Multipolarity on the March: Disparate Yet Connected Events

NATO's conference in Vilnius and has attracted the attention of China, while Lavrov made no direct mention of it his statement and presser with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Sultanate of Oman Bashar Al-Busaidi. I suspect that in the confidential portion of their conversation, President Putin and VTB CEO Andrey Kostin discussed the latter's proposal for an international depositary settlement hub to be located in one of Persian Gulf countries. I suspect during yesterday's discussion between Russia and the Gulf Cooperation Council that particular prospect was discussed as it makes eminent sense given the monetary flows transiting OPEC+ nations. I would also suspect the GCC would be very interested in forming its own regional development bank that would interact with the proposed settlement hub. And all this activity is merely a small portion related to the long delayed building of the Multipolar World, a project that was somewhat began in October 1945 when the UN Charter came into legal, global force, thus providing the UN with its foundation, but was neutered and crippled by the Outlaw US Empire and its allies first during the Cold War, and in the era of Neoliberal Neocolonialism that began in earnest in 1978 and continues today.

I think it best to begin with a selection of Mr. Lavrov's words given during his opening remarks and in reply to media questions. A significant example of multilateralism is provided in this portion of Lavrov's remarks:

There are a number of problems that require joint efforts, including between Russia and our Arab friends. I am also referring to security in the Gulf region (now that Saudi Arabia has normalized its relations with Iran, and other Arab countries are also moving in this direction); and work on the Yemeni settlement – on those issues that are of particular importance for creating conditions for resolving humanitarian, economic and refugee problems in the Syrian Arab Republic and moving towards a political settlement. Here, too, there is progress, first of all, expressed in the return of the Syrian Arab Republic to the League of Arab States (LAS), which was consolidated at the May summit of the League in Jeddah. And a number of other areas that are of increased interest in the region.

However, yesterday, as you know, we paid special attention to the problem of the Palestinian-Israeli settlement, which has reached a deep impasse and requires special attention and special efforts to overcome the current stagnation. Our Arab friends have relevant ideas, and Russia has also come up with some initiatives. A number of other countries are also interested in finding a way to resume direct negotiations between Palestine and Israel and to begin to move towards the full implementation of existing UN decisions, the implementation of the Arab peace initiative on the establishment of an independent Palestinian state that will coexist in peace and security with Israel, as well as with all other countries in the region. So far, we have not observed such a movement. On the contrary, there are attempts to consign all these UN resolutions to oblivion and let things take their course. This is unacceptable, and here we have full solidarity, as on most other issues, with our Omani and other Arab friends.

Indeed, most of the world is aligned with Russia and its Arab friends on the Palestinian issue. Currently Occupied Palestine is experiencing another wave of ferment, as the settlers are mostly verbally attacking each other while continuing to attack Palestinians who continue to resist the best they can. This month-old short article by Alastair Crooke provides a good overview. Part of Lavrov's answer to a question about the lower than potential Russian-Omani economic activity looked at the context of those relations:

I am sure that all the opportunities that the economies of our countries present to each other should be used to the maximum. We are realists and we know that those who imagine themselves to be the arbiters of the destinies of the whole world are trying in every possible way to prevent this. We have an idea of the unscrupulous methods used by the American-led countries of the "collective West": they simply demand that the states of the "global South" and the East stop any contacts with the Russian Federation. This is behavior that shows bad manners and inability to behave in society, in this case in the international community, the conviction that even today it is possible to act by colonial methods - to dictate to everyone how to behave and still try to live at the expense of others. Yesterday, during a meeting with the ministers of the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, as well as today during our bilateral contact, I was convinced that the Arab states have their own vision of what is happening in the world: they do not seek to unequivocally take one side or the other in any situations, they always advocate the search for compromises, for ensuring a balance of interests and against pressure on sovereign states. Non-interference in internal affairs is one of the first principles of the UN Charter, and every other principle without exception must be respected. Let's not forget about such a principle as the sovereign equality of states, which is not respected by any US ally. Of course, including the United States itself. Whatever action they take in the international arena is a complete disrespect for the equality of other states in relation to the West. This kind of pressure has no prospects, it only exposes the organizers of such campaigns in their plans to prevent the formation of an equal multipolar world order, to preserve their hegemony, which means going against the objective course of history. However, this will not work, and a multipolar world will be formed. One of the obvious centers of this world will be the Arab countries: the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Persian Gulf.

The final question of the presser was about Finland and Sweden's becoming part of NATO, which merely formalizes their informal membership over the past several decades and explains why Russia isn't too outwardly upset at this change and actually laments it as being a bad choice:

We are taking adequate and early steps. We were struck by the speed with which both Finland, which has already joined NATO, and Sweden, which is actively forcibly involved in the process that will remove the well-known obstacles on this path, abandoned their neutral status, the advantages that it provided for many decades, ensured their relatively independent role, reputation and authority in Europe and in the international arena. These countries have renounced special trade, economic and investment advantages in relations with the Russian Federation. The speed with which this happened makes it necessary to look for the reason in the complete subordinate position in which the United States and the rest of the "collective West" have placed these countries.

All the national interests of both the Finnish and Swedish states were sacrificed to the need to unite the entire West in the struggle in this case against Russia by turning Ukraine into another neo-Nazi tool aimed at our country with the sole purpose of preventing at least any challenge to the task set by the United States - to ensure the hegemony of the West forever, to continue to provide it with life by colonial methods at someone else's expense.

I repeat that both Finland and Sweden had a completely different reputation, but, apparently, the instincts of the times of the emergence of Nazism in Europe and the times of the Cold War turned out to be hidden quite shallowly. Immediately after the command was given to everyone to "line up" against Russia, they dutifully agreed to this. Sadly, this is the choice of governments that have received the votes of their constituents. Therefore, it is up to the people of the country concerned to judge whether this is in the interests of these two States. Of course, we will draw conclusions depending on how quickly and deeply NATO will develop their territory. There is no doubt that they are going to do this. Both Helsinki and Stockholm are already discussing with the United States many issues related to the deployment of the alliance's infrastructure on the borders with the Russian Federation (in the case of Finland) and very close to our borders (in the case of Sweden). I assure you that all legitimate security interests of the Russian Federation will be ensured. We know what these measures will be and how to implement them in practice.

There's a current school of thought that sees NATO and the designs of its Master the Outlaw US Empire as the inheritors of Hitler's Plan Ost that was to culminate the Age of Plunder in Eurasia. Proof of the purposeful rescuing of Nazis and Nazism was made public over 20 years ago during hearings and the opening of archives in an investigation done by the US Congress that proved OSS/CIA direct assistance to OUN (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists), which is one of the Ukrainian Nazi organizations that commenced prior to WW2's end. This proved direct terroristic meddling in the affairs of Eastern European Nations in violation of the UN Charter and the US Constitution which through its Supremacy Clause incorporates the entirety of the UN Charter into the Law of the Land. The continual violation of both the UN Charter and its own Constitution is what causes me to describe my nation as the Outlaw US Empire, for that's exactly what it is. With that explained, we can now look into China's reaction to the Vilnius NATO Conference.

The link in my opening sentence goes to today's Global Times editorial that carries the title, “Two stern warnings must be given to the arrogant NATO.” Noting NATO's expansion into Asia occupies the first several paragraphs. Then we approach the main issues:

There are 31 NATO members, but they have never been monolithic and have different views on many international issues. However, they are in general dominated by the will of the US. Now they have been kidnapped by the panic and tension instigated by the US, becoming "Washington's axe, spears and shovels." Wherever NATO goes, wars are likely to break out. These are not only the subjective impressions left by NATO, but also objective facts to a large extent. This situation is actually more worthy of the high vigilance of those member states within NATO that have no intention of being passively involved in the war.

This is quite correct as several NATO members are quite demonstrative about their objection to NATO's involvement in Ukraine with Hungary being in the vanguard. I should note that Global Times is an unofficial media outlet of the Chinese government and often makes its views known through the publication. So, the views expressed must be taken seriously by readers:

At the Vilnius summit, we saw NATO become more ambitious and aggressive. When NATO is being arrogant, we must sternly warn it of two points: Firstly, NATO must restrain rather than indulge its own impulse to expand, position itself correctly, and never cross the line; secondly, NATO must respect the legitimate security concerns and interest demands of major countries in the region, rather than offend and provoke them. Otherwise, it will lead to disastrous consequences. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is a lesson. If NATO does not restrain itself but even aggravates its actions, more serious consequences will follow.
To put it more directly, NATO must promptly withdraw the black hand it has extended toward the Asia-Pacific region, and it should not even think about squeezing half of its body in the future. Apart from certain countries like Japan, which act out of dark selfish motives rather than considering the overall interests of Asia, the majority of countries in Asia not only do not welcome NATO but also see it as a terrible monster that should be avoided at all costs. This is because NATO only brings security risks, war threats, and development predicament to Asia. [My Emphasis]

IMO, this is a very serious warning that closely resembles those made previously. Interestingly, a recent statement by former Australian PM Paul Keating is cited to reinforce what's bolded above. Also note China for perhaps the first time is speaking for all of Asia:

He hit the nail on the head, saying "The Europeans have been fighting each other for the better part of 300 years, including giving the rest of us two world wars in the last hundred. Exporting that malicious poison to Asia would be akin to Asia welcoming the plague upon itself." He also called Stoltenberg, who exaggerates the China threat, a "supreme fool" who "conducts himself as an American agent more than he performs as a leader and spokesperson for European security."
Keating is a visionary and insightful politician. We highly agree with his statement. No one has criticized NATO more accurately and vividly than Keating. His words reflect a consensus among Asian countries. The transatlantic military alliance, which has been expanding and disrupting the security situation in Europe since the Cold War, is now extending its reach into the Asia-Pacific region. Its ulterior motives are well-known in the international community. Inciting division and hatred, creating group confrontations, and causing chaos in Europe, they now seek to disrupt the peace in the Asia-Pacific region. We firmly resist this, together with the majority of countries in the Asia-Pacific region. [My Emphasis]

Japan is another issue all on its own with its plan to dump radioactive waste-water from Fukushima into the Pacific which is opposed by all regional nations. Japan is one of about 40 nations that are controlled by the Outlaw US Empire which I consider to be outside the emerging Multipolar Bloc of 150+ nations. A great deal must be done to either free global institutions or construct new ones, the UN being one. Lavrov has called what's happened to once multilateral institutions as “privatization” which conforms to the ruling Neoliberal ideology of that Bloc. This problem is well illustrated in the following media release by Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs: “UN Security Council Resolution 2672 on international humanitarian assistance to the Syrian Arab Republic, including the "cross-border" mechanism (CBM)”:

Against the backdrop of discussions at the UN Security Council in New York on international humanitarian assistance to the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR), including the "cross-border" mechanism (CBM), we drew attention to the collective appeal of representatives of the UN humanitarian wing of July 5.

In its joint press release, the UN vanguard (by coincidence, mainly Americans and Europeans) equated humanitarian aid to Syrians as a whole with an arbitrary mechanism that violates international humanitarian law (IHL). He categorically spoke in favor of expanding it in terms of time (by 12 months instead of 6) and in terms of the number of border crossings (3 instead of 1). He stressed the importance of supplying, regardless of the legitimate Government of the Syrian Arab Republic, a UN member state.

Thus, high-ranking UN representatives ignored the norms and guidelines of IHL, the suffering of millions of ordinary Syrians for the sake of the political order of Western states to undermine the sovereignty of Damascus and deepen the territorial split of the SAR.

Syria remains the only country in the world that has had a "cross-border" mechanism for the delivery of humanitarian aid as a temporary and emergency measure since 2014 without coordination and coordination with Damascus. This mechanism is used to ensure the uninterrupted supply of Idlib, which is under the control of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group, recognized as a terrorist group by the UN Security Council. Thus, the UN, hiding behind the needs of 2,7 million people, advocates, in fact, the preservation and perpetuation of this particular mechanism and this enclave.

It is a complete disregard for the suffering and needs of another 14 million Syrians just because they are in the territories controlled by the Syrian Government. One gets the impression that these Syrians do not need help, especially after the devastating earthquake of February 6.

Such facts as the disruption of domestic humanitarian convoys from Damascus to all parts of the country (cross-line); blocking, including as a result of illegal unilateral sanctions, projects for the early restoration of civilian infrastructure (schools, hospitals, houses, water and electricity facilities); refusing to facilitate the return of Syrians to their places of origin; failure to fulfill donor promises while Western countries continue to plunder the natural resources of the SAR - oil and grain.

It is not advertised that the sustainability and predictability of the planning of international humanitarian activities in Syria is affected not by the timing of the extension of the resolution, which has been in force since 2014, but by the catastrophic shortage of funds, which is why specialized agencies are forced to curtail their efforts (in particular, the World Food Program (WFP) has already reduced the coverage of aid recipients by 50% due to lack of funding).

However, the UN continues to work on instructions from Western countries. There is an obvious "double standard" in the provision of humanitarian assistance to Syria and the new Russian regions: in the first case, "cross-border, that is, bypassing and independently of Damascus, and in the second - only from Kiev and across the lines of contact (cross-line).

Russia has always advocated the expansion and expansion of comprehensive humanitarian assistance to all Syrians in need without discrimination and preconditions, in accordance with the norms and guidelines of IHL. We proceed from the urgent need to depoliticise humanitarian issues, which are actively used by the West with the help of the UN to serve purely political goals and objectives.

As you read, millions of very innocent people whose lives were massively dislocated by NATO's proxy war on the Syrian state to oust its democratic government continue to be abused by the UN of places because of how its institutions have been privatized, and this particular situation is almost ten years old. This is but one example of the need to establish the Multipolar Bloc and begin the rearrangement of the international system, a process that's making it greatest headway in changing the international financial system and the methods of international commerce.

Many have heard reports that a new form of international currency aiming to displace the US dollar is in the works, and that is correct. What many don't know or understand is the complexity of making this change. One aspect is the transmittal and clearing of transactions between nations that to-date have relied on the Western financial system that gives it the power to block one or more nations as is being demonstrated. The Multipolar Bloc is currently engaged in constructing institutions and mechanisms to make the system work in a fairer, impartial manner. Russia is rapidly working to construct such a system in cooperation with many other nations. The most promising approach is at regional levels that can later be plugged into a global system. The proposed settlement hub mentioned above is just one of several. Reading the short conversation between Putin and Kostin provides a glimpse at the performance of Russian efforts to make the ruble a hard currency despite all the impediments laid in its path:

Vladimir Putin: Andrey Leonidovich, VTB has historically been primarily engaged in servicing foreign trade activities, and in this regard, it was largely tied to those clients who work in this area, to foreign infrastructure. And of course, it was more difficult for VTB to go through the difficulties that our detractors created for us, even, perhaps, than for other financial institutions. Nevertheless, the main difficulties were overcome thanks to your efforts and the efforts of your team.

What is the current situation of VTB?

Andrey : Vladimir Vladimirovich, we have been operating at a profit since the fourth quarter of last year. There is a positive trend in all areas of work.

We are actively engaged in creating a new infrastructure for settlements in rubles and in the currencies of friendly countries. We have the expertise and infrastructure to do this, because we are present in major Asian countries such as China, India, and the CIS countries. Therefore, active work is being carried out on this base.

I would like to thank you for your political support, because these issues require solutions at a high political level, and we constantly feel it. So thank you very much.

As for the sanctions that were applied against us, you know, perhaps thanks to them, we have developed a certain immunity and increased our sovereignty in this matter.

You look at what's happening in the United States right now: in fact, the biggest financial banking crisis since 2008, and it's already spreading to Europe. This is exactly what we said, that sanctions are double-edged. Therefore, the sanctions imposed by the West on Russia essentially destroyed the world trade system and led to an increase in inflation, and the West's attempts to solve this in standard ways led to the depreciation of bank assets, and in the end we have what we have.

But our banking sector feels secure. I don't think there will be any problems. Although, of course, we suffered some losses last year due to the fact that our property was simply taken away.

Vladimir Putin: What you said about increasing the level of independence and sovereignty may have happened in time, referring to the negative trends that are growing in the banking system of the United States itself.

A. Kostin: I agree with you. Now we need to learn how to work in a new way. And I think that in a few years it is quite possible to significantly rebuild the financial system. And of course, I think it will have a different look.

Vladimir Putin: What is the bank's portfolio structure today?

Alexey Kostin: Mr President, we are no longer lending in the currencies of Western countries, of course, and there is no such possibility. The ruble exchange rate is growing, and we are gradually working in yuan and other currencies. I think this process is already quite significant. And in general, in the calculations of the ruble today in friendly countries is already more than half. So I think this process will continue.

Vladimir Putin: I meant: individuals and corporate clients.

A. Kostin: Of course, we are gradually increasing the share of work with citizens and actively lending to industry.

Vladimir Putin: Good.

As you read, they also shared their assessment of the West's deep financial problems caused by their Neoliberal methods and the blowback of the sanctions. I also presume they discussed Kostin's proposal and how it would mesh with other efforts. There's great anticipation that the upcoming BRICS Summit will produce some important news on the international financial system, some of which is already being speculated as being a done deal that proved to be unsubstantiated gossip. Developments on this issue will be a closely followed topic along with the entire process of the Multipolar Bloc's emergence and how the US Imperial Bloc reacts. I probably won't give much in the way of specific updates on the Ukraine situation as Rybar and Simplicius are 100% focused on that topic and do an excellent job.