial leadership and support the effectiveness of sanctions,” the White House said in a statement on Friday. It could also make the US payment system more “environmentally sustainable” and “promote financial inclusion and equity,” according to the statement.
Welcome to the minimum wage gig-economy as it’s called in Britain. Courtesy of the EU multiculturalism, diversity and eqaulity agenda. The digital currency age is already here. I could already travel around the world and not spend any currency, it could all be done on my debit/credit card.
Yes, central bank digital currencies are a misdirection.
The world operates digitally already and reserve banks are controlled by private banks not governments.
The real objectives are first to get rid of cash and second to get the whole world onto a single currency.
They want us to want their system.
Bad idea.
In a world of digitl currencies, governments will finally control indivdual wealth. Communism by the back door.
@ Asia Teacher
Not just individual wealth but one conscience and bread as well as Dostoevsky foretold.
Wanted you to know that I never mark up important books in my library one of my most cherished is Dr. Willard Cantelon book that I have quoted from many times but your comment here deserves a place on the inside front cover of his book. Why? Because what you said in two sentences sums up his thesis perfectly except for the missing Biblical part {Rev. 13:16-17} and he wrote this way back in 1972!!! He would be impressed as i am now here today!!
Thank you very much for the KISS Principle in all its glory!!!
Cheers
U Thant:
I believe in the philosophy of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. from its present antithesis, I believe the world is moving toward a new synthesis.
Yikes!!!!
I have a whole range of congruent views with the analysis in the text “London Delusions”. There are many more undeserved privileges that London inherits completely without foundation. It must be admitted that the rest of the world also gave them some helms lightly, so they imagined that they were a people above the rest. Too easily the world agrees and lets English be the language of universal communication. It’s a huge advantage needlessly almost given away. From that, they derived the right to be incredible complicators of the international order, true scoundrels with an innate talent, to spoil something for others even when they have no benefit from it. However, I still cannot understand why, at least while the UN still represents a place of decision-making and in symbolic forms, that some things start to change. Certainly, most of the countries of the world are not on the side of politics led by Britain and the USA, and a lot of things could have been voted on in the assembly. Unfortunately, here we are again witnessing the loss of initiative and the chance for a different story. Nevertheless, Zelenski will be blunt again, and he is tired of God and people. It is not clear where the step is lost.
Machine translation
As for the language, for a longest time Latin has been the world dominant universal language, while Roman empire was long diminished. English language no longer belongs to England and Brittish nor Americans cannot regulate it, there is no regulation authority over it and the whole world contributes to it with new words.
If anything, English being a universal language gives native English speakers mild disadvantage. Very few exercises train mind better than learning additional language in young age, so the children who grow up in bilingual environment gain couple intelligence points for free.
Why is Britain rabid about Russia? Because: Novichok!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_Skripal
Coincidentally, Porton Down (Britain’s chemical warfare centre) is about 12 km from Salisbury.
Britain’s decline started when it tried to become part of Europe first by the common Market, Then EEC then EU and dumped its long standing preferred colonial economic ties.
It was a serious mistake because France & Germany were not going to give any quarter to them.
It took 40 years to realize the mistake until Brexit happened. (And the EU still dictate to EU countries what their laws will be which akin to what the Vatican did 500 years ago which caused the Reformation – aka Luther & Henry VIII).
But when you realize that US money from by EU elites anyway funded the German 1933-45 venture then its a complete web of smoke & mirrors. A shell game.
Nothing has changed in this. Their running dogs the Obama-Biden administration and Soros are up to their old agenda again on behalf of the EU elites in their agenda of greed & evil around the globe.
Britain has been a only one of the actors in this stage production that been going on a 1000 years.
An important one, but part of the deception going on.
So what is Britain’s big plan now after Elizabeth II – does Charles at age 75 think he can reinvent the UK surrounded by enemies and problems galore and Scotland wanting out ?
One thing is for sure that the UK is in for more changes unless things improve.
I am not sure about the notion that GB is subservient to the USA. The Empire is still the Empire… it is essentially the ‘West’ which still believes it controls and is entitled to control the world, its population and its resources.
But what exactly is the Empire? I believe that it is just a collection of historically wealthy and corrupt families who controls respective governments and therefore its people to wield its power to establish even greater control of the world’s resources.
A more in depth analysis of the history of (at least) the last 300 years would show that ”the cliché about the “Russian threat”” and the necessity to ‘contain’, ‘isolate’, ‘cajole’, eventually ‘destroy’ that threat for good, practically formatted the political thinking of the ‘West’. Think only of the “Testament of Peter the Great”, which continued to be considered as the ‘Bible’ of Russian policies even after it was proved to be a forgery.
” London has no real colonial interests that it can use to underpin its intrigues. Ukraine, whose conflict with Russia has been patiently nurtured since 2013 by US strategists at the State Department, will not bring Britain a penny of profit.”
“And how will the British gain from this war? Will Ukraine ever be able to repay all the investments that London has sunk in it since February 2022?”
The answer to the sentences/questions above are key to understanding the geopolitical status quo.
The costs of Britains investment in Ukraine will be paid for by taxpayers (either current or future). The benefits of Britains investment in Ukraine goes to the banks, by the expansion of the money supply and increased public indebtedness.
The actions of the government should not be seen as being in the interests of the people, but of the banks.
The benefit to the banks should be seen as a benefit to the controlling interests in the banks ie. individuals of a certain persuasion, with a certain ambition not entirely consistent with the people’s.
Europe is part of Russia.