The test, conducted by employees at the National Research Center for Epidemiology and Microbiology, reportedly saw the participants gaining immunity to the virus with no adverse effects. According to the research center’s director, Alexander Ginzburg, this is a step towards state-sanctioned trials.
“We will consider the experiment successful when we get permission for official trials from the Ministry of Health and carry them out,” he said, speaking to Russian news agency TASS.
According to Ginzburg, the scientists chose to vaccinate not only to prove the effectiveness of their creation but also to defend themselves from the virus and gain immunity, enabling them to continue working throughout the pandemic. The director did not specify how many people were vaccinated, but described them all as “alive, healthy and happy.”
Ginzburg believes that it would take about six months to immunize the entire country once the vaccine is officially approved. If everything goes to plan, he hopes it will be approved by the end of summer. In his opinion, the first people to be immunized should be frontline doctors and the elderly.
On Thursday, Health Minister Mikhail Murashko told TV channel Russia 1 that “access to wider use of the vaccine should appear sometime at the end of July.” Previously, Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova had reported that 47 different vaccines were being developed throughout the country.
According to the latest government data, Russia has had 326,448 confirmed cases of Covid-19. Thus far, 99,825 people have recovered, and 3,249 have died.
Last week the Federal Reserve released a report predicting that the next print on GDP numbers will likely show a loss of 34.9% in the second quarter. This is the biggest GDP plunge since the Great Depression; even the crash of 2008 doesn’t compare. And when we take into account the fact that the Fed artificially boosts GDP calculations by adding in many non-productive government programs, we have to ask, what are the REAL losses above and beyond what the Fed admits to?
With the supply chain in disarray, many companies (like Apple) are trying to shift their manufacturing base to dodge the pandemic. Of course, none of them want to bring factories back to the US; there’s simply no incentive to do so. And, the small business sector has been crushed by the shutdowns, with the vast majority of those seeking bailout loans still waiting for aid and over 20.5 million employees laid off in April alone.
Needless to say, the economy has been severely affected. The problem is that many people are being led to believe that this event has been triggered by the virus outbreak alone. This is a lie. As I noted back in February in my article ‘Global Centralization Is The Cause Of The Crisis – Not The Cure’, the collapse of the Everything Bubble was well underway long before the pandemic. The crash was started by the Federal Reserve hiking rates into economic weakness at the end of 2018, puncturing the bubble and setting the liquidity crisis in motion.
The pandemic is just the icing on the cake of a collapse that was going to happen anyway. It is also a convenient scapegoat, because now the banking elites are going to escape all the blame for the crash and the public is going to hyperfocus on the coronavirus as the culprit.
As I also warned would happen over the past few months, the Chinese government has been caught in numerous lies surrounding their response to the outbreak, including hiding the true numbers of dead and infected and suppressing information to the rest of the world on the danger of human-to-human transmission. The problem that the public is still not being told about, however, is that the Chinese did not act alone, they had help.
It takes two sides to do the pandemic tango – If air travel had been cut off from China immediately upon the confirmation of the virus spread until the danger could be assessed, the outbreak may have never carried beyond China’s borders. Yet this did not happen. Air travel remained open for weeks from China after the outbreak confirmation. Then, when the virus hit Italy hard, air travel continued from Europe to the US unabated. It was almost as if the establishment WANTED the virus to spread quickly…
I remember some of the idiotic sentiments being passed around in web forums back in January and February. Some people argued that the virus “only infects Asians”. Some people said sarcastically “Oh no, whatever will we do without our new iPhones…!”. And, yet others, including the Trump Administration, argued that the US economy would escape any real harm.
Well, we are a few months into the outbreak and now the US has the largest number of infections in the world. US deaths are already almost triple that of the CDC’s yearly reported 30,000 deaths for the flu. The virus is no Black Plague, but it’s not something to be shrugged off either. If this virus behaves anything like the pandemics of the past, expect it to linger for a couple of years, not just a few months. The lockdowns actually guarantee that this situation will drag on for quite some time.
Apple iPhone sales have crashed 77% in April, right along with almost every other sector of the economy. Clearly, the Trump Administration and Larry Kudlow were either lying to us in February, or they had no idea what they were talking about.
Despite the current reopening hype, the situation is only going to get worse from here on out. Certainly in terms of the economy, but also in terms of the outbreak. The globalists have openly discussed their plans for this pandemic, including a minimum 18 month period of lockdowns and “reopenings”. The public seems to be oblivious to the fact that the plan is for a “1 month open, 2 months closed” cycle going into next year. That’s right, the lockdowns will return.
Certain globalists have slithered out of the swamp to the forefront of media attention recently, and it is interesting to see how transparent the narrative has become. As I have predicted time and time again, during the collapse the very people that helped create the crisis are now suddenly being put on a pedestal by the media as our saviors and some are being presented as “rebels” on the side of conservatives. Here are just a few global elites that have been specifically prominent during this disaster.
Wow, I’m getting incredibly sick of seeing Bill Gates presented in the media lately as some kind of virology guru. Why should we take the advice of a computer programmer on issues of biology and sociopolitical response? Why should we take the advice of an open globalist with an admitted agenda of population control?
Bill Gates is notorious for letting his agendas slip in public forums such as his Ted Talks. In 2010 Gates called for carbon emissions to be reduced to zero (an impossibility without complete de-industrialization and the economic murder of billions of people). In the same talk, he hinted that methods to reduce the population could include “new vaccines and reproductive health services…” He did not elaborate at the time, except to claim that vaccines would lead to “social changes” that would reduce population. Aren’t vaccines supposed to extend people’s lives, thus increasing the population?
We do know that Bill Gates has funded numerous experimental vaccine trials through the World Health Organization, including Polio vaccination programs. It was these same programs that led to viral outbreaks of polio in various countries and hundreds of paralyzed children. In fact, the vaccines caused more cases of polio than the wild-type virus. This if VERIFIED FACT, admitted by the WHO, though numerous leftist media sources have tried to deny it.
At most, the WHO and Gates can claim that the infections were “accidental”. But if this is the case, it would still suggest that vaccines developed by Gates Foundation programs and the WHO should not be trusted. Given Gates’ obsession with depopulation, I think it safer to not allow him to inject viruses (living or dead) into people.
The Gates Foundation was also central in Event 201, a pandemic exercise which “simulated” a coronavirus outbreak and the government and UN response. This exercise took place only a couple of months before the real thing happened. What an incredible coincidence. It is also an incredible coincidence that almost every solution presented in the simulation is now being implemented or suggested around the world during the real pandemic, including the use of tracking apps and immunity passports that violate every level of personal freedom we know.
Gates is not a hero, far from it. In fact, Gates and his ideology benefit greatly from the pandemic.
A dedicated globalist, El-Erian has been everywhere in the economic media lately. As I examined in my Globalist Disinformation Spotlight article, El-Erian is an active promoter of a global currency under the control of the IMF through its Special Drawing Rights basket. He also argued last year that economic swings were “out of the control of central banks” and that they should not be blamed for any financial disruptions. At the same time, El-Erian claimed that the US economy was “strong” and that there was no chance of a recession in 2020.
El-Erian was consistently wrong about almost everything last year, but this year, suddenly, he has been the go-to guy for the economic media. Mohamed has shifted gears entirely in 2020, flip-flopping on his outlook and presenting, finally, a realistic analysis of the situation. He is now being presented as the wise man on the mountain warning us of impending disaster.
This is a classic case of the globalist “savior” narrative in play. They lie about the danger of collapse right up until the collapse becomes obvious to the public, and then they suddenly start warning of the collapse when it is too late for the public to do anything about it. That is to say, they keep the public unprepared and complacent for as long as possible, then act like they predicted the whole mess at the last minute.
The great fake liberty billionaire. A long time globalist, Musk seems like an enigma, but he is really rather simple. As a classic narcissist, Musk switches his persona to ride what he sees as the waves of public sentiment. He wants to be all things to all people and has bought into his own hype. A couple of years ago Musk was a globalist gatekeeper, a top guest of the Global Government Summit, a proponent of universal basic income, and argued in favor of transhumanism.
Musk’s companies are lavished with praise in the media despite their minimal global market share. Being one of the only carmakers in the US does mean Tesla is one of the “biggest” in the US, I suppose (but how often do you actually see a Tesla on the road outside of California?). The problem is Musk survives predominantly by siphoning up billions in government funding and taxpayer dollars. Without such funding, Musk would have been out of business a long time ago. This fact runs contrary to Musk’s new persona as a kind of libertarian, small government businessman.
Also keep in mind that Musk’s business model relies on global warming propaganda flowing out of the same elitist circles he enjoys when he’s not “speaking out” about government tyranny. If carbon controls are not enforced by governments (and if gas prices stay low), Musk’s high-priced electric cars have no market.
While Musk’s companies live primarily on government welfare, the guy acts like he’s some kind of savant, and he has a lot of people fooled on this account on both sides of the political spectrum. It is truly astounding. If he is a “genius” at anything, it is that he is an effective con man.
For now, Musk is attempting to hook into the alternative media and the rise of the liberty movement with his anti-lockdown tweets and sudden opposition to globalism. Has Musk been “red-pilled”? I suspect he will flip-flop again in due course. If Musk wants to cut off all ties to his many friends in the globalist community then perhaps he has turned a new leaf, but I seriously doubt it.
Dr. Anthony Fauci
One of the people that helped create the coronavirus outbreak is the leading Trump Administration talking head on the coronavirus response. An avid defender of the WHO and, along with Trump, a defender of China’s rigged data back in January, Fauci is the guy who, in 2015, greenlit the millions of dollars in funding on coronavirus research at the Level 4 lab in Wuhan, China. This is the same lab that is now under investigation for releasing the virus on the world, and Fauci’s funding went directly into research on coronavirus transmission from bats to other mammals.
All I have to ask is, why has this man been at the forefront of the pandemic response for the US? Now in self-isolation for possible infection, perhaps Fauci will fade into the background as he is further exposed as a participant in the creation of this pandemic.
Thunberg is not so much a global elite as she is a useful idiot. A puppet of her activist parents, Thunburg only parrots the same global warming arguments that have already been debunked year after year, yet she continues to be elevated in the mainstream media as a spokes girl for environmentalism. Why? Because the “children are our future”, and leftists love the idea of brainwashed kid activists. If Thunburg is any indication of the next generation, the future is bleak.
While there is still zero concrete evidence that human carbon emissions lead directly to changes in the Earth’s climate, it is true that the climate does “change” over time. Of course, shifts in activity on the gigantic nuclear fusion reactor in space known as THE SUN are probably more responsible for temperature changes on the Earth than the tiny 0.04% of carbon in the Earth’s atmosphere. Don’t tell the political left this, though, or you might be labeled a “climate denier”…
Thunberg and other climate activists have suddenly been pushed to the forefront recently to comment on the pandemic situation. This might seem rather bizarre, but it makes sense when you realize how the pandemic is being exploited by the globalists to achieve certain goals. Every agenda of the globalists from carbon emissions reductions to the suppression of industrial manufacturing to the destruction of large scale farming and even to the reduction of meat in people’s diets is being accomplished right now by the coronavirus and the government shutdowns. Where climate activists failed, the virus is making headway.
Beyond that, climate activists are now arguing that the restrictions put in place because of the pandemic should be KEPT IN PLACE because of global warming. You see how that works? One has nothing to do with the other, but the technocrats will force the public to see them as related if they can. Just “listen to the scientists”, people! Listen and obey the high priests of the Technotronic era. Stop demanding evidence, you aren’t “smart enough” to understand it anyway. Only UN-funded labs have the power to decipher the magical math behind global warming studies.
The pandemic will open the door to many lies and the flood of disinformation the alternative media has been working so hard to counter is going to explode beyond anything we’ve seen in the past. The elites are at a crossroads. They have to turn the public towards supporting collectivism and tyranny now, or they may find themselves facing the business end of a large number of torches and pitchforks. At the bottom, these elites should be in prison, not on TV dictating to the people about how they should behave and what freedoms they should give up during the crisis.
* * *
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.
A Facebook fact checker who has ‘debunked’ articles suggesting that COVID-19 may have leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) has a giant conflict of interest; she worked at the institute – which is now suspected of accidentally leaking the hyper-virulent virus which has killed over 130,000 people and cast the global economy into chaos.
Danielle Anderson, who works at Duke University’s NUS Medical School lab in Singapore, also contributes to Science Feedback – which Facebook has been using to slap “False Information” labels on articles claiming that COVID-19 may have originated at the Wuhan institute – where Anderson worked with bat coronavirus.
A quick search of Anderson’s publications reveals no fewer than nine collaborations with Dr. Peng Zhou – a Wuhan scientist experimenting on bat coronavirus (the mention of whom may result in a Twitter ban).
If you follow the info, you will find the Facebook fake fact-checker on the China Wuhan lab is a scientist who works/worked at China’s Wuhan lab the past two years and says it is impossible that they would be sloppy because they are very careful! 😂😡@Facebook https://t.co/Ldvu7He82v
— Sharyl Attkisson🕵️♂️ (@SharylAttkisson) April 16, 2020
Anderson has been adamant that the lab adheres to the highest standards of safety, and that COVID-19 simply couldn’t have accidentally been leaked by her colleagues.
“I have worked in this exact laboratory at various times for the past 2 years. I can personally attest to the strict control and containment measures implemented while working there,” Anderson writes in one such ‘debunking’ of a New York Post article that claims “China [is having] a problem keeping dangerous pathogens in test tubes where they belong” while Science Feedback cast doubt on the Post‘s claim that “evidence points to SARS-CoV-2 research being carried out at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”
An April 9 report in the Journal reveals that COVID-19 is genetically identical to a coronavirus found in a horseshoe bat “collected by hazmat-clad scientists from the Institute of Virology in Wuhan.”
While a Wednesday report from Fox News reveals that COVID-19 leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and that “patient zero” was an employee who became infected before spreading it throughout the community, according to ‘multiple sources who have been briefed on the details.’
And while Anderson was busy covering for her corona-labmates with Facebook debunkings implicating the WIV, she went on national television to explain that the virus could have only come from outside the lab.
Anderson further peddled the now-debunked wet-market theory in a paper she co-wrote in The Lancet, which reads: “While recognising the tremendous effort by the China CDC team in the early response to the 2019-nCoV outbreak, the small number of team members trained in animal health was probably one of the reasons for the delay in identifying an intermediate animal(s), which is likely to have caused the spread of the virus in a region of the market where wildlife animals were traded and subsequently found to be heavily contaminated. Unfortunately, what animal(s) was involved in transmission remains unknown.”
Any suggestion to the contrary is now deemed ‘False Information’ by Facebook, thanks to the highly conflicted Danielle Anderson and crew over at Science Feedback.
May 20, 2020
Positive cases in northern China seem to incubate the virus for a longer-term, with milder symptoms, a new study found.
China’s medical experts warned on May 19 that COVID-19 may be mutating, given the disease’s behavior changes in the northern region.
According to Qiu Haibo, head of the Department of Critical Care Medicine in Zhongda hospital, COVID positive patients during the new virus outbreak in Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces show a different infection comportment in comparison to Wuhan initial cases.
Positive cases in northern China seem to incubate the virus for a longer-term, with milder symptoms, a new study found.. Wuhan’s original cases had quicker and stronger symptoms in only two weeks. Besides, experts detected heart, kidney, and gut damage in Wuhan patients, while northern affected ones showed lung damage.
As Qiu explained, these differences could reveal pathogens are changing, which could be difficult to comprehend for testing, and control. “The longer period during which infected patients show no symptoms have created clusters of family infections,” the former director of the Chinese society of critical care medicine (Csccm) stated.
More than 100 million people in China face new lockdown as second wave of COVID-19 cases emerge
Nearly 108 million people in China’s Jilin province are being forced back on lockdown after a growing group of new coronavirus infections has triggered a backslide in the nation’s push to return to…
Chinese Health experts are analyzing if these changes respond to a virus mutation or a health protocol deviation. COVID mutations could cause not only new outbreaks but also treatment inaccuracy. Alongside the health risk, economies would be forced to reopen later than scheduled Even so, there is no evidence that this virus change makes it more contagious.
“In theory, some changes in the genetic structure can lead to changes in the virus structure or how the virus behaves,” University of Hong Kong’s School of Public Health director, Keiji Fukuda, said. “However, many mutations lead to no discernible changes at all,” he added.
So far, China registered 82,965 positive cases, 4,634 deaths, and 78,244 recoveries.
Not a single word leader yet to die from this virus? On the other hand, millions are suffering from hunger and poverty because of this lockdown.
Regardless of the anti-Chinese hysteria of the group that imposed Western health policy responses to the Covid-19 epidemic, it demonstrated Western dependence on Chinese manufactured products. This led the Trump administration to move from a desire to rebalance trade to a military confrontation, without however resorting to war. The sabotage of the Silk Roads has officially begun.
One of the consequences of the Coronavirus epidemic is that Westerners have realised their dependence on Chinese manufacturing capacity. Neither the Europeans nor the Americans were able to manufacture the millions of surgical masks they urgently wanted to distribute to their population. They had to buy them in China and often fought among themselves on the tarmacs to take them home at the expense of their allies.
In this context of general save-and-go, US leadership over the West no longer made sense. This is why Washington decided not to rebalance trade relations with China, but to oppose the construction of the silk roads and to help the Europeans relocate part of their industry. This could be a decisive turning point: a partial halt to the process of globalization that had begun, with the disappearance of the Soviet Union. Beware: this is not an economic decision to call into question the principles of free trade, but a geopolitical strategy to sabotage Chinese ambitions.
This change of strategy had been announced by the campaign not only economic, but also political and military against Huawei. The United States and NATO feared that if Huawei won the Western government contracts to install the G5, the Chinese army would be able to intercept its signals. More importantly, they knew that if the Chinese took these contracts, they would technically be the only ones who could take the next step .
This is not a rallying of the Trump administration to the Red Dawn fantasies , whose anti-Chinese obsession is based on primary anti-communism, but an awareness of Beijing’s gigantic military progress. Admittedly, the budget of the People’s Liberation Army is derisory compared to that of the US Armed Forces, but precisely its very thrifty strategy and its technical progress allow it today to challenge the US monster.
At the end of the First World War, the Chinese of the Kuomintang and the Communist Party together set out to reunify their country and avenge a long century of colonial humiliation. A Kuomintang personality, Chiang Kai-shek, tried to eliminate the Communist Party but was defeated by it and went into exile in Taiwan. Mao Zedong pursued this nationalist dream while guiding the Communist Party in the social transformation of the country. However, his aim was always nationalist, as the Sino-Russian war on Zhenbao Island in 1969 showed. In the 1980s, Admiral Liu Huaqing (the man who put down the coup attempt by Zhao Ziyang in Tiananmen Square) devised a strategy to push the US armies out of the Chinese cultural zone. This strategy has been patiently implemented for forty years. Without ever provoking a war, Beijing is extending its territorial sovereignty in the China Sea and harassing the US Navy. The time is not far off when the US Navy will have to withdraw, leaving China to take Taiwan by force.
After the dissolution of the USSR, President George Bush Sr. considered that the US had no rivals left and that it was time to make money. He demobilized a million soldiers and opened the way for financial globalization. US multinationals relocated their companies to China where their products were manufactured by countless untrained workers, paid twenty times less than US workers. Gradually, almost all the goods consumed in the US were imported from China. The U.S. middle class became poorer, while China trained its workers and became richer. From the principle of free trade, the movement spread throughout the West and then to the whole world. The Communist Party decided to re-establish a modern equivalent to the ancient Silk Road and, in 2013, elected Xi Jinping to carry out this project. When it is realized, if it is realized, China could have a virtual monopoly of manufacturing goods in the world.
By deciding to sabotage the Silk Roads, President Donald Trump is trying to push China out of its own cultural zone just as it is pushing the United States out of its own. To do so, he will be able to count on his “allies” whose companies are already devastated by excellent Chinese products at low prices. Some of them have experienced revolts because of this, such as the Yellow Vests revolt in France. In the past, the ancient Silk Road brought unknown products to Europe, while today’s roads carry the same products as those made in Europe, but much cheaper.
Contrary to popular belief, China could give up the Silk Roads for geostrategic reasons, regardless of the amount of its investment. It has done so in the past. It had thought of opening a maritime silk route in the 15th century, sent Admiral Zheng He, “the eunuch with the three jewels”, at the head of a formidable armada, as far as Africa and the Middle East, before withdrawing and scuttling its gigantic fleet never to return.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo traveled to Israel under lockdown. He tried to convince the two future prime ministers, Benjamin Netanyahu (Jewish colonialist) and his deputy, who were nevertheless opposed to General Benny Gantz (Israeli nationalist), to stop Chinese investments in their country  Chinese companies already control half of Israel’s agricultural sector and are expected to account for 90% of its trade in the coming months. Mike Pompeo should similarly try to convince the Egyptian president, Abdel Fattah el-Sissi. Indeed, the Suez Canal and the Israeli ports of Haifa and Ashdod were to be the terminals of the modern silk route in the Mediterranean.
After various attempts, China assessed the instability of Iraq, Syria and Turkey and gave up crossing them. A tacit agreement was reached between Washington and Moscow to leave a jihadist pocket anywhere on the Syrian-Turkish border to discourage Chinese investment in the area. Moscow intends to base its alliance with Beijing on silk routes crossing its own territory and not Western countries. This is the project of President Vladimir Putin’s ’Great Eurasian Partnership’ .
We come back tirelessly to the same dilemma (“Thucydides’ trap”): faced with the rise of a new power (China), the dominant power (the United States) must either wage war on it (like Sparta against Athens), or give space to the newcomer, that is, accept the division of the world.
 “The Silk Route will pass through Jordan, Egypt and Israel”, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Voltaire Network, 19 October 2018. “The Silk Road and Israël”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Information Clearing House (USA) , Voltaire Network, 30 October 2018.
 “Speech by Sergey Lavrov at the 74th session of the UN General Assembly”, by Sergey Lavrov, Voltaire Network, 27 September 2019.
Chinese General Qiao Liang argues, “If we have to dance with the wolves, we should not dance to the rhythm of the United States,” reports Pepe Escobar.
In 1999, Qiao Liang, then a senior air force colonel in the People’s Liberation Army, and Wang Xiangsui, another senior colonel, caused a tremendous uproar with the publication of “Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America.”
“Unrestricted Warfare” was essentially the PLA’s manual for asymmetric warfare: an updating of Sun Tzu’s “Art of War.” At the time of original publication, with China still a long way from having its current geopolitical and geo-economic clout, the book was conceived as laying out a defensive approach, far from the sensationalist “destroy America” added to the title for U.S. publication in 2004.
Now the book is available in a new edition and Qiao Liang, as a retired general and director of the Council for Research on National Security, has resurfaced in a quite revealing interview originally published in the current edition of the Hong Kong-based magazine Zijing (Bauhinia).
General Qiao is not a Politburo member entitled to dictate official policy. But some analysts I talked with agree that the key points he makes in a personal capacity are quite revealing of PLA thinking. Let’s review some of the highlights.
Dancing with Wolves
The bulk of his argument concentrates on the shortcomings of U.S. manufacturing: “How can the US today want to wage war against the biggest manufacturing power in the world while its own industry is hollowed out?”
An example, referring to Covid-19, is the capacity to produce ventilators: “Out of over 1,400 pieces necessary for a ventilator, over 1,100 must be produced in China, including final assembly. That’s the US problem today. They have state of the art technology, but not the methods and production capacity. So they have to rely on Chinese production.”
General Qiao dismisses the possibility that Vietnam, the Philippines, Bangladesh, India and other Asian nations may replace China’s cheap workforce: “Think about which of these countries has more skilled workers than China. What quantity of medium and high-level human resources was produced in China in these past 30 years? Which country is educating over 100 million students at secondary and university levels? The energy of all these people is still far from being liberated for China’s economic development.”
He acknowledges U.S. military power even in times of epidemic and economic difficulties is always capable of “interfering directly or indirectly in the Taiwan straits question” and finding an excuse to “block and sanction China and exclude it from the West.” He adds that, “as a producing country, we still cannot satisfy our manufacturing industry with our own resources and rely on our own markets to consume our products.”
In consequence, he argues, it’s a “good thing” for China to engage in the cause of reunification, “but it’s always a bad thing if it’s done at the wrong time. We can only act at the right time. We cannot allow our generation to commit the sin of interrupting the process of the Chinese nation’s renaissance.”
General Qiao counsels, “Don’t think that only territorial sovereignty is linked to the fundamental interests of a nation. Other kinds of sovereignty – economic, financial, defense, food, resources, biological and cultural sovereignty – are all linked to the interests and survival of nations and are components of national sovereignty.”
To arrest movement toward Taiwan’s independence, “apart from war, other options must be taken into consideration. We can think about the means to act in the immense gray zone between war and peace, and we can even think about more particular means, like launching military operations that will not lead to war, but may involve a moderate use of force.”
In a graphic formulation, General Qiao thinks that, “if we have to dance with the wolves, we should not dance to the rhythm of the U.S. We should have our own rhythm, and even try to break their rhythm, to minimize its influence. If American power is brandishing its stick, it’s because it has fallen into a trap.”
In a nutshell, for General Qiao, “China first of all must show proof of strategic determination to solve the Taiwan question, and then strategic patience. Of course, the premise is that we should develop and maintain our strategic force to solve the Taiwan question by force at any moment.”
Gloves Are Off
Now compare General Qiao’s analysis with the by-now-obvious geopolitical and geo-economic fact that Beijing will respond tit for tat to any hybrid war tactics deployed by the United States government. The gloves are definitely off.
The gold standard expression has come in a no-holds barred Global Times editorial: “We must be clear that coping with US suppression will be the key focus of China’s national strategy. We should enhance cooperation with most countries. The US is expected to contain China’s international front lines, and we must knock out this US plot and make China-US rivalry a process of US self-isolation.”
An inevitable corollary is that the all-out offensive to cripple Huawei will be counterpunched in kind, targeting Apple, Qualcom, Cisco and Boeing, even including “investigations or suspensions of their right to do business in China.”
So, for all practical purposes, Beijing has now publicly unveiled its strategy to counteract U.S. President Donald Trump’s “We could cut off the whole relationship” kind of assertions.
A toxic racism-meets-anti-communism matrix is responsible for the predominant anti-Chinese sentiment across the U.S., encompassing at least 66 percent of the whole population. Trump instinctively seized it – and repackaged it as his re-election campaign theme, fully approved by Steve Bannon.
The strategic objective is to go after China across the full spectrum. The tactical objective is to forge an anti-China front across the West: another instance of encirclement, hybrid war-style, focused on economic war.
This will imply a concerted offensive, trying to enforce embargoes and trying to block regional markets to Chinese companies. Lawfare will be the norm. Even freezing Chinese assets in the U.S. is not a far-fetched proposition anymore.
Every possible Silk Road branch-out – on the energy front, ports, the Health Silk Road, digital interconnection – will be strategically targeted. Those who were dreaming that Covid-19 could be the ideal pretext for a new Yalta – uniting Trump, Xi and Putin – may rest in peace.
“Containment” will go into overdrive. A neat example is Admiral Philip Davidson – head of the Indo-Pacific Command – asking for $20 billion for a “robust military cordon” from California to Japan and down the Pacific Rim, complete with “highly survivable, precision-strike networks” along the Pacific Rim and “forward-based, rotational joint forces” to counteract the “renewed threat we face from great power competition.”
Davidson argues that, “without a valid and convincing conventional deterrent, China and Russia will be emboldened to take action in the region to supplant U.S. interests.”
Watch People’s Congress
From the point of view of large swathes of the Global South, the current, extremely dangerous incandescence, or New Cold War, is mostly interpreted as the progressive ending of the Western coalition’s hegemony over the whole planet.
Still, scores of nations are being asked, bluntly, by the hegemon to position themselves once again in a “you’re with us or against us” global war on terror imperative.
At the annual session of the National People’s Congress, starting this Friday, we will see how China will be dealing with its top priority: to reorganize domestically after the pandemic.
For the first time in 35 years, Beijing will be forced to relinquish its economic growth targets. This also means that the objective of doubling GDP and per capita income by 2020 compared with 2010 will also be postponed.
What we should expect is absolute emphasis on domestic spending – and social stability – over a struggle to become a global leader, even if that’s not totally overlooked.
After all, President Xi Jinping made it clear earlier this week that a “Covid-19 vaccine development and deployment in China, when available,” won’t be subjected to Big Pharma logic, but “will be made a global public good. This will be China’s contribution to ensuring vaccine accessibility and affordability in developing countries.” The Global South is paying attention.
Internally, Beijing will boost support for state-owned enterprises that are strong in innovation and risk-taking. China always defies predictions by Western “experts.” For instance, exports rose 3.5 percent in April, when the experts were forecasting a decline of 15.7 percent. The trade surplus was $45.3 billion, when experts were forecasting only $6.3 billion.
Beijing seems to identify clearly the extending gap between a West, especially the U.S., that’s plunging into de facto New Great Depression territory with a China that’s about to rekindle economic growth. The center of gravity of global economic power keeps moving, inexorably, toward Asia.
This article is from The Asia Times.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
“The pandemic and shutdown of advanced economies could push as many as 60 million people into extreme poverty – erasing much of the recent progress made in poverty alleviation,” World Bank Group President David Malpass said. According to him, the unprecedented crisis could wipe out up to three years of progress in the area.
The pandemic has been ripping through the global economy, which is set to fall into a deep recession and contract by up to five percent this year, the Washington-based institution said.
Last month, the bank said that the virus-triggered economic turmoil is likely to cause the first increase in global poverty since 1998, when the Asian Financial Crisis hit. Even under the bank’s best estimate, some 49 million people will fall into extreme poverty, which it defines as living on less than $1.90 per person per day.
To help combat the deadly virus, the World Bank has offered financing emergency programs in 100 countries. In the “largest” crisis response in the Bank Group’s history, the program unlocked $160 billion in grants and financial support over a 15-month period, as well as the suspension of bilateral debt service payments. The bulk of the financial help will go to Sub-Saharan Africa, as it is expected be the region hit hardest in terms of increased extreme poverty.
Most international financial institutions have already sounded alarms over the devastating impact of the coronavirus pandemic, with some forecasts indicating that the global gross domestic product (GDP) could fall nearly 10 percent. The UN had earlier warned that the virus could also trigger a global food shortage, while its labor agency forecasts that 195 million jobs could be lost worldwide.
I say let’s keep the lockdown on permanently, as the planet and its inhabitants seem to be enjoying life without the human virus!
May 20, 2020
Study reveals such low levels not recorded since 2006, but temporary reduction could be just ‘a drop in the ocean’.
The world cut its daily carbon dioxide emissions by 17 percent at the peak of the coronavirus pandemic shutdown last month, a new study has found.
But with life and heat-trapping gas levels inching back towards normal, the brief pollution break will likely be “a drop in the ocean” when it comes to climate change, scientists said in the study released on Tuesday in the Nature Climate Change journal.
In their study of carbon dioxide emissions during the pandemic, an international team of scientists calculated that pollution levels were heading back up and, for the year, would end up between four and seven percent lower than 2019 levels.
The figure will be seven percent if the strictest lockdown rules remain all year long across much of the globe, and four percent if they are lifted soon.
That is still the biggest annual drop in carbon emissions since World War II.
For a week in April, the US cut its carbon dioxide levels by about a third.
China, the world’s biggest emitter of heat-trapping gases, sliced its carbon pollution by nearly a quarter in February. India and Europe cut emissions by 26 percent and 27 percent respectively.
The biggest global drop was from April 4 through 9 when the world was spewing 18.7 million fewer tonnes of carbon pollution a day than on New Year’s Day.
Such low global emission levels have not been recorded since 2006.
But by April 30, the world’s carbon pollution levels had grown by 3.3 million tonnes a day from its low point earlier in the month.
Carbon dioxide stays in the air for about a century.
Outside experts praised the study as the most comprehensive yet, saying it shows how much effort was needed to prevent dangerous levels of further global warming.
“That underscores a simple truth: Individual behaviour alone … won’t get us there,” Pennsylvania State University climate scientist Michael Mann, who was not part of the study, said in an email. “We need fundamental structural change.”
If the world could keep up annual emission cuts like this without a pandemic for a couple of decades, there was a decent chance Earth could avoid warming another 1C (1.8F) of warming from now, authors of the study said.
But getting the type of yearly cuts to reach that international goal is unlikely, they said.
The study, carried out by Global Carbon Project, looked at 450 databases showing daily energy use and introduced a measurement scale for pandemic-related societal “confinement” in its estimates.
Nearly half the emission reductions came from less transportation pollution, mostly involving cars and trucks, the authors said.
By contrast, the study found that drastic reductions in air travel only accounted for 10 percent of the overall pollution drop.