Eso’s Chronicles 247/ 33

Addendum 8—1^st Post-WW4 Event

© Eso A.B.

 

Given that in my previous post, I stated that the U.S. appears to have agreed to pull out of Europe and Asia, because though its military might may deter aggression against it, it is not strong enough, given modern weapons, to deter the destruction of its own or Europe’s infrastructure if it itself were to become the aggressor. The recent posturing by the U.S. and its allies in the Middle East gave rise to suspicions that indeed the West had chosen the aggressor’s path. This is also the reason why the sudden pull back from an outright attack on Syria and hence on Iran makes suspect that it was met with a warning by the powers native to Europe and Asia that was no less determined to prevent such an attack.

 

Not surprisingly, the U.S. change of mind not to press war (it may be interpreted to be a 2^nd version of the so-called Molotov-Ribbentrop Nonaggression Pact http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/230972/German-Soviet-Nonaggression-Pact , renamed as the Kerry-Lavrov Pact 75 years later, has upset many of its allies who had mistakenly believed that nothing could deter the U.S. from attacking if it so decided. Their mistake was to make-believe that the U.S. was not—for delusionary reasons—vulnerable. Now they know differently, which changes many things, and is cause for resetting many expectations as to the developments in the future.

 

It is not surprising; therefore, that many high officials of the U.S. and EU governments are currently in the Middle East and Eastern Europe giving reassurances. In this context, the following statement by US Defence Secretary Chuck Hegel, is interesting:

 

"Going forward, the Department of Defense will place even more emphasis on building the capacity of our partners in order to complement our strong military presence in the region." http://rt.com/news/us-mideast-iran-nuclear-hagel-878/

 

A nice try, but… it does not acknowledge the vulnerability (presumed by this author) of the country that stands behind “our strong military presence”. An admission of vulnerability, if not made in earlier times even in secret, is taken for granted today by every analyst, because time has done its levelling best to put everyone’s military hardware on a more or less equal footing. As for the “partners”, these are the six oil exporting nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Bahrain, one of the nations of said Council or Congress (aka Manama Dialogue security forum) and the host to the conference may indeed buy additional military equipment from the U.S. military industrial complex. However, the same reasons why the U.S. paid attention to Russian cautioning are also operative with regard to Bahrain. As the readers who may be sceptical with regard to this writer’s reasoning know best: We will believe only if we witness a demonstration of the ‘truth’; that is to say, a demonstration is pending and awaiting its day. All this writer can say to this is: We will see: after all, the predecessor to the suspected Kerry-Lavrov Pact is infamous for soon being betrayed.

 

Indeed, with the U.S. shifting “… its military attention, not to mention the bulk of its assets, to Asia,” as the RT article states, and because the secret agreement between Russia (and China) and the U.S. has not been officially announced, a demonstration may be an event one or all of six nations may expect to be the guinea pigs for. Just what form and shape a demonstration will take is for military experts to decide, but this author has always been impressed with the ability by some nuclear weapons to cause surges of electromagnetic pulse that may target a nation’s electric systems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse , knocking out unprotected power grids. If such weapons may emit a directed  pulse, the demonstration may be a ‘test’ that deliberately ‘goes wrong’ yet provides the ‘proof’ for those who suspect but are uncertain of the existence of a secret treaty. Who will risk the prolonged (it may be years) recovery of one’s infrastructure?

 

The statements by Chuck Hegel are well within the bounds of face saving posturing—if such posturing is part of the agreement “with Iran”. It hurts no one if the cat scrapes the sand in his box obsessively: “We have deployed our most advanced fighter aircraft throughout the region, including F-22s, to ensure that we can quickly respond to contingencies,” he [the cat] said. “Coupled with our unique munitions, no target is beyond our reach.”

 

What the response of the F-22s may be to a ‘contingency’ that blows all the fuses and burns the electrical wiring of Saudi Arabia and Israel will be is unknown, but we may guess: nothing special, except for the panic in the offices of government historians that the first and last shot of WW4 went as unnoticed as the nonaggression pact proves itself (this time) to be trustworthy.

 

Still, we may expect that the Great Powers, knowing that a ‘test’ (just as a military manoeuvre) may metamorphose into the ‘real’ thing, will be watching events closely and tensely. The U.S. Defense Secretary has already told the world that all 40 naval vessels that were transferred to the Middle East are spending their time criss-crossing he Hormuz Straight and other bodies of water; while Russia advises the news media that it is withdrawing its naval fleet, even as everyone knows that ‘withdrawal’ is an ancient battle tactic; even as China, with its planned futuristic military base on the moon not yet ready http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/2013/12/06/13/32/china-to-turn-moon-into-death-star , has  satellites or ‘death stars’ armed with missiles circling the globe for sure.