by Rick Rozoff
Global Research (Canada)
On October 12 the United States and India launched an eighteen-day military exercise codenamed Yudh Abhyas (war study) in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. Described as "one of their largest-ever ground combat joint exercises," [1], the war games "involve the Indian Army Motorized Infantry Battalion and the 2nd Squadron of 14 CAV of 25 Stryker Brigade Combat Team, comprising some 320 U.S. servicemen." [2]
The deployment of Stryker armored combat vehicles for the drills marks the first time they have been used overseas since being introduced in Iraq in 2003 and sent to Afghanistan earlier this year. A week before the exercise began the Pentagon reported that "The Army plans to deploy 17 of its Stryker combat vehicles this month to India for the first exercise of its kind in the country.
"This is also the largest deployment of the Strykers outside of those sent to Iraq and Afghanistan." [3]
Far from being an isolated case, the joint U.S-Indian operation is emblematic of unprecedented military cooperation between the two nuclear nations over the past few years, in fact a strategic military partnership whose major purposes are to supplant Russia as India's decades-long main defense ally and arms supplier and to consolidate a U.S.-led military bloc in the Asia Pacific region aimed at containing China and furthering the encirclement of both that nation and Russia.
A U.S. Defense Department release on the currently ongoing exercise in question mentioned that "more than two years in the planning, [it] comes as the Defense Department continues to reach out to India to increase its military collaboration. Pacific Command's top officer, Navy Adm. Timothy J. Keating, last month traveled to India and said officials there have committed to increasing their military relationship with the United States." [4]
While the drills immediately address more modest goals - ostensibly practicing counterinsurgency and anti-terrorist techniques - "Hundreds of soldiers using heavy transport aircraft and battle tanks are participating in the biggest-ever war games between the two countries which were on the opposing side of the Cold War but now seek to build strategic and military ties.
"With an ally in India, Washington also seeks to keep an eye on the Chinese army's growing military mobility and strength in the area." [5]
In addition, an Indian press source reported that "Mid-way through Yudh Abhyas, yet another exercise named Cope India-09 between the air forces of the two countries will begin at Agra Oct 19." [6]
The Times of India reported on September 24 that an annual Chinese-Indian military exercise held each December since 2007 "as a major confidence-building measure between them" has been cancelled for 2009.
How far the displacement of Russia as India's major military ally has progressed against the backdrop of the Pentagon's plans for an Asia Pacific analogue of NATO was detailed by the Voice of America recently:
"For decades, India mostly depended on, first, the Soviet Union and then Russia for its military supplies. But as the Cold War ended and India's relations with the United States began improving during Bill Clinton's presidency, New Delhi gradually increased its military cooperation with Washington....Today, besides holding joint military exercises with the U.S. military, India has also been buying U.S. armaments worth billions of dollars."
The same article quoted the Indian ambassador to the United States, Meera Shankar:
"Our militaries once unfamiliar with each other now hold regular dialog and joint exercises in the air and on land and sea....Our defense trade was negligible a decade ago. We placed orders worth $3.5 billion last year and it could grow even more in the future." [7]
Heightened full spectrum - ground, air and sea - military collaboration between the U.S. and India is in part related to the escalation of America's and NATO's war in South Asia: Afghanistan and Pakistan, India's neighbor.
On October 13 the Washington Post revealed that the White House will send 13,000 support troops to join the additional 21,000 combat forces already and soon to be deployed this year and the BBC announced the following day that "the Obama administration had already told the UK government it would soon announce a substantial increase to its military forces in Afghanistan," to be formally confirmed next week at a meeting of NATO defense chiefs in the capital of Slovakia. [8] On the 15th the NATO regional commander in southern Afghanistan, Major General Mart de Kruif, said of Helmand province and adjacent areas that "we need at least two additional brigades of coalition forces, somewhere between 10,000 or 15,000 troops." [9]
NATO's Military Committee, the senior military authority in the Alliance, just completed a tour of inspection to Afghanistan. "In attendance were Military Representatives from all 28 NATO member states as well as Military Representatives from the 14 non-NATO nations who also contribute forces to ISAF." [10]
India has been assigned a role to play in the "stabilization" of the subcontinent as Afghanistan and Pakistan alike have been plunged into war and chaos since the U.S. and NATO invaded the first nation on October 7, 2001.
But the New Delhi-Washington axis is fraught with even grander designs and potentially catastrophic dangers.
With the North Atlantic Treaty Organization expanding into Eastern Europe - practically all of Eastern Europe - over the last ten years and its upgrading of military contacts and deployments through various partnership agreements (Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean Dialogue, Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, Contact Countries, Trilateral Afghanistan-Pakistan-NATO Military Commission), the world's only military alliance spans five continents, the Middle East and the South Pacific, effectively taking over other former Cold War military blocs like the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS) and thus constituting history's first international military alliance.
The four nations identified by NATO as Contact Countries - Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea - are all in the Asia Pacific area and in varying degrees all have contributed troops and naval support to the U.S.-NATO war in Afghanistan.
Initiatives like the U.S.-instituted Proliferation Security Initiative [11] naval surveillance and interdiction operation, begun in and still primarily focused on Asia, and the global missile shield program [12] both integrate major NATO member states and candidates for an emerging Asian NATO.
India as a nuclear power and the world's second most populous nation, one bordering China and with historical strategic ties with Russia, is pivotal in Western designs to establish worldwide military superiority so that, in the words of an Indian analyst several years ago, the U.S. can complete its vision for dominance over every sector of the globe with this stratagem: To have closer state-to-state relations with every nation in the world than all other nations have with any other nation, even neighboring states.
Just as in 1978 former rivals Egypt and Israel were reconciled unilaterally by the U.S., which is nowhere near the Middle East, so now any two countries in the world in a conflict situation - from South Asia to the Caucasus, from Africa to the Balkans - must go through Washington and Brussels to resolve their differences. That role, like so many others, has devolved from the United Nations to the United States and NATO.
U.S. and general Western military strategy in Asia is not limited to India, however preeminent a role that country has in the West's plans. Australia, which earlier this year released a Defence White Paper [13] announcing its largest-ever arms buildup and plans to arrogate to itself the role of a regional military power, is "pushing to rebuild its defence ties with India, risking the potential ire of China by formally requesting Australia be allowed to participate in the annual India-US joint naval exercise Malabar." [14]
The Malabar naval war games are an integral component of U.S. plans to integrate India into its Asian and global military nexus. An Indian news sources reported the following in relation to this year's exercise:
"The exercise in the Malabar series will take place [April 2009] off the Japanese coast in which Indian warships will carry out training manoeuvres in naval warfare alongside US Navy and Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force warships.
"The Malabar exercise, which began as a bilateral exercise in 1992 with the Americans, has in recent years taken on a multi-national character with greater participation from US allies and has made China sit up and take note.
"The last Malabar trilateral exercise involving India, the US and Japan was held in early 2007 off the Japanese coast. In the later part of that year, India joined the multilateral 25-warship Malabar exercise involving the navies of Singapore and Australia too, apart from US and Japan in the Bay of Bengal." [15]
Australia's intention to participate in the next Malabar drills - "an exercise obviously intended by the US to be a foil to China's strategic military might" - also comes "in the wake of the [Prime Minister Kevin] Rudd government's controversial defence white paper, which called for a build-up of naval capacity and appeared to suggest Australian defence strategy in coming decades would be shaped by China's military expansion." [16]
While visiting the nation recently Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith "invited India to participate in multilateral Australian Defence Force-hosted exercises Kakadu and Pitch Black." [17]
India borders China as do several other countries where the U.S. and its NATO allies have stationed troops and where they regularly conduct or will conduct military exercises, Afghanistan and Pakistan among them.
The Pentagon's Pacific Command has been holding annual joint Khaan Quest military operations in Mongolia, which borders both China and Russia.
In July Mongolia announced that it was providing troops to NATO for the war in Afghanistan, with an American news report stating "the country plans to send troops to Afghanistan, in a cooperation that stems from its 'third neighbor' policy to reach out to allies other than China and Russia," and "Mongolia's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan has helped cement its alliance with the United States and secure grants and aid." [18]
Last month NATO conducted a twenty-nation disaster response exercise, ZHETYSU 2009, in Kazakhstan, which also abuts China and Russia. French president Nicolas Sarkozy has just secured rights to transit his nation's military forces through the country.
On September 27 the Chinese press reported on a multinational military exercise to be conducted in Cambodia, one nation removed from China, next year:
"[M]ore than 2,000 military men are reserved for the first-ever event in the country and they will come from more than 20 countries, of which 1,500 will be from the United States.
"[D]uring a four-day visit to Washington D.C., Tea Banh, Cambodia's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defense, had met with U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and discussed security cooperation between the United States and Cambodia." [19]
On October 14 reports surfaced on Taiwan conducting its "largest-ever missile test...launched from a secretive and tightly guarded base in southern Taiwan."
The report also said the missiles were "capable of reaching major Chinese cities." [20]
With President Ma Ying-jeou observing, "the drill included the test-firing of a top secret, newly developed medium-range surface-to-surface missile with a range of 3,000 kilometres, capable of striking major cities in central, northern and southern China." [21]
The following day's news reported that the Defense Ministry of South Korean "plans to equip the Navy's 7,600-ton-class Aegis vessels, including a King Sejong-class destroyer, with the newest-type American-made SM-6 missiles" and that "to ensure proper use of SM-6 [Extended Range Active] missiles, the South Korean Navy will naturally be linked to the U.S. missile defense system, considering that it will need the assistance of some intelligence reconnaissance devices, including spy satellites and radars, in the U.S. MD [missile defense] system." [22]
Each year the Pentagon leads the multinational Cobra Gold war games in Thailand. This year the armed forces of the host country, the U.S., Japan, Singapore and Indonesia were involved and several other nations "participate[d] in various roles during the exercise": Australia, Brunei, France, Italy, Britain, Bangladesh, India, the Philippines, the Peoples Republic of Cambodia, China, Canada, Germany, South Korea, Laos, Nepal, Pakistan, Vietnam, and Mongolia. [23]
Excepting China, the above roster is a faithful representation of a NATO-Asian NATO axis in formation.
On October 14 the USS Bonhomme Richard amphibious assault ship arrived in East Timor for the latter's "first joint military exercise with the United States" and it was reported that "manoeuvres with 2,500 US troops and Australia forces are to last through October 24." [24]
The American ambassador to the new nation, Hans Klem, said that the exercises would focus on "jungle training, urban training, infantry training [and] beach landings...." [25]
The Pentagon's military penetration of Asia and encroachment on China, coordinated at every turn with Washington's NATO allies, is part of an international campaign to achieve military presence in and domination over every longitude and latitude. The European continent has been subsumed almost completely under NATO.
America's new Africa Command recently completed a 25-nation military exercise in Gabon and will soon begin multinational maneuvers in Uganda.
The war in Afghanistan has recently provided the U.S. and NATO new basing and military transit rights in the Central Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. "The United States has secured 'lethal transit' deals with Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan....Both the Kyrgyz Ministry of Defense and the US Embassy in Bishkek confirmed earlier that the Manas Transit Center is facilitating the shipment of military freight going to Afghanistan....[T]he transit of supplies into Afghanistan via Turkmenistan 'is possible'...." [26]
Of the three nations in the South Caucasus, Georgia and Azerbaijan are veritable Pentagon and NATO military outposts on Russia's borders and Armenia just announced it might send troops to Afghanistan to serve under NATO command.
Washington has recently secured the use of seven new military bases in Colombia and has announced similar plans for two naval facilities in Panama two years after reactivating U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command.
Even uninhabited areas of the world (and their energy and other resources) are not beyond the Pentagon's and NATO's purview.
On October 9 the top military commander of U.S. European Command and NATO, Admiral James Stavridis, "warn[ed] of conflict with Russia in [the] Arctic Circle" as The Times of London phrased it.
Last week an Indian writer offered this concise perspective:
"The arc of encirclement of Russia gets strengthened. NATO ties facilitate the deployment of the US missile defence system in Georgia. The US aims to have a chain of countries tied to 'partnerships' with NATO brought into its missile defence system - stretching from its allies in the Baltic to those in Central Europe. The ultimate objective of this is to neutralise the strategic capability of Russia and China and to establish its nuclear superiority. The National Defense Strategy document, issued by the Pentagon on July 31, 2008, portrays Washington's perception of a resurgent Russia and a rising China as potential adversaries." [27]
The analyst doesn't exaggerate.
In February 2008 a Reuters report said that, "The United States is worried that Russia, China and OPEC oil-producing countries could use their growing financial clout to advance political goals, the top U.S. spy chief told Congress...."
National Director of Intelligence Michael McConnell told the Senate Intelligence Committee that he had "concerns about the financial capabilities of Russia, China and OPEC countries."
His concerns, however, suggested military rather than economic and trade matters. A summary of his testimony had little to say of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and much about Russia and China.
"Russia, bolstered in part by oil revenues, was positioning itself to control an energy supply and transportation network from Europe to East Asia, and the Russian military had begun to reverse a long decline....China has pursued a policy of global engagement out of a desire to expand its growing economy and obtain access markets, resources, technology and expertise." [28]
Shortly afterward Russia "demanded an explanation from America over a report by the director of American national intelligence in which Russia, China, Iraq, Iran, North Korea and al-Qaida are described as sources of strategic threats to the U.S, ITAR-TASS has been told by a source close to the Kremlin." [29]
That is, Russia and China had effectively been added to the infamous "axis of evil" targeted by former president George W. Bush in January of 2002.
Though Bush's departure from the White House and his successor's arrival there haven't changed anything, except if anything to makes matters progressively worse.
An Associated Press story of May 1, 2009 mentioned that "The Obama administration is working to improve deteriorating U.S. relations with a number of Latin American nations to counter growing Iranian, Chinese and Russian influence in the Western Hemisphere, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said....[30]
In the latest quadrennial National Intelligence Strategy report last month, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair claimed "Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea pose the greatest challenges to the United States' national interests." [31]
China and Russia have replaced subjugated Iraq in the ranks of remaining "axis of evil" members Iran and North Korea.
Blair's report asserted that Russia "may continue to seek avenues for reasserting power and influence in ways that complicate U.S. interests." A paraphrase of the document said of "China, which trades regularly with the United States and owns billions of its national debt," that "Beijing competes for the same resources the United States needs, and is in the process of rapidly modernizing its military." [32]
In 2006 an article appeared in Foreign Affairs, the magazine of the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, called "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy," coauthored by Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, which explored in the frankest manner how the U.S. could deal with its Chinese and Russian "challengers."
As the piece's title indicates, the focus is on nuclear weapons and America's superiority in regards to them.
Its basic contention is summarized in this paragraph:
"For four decades, relations among the major nuclear powers have been shaped by their common vulnerability, a condition known as mutual assured destruction. But with the U.S. arsenal growing rapidly while Russia's decays and China's stays small, the era of MAD is ending - and the era of U.S. nuclear primacy has begun." [33]
That appraisal inevitably led to the conclusion that "It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike."
The authors examine with coldblooded detachment comparative advancements in each of the U.S.'s triad of nuclear weapons delivery systems - ground-based missile, air and submarine - and how in all three instances Washington could launch crippling first strikes on China and Russia alike.
For example, they state "The U.S. Air Force has finished equipping its B-52 bombers with nuclear-armed cruise missiles, which are probably invisible to Russian and Chinese air-defense radar. And the air force has also enhanced the avionics on its B-2 stealth bombers to permit them to fly at extremely low altitudes in order to avoid even the most sophisticated radar."
And they list both nation's vulnerabilities in an almost gleeful manner:
"The more Russia's nuclear arsenal shrinks, the easier it will become for the United States to carry out a first strike.
"The real U.S. war plan may call for first targeting Russia's command and control, sabotaging Russia's radar stations, or taking other preemptive measures - all of which would make the actual U.S. force far more lethal than our model assumes.
"According to our model, such a simplified surprise attack would have a good chance of destroying every Russian bomber base, submarine, and ICBM.
"China's nuclear arsenal is even more vulnerable to a U.S. attack. A U.S. first strike could succeed whether it was launched as a surprise or in the midst of a crisis during a Chinese alert. China has a limited strategic nuclear arsenal.
"According to unclassified U.S. government assessments, China's entire intercontinental nuclear arsenal consists of 18 stationary single-warhead ICBMs."
To confirm that their study is indicative of not only their own conviction, the authors add that "The improvements to the U.S. nuclear arsenal offer evidence that the United States is actively seeking primacy...The current and future U.S. nuclear force, in other words, seems designed to carry out a preemptive disarming strike against Russia or China.
"The intentional pursuit of nuclear primacy is, moreover, entirely consistent with the United States' declared policy of expanding its global dominance."
In view of what has developed in the interim since its publication, the article provides the unadorned truth about so-called missile defense in stating "the sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one - as an adjunct to a U.S. first-strike capability, not as a standalone shield. If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal - if any at all.
"At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would have so few warheads and decoys left."
The piece ends in acknowledging that with the demise of the Warsaw Pact and any pretense that American and NATO nuclear weapons would be needed against a superior conventional military attack and no further intent, as with Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, to compel adversaries to spend themselves into bankruptcy on a strategic arms race, "Washington's continued refusal to eschew a first strike and the country's development of a limited missile-defense capability take on a new, and possibly more menacing, look. The most logical conclusions to make are that a nuclear-war-fighting capability remains a key component of the United States' military doctrine and that nuclear primacy remains a goal of the United States."
As much as words like competition and challenges may factor in the speeches of U.S. and other Western politicians when relating to domestic matters, the White House and the Pentagon will tolerate no serious competition and allow no challengers in their drive for global military, political and economic domination.
When all else fails, and even before, Washington's ultima ratio consists of its nuclear arsenal and delivery systems.
-------
Notes
1) Indo-Asian News Agency, October 12, 2009
2) Russian Information Agency Novosti, October 12, 2009
3) U.S. Department of Defense, American Forces Press Service, October 6, 2009
4) Ibid
5) Reuters, October 12, 2009
6) Indo-Asian News Agency, October 12, 2009
7) Voice of America, October 8, 2009
8) BBC News, October 14, 2009
9) Agence France-Presse, October 15, 2009
10) NATO, October 15, 2009
11) Proliferation Security Initiative And U.S. 1,000-Ship Navy: Control Of World’s Oceans, Prelude To War Stop NATO, January 29, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/proliferation-security-initiative-and-us-1000-ship-navy-control-of-worlds-oceans-prelude-to-war/
12) U.S. Accelerates First Strike Global Missile Shield System, Stop NATO, August 19, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/u-s-accelerates-first-strike-global-missile-shield-system
Global Military Bloc: NATO’s Drive Into Asia Stop NATO, January 24, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/global-military-bloc-natos-drive-into-asia
13) Australian Military Buildup And The Rise Of Asian NATO, Stop NATO, May 6, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/australian-military-buildup-and-the-rise-of-asian-nato
14) The Australian, October 15, 2009
15) Outlook India, April 10, 2009
16) The Australian, October 15, 2009
17) Ibid
18) Reuters, July 22, 2009
19) Xinhua News Agency, September 27, 2009
20) Radio Taiwan International, October 14, 2009
21) Deutsche Presse-Agentur, October 14, 2009
22) Chosun Ilbo, October 15, 2009
23) Embassy of the United States of America Bangkok, January 13, 2009
24) Deutsche Presse-Agentur, October 14, 2009
25) Ibid
26) EurasiaNet/Eurasia Insight, October 13, 2009
27) Younes Bhat, Crisis from the Balkans to Caucasus: Munich Speech to Reset Button Mainstream Weekly, October 11, 2009
28) Reuters, February 5, 2008
29) Voice of Russia, February 8, 2008
30) Associated Press, May 1, 2009
31) Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, September 16, 2009
32) Ibid
33) The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy, Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006-
Rick Rozoff is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Rick Rozoff
The deployment of Stryker armored combat vehicles for the drills marks the first time they have been used overseas since being introduced in Iraq in 2003 and sent to Afghanistan earlier this year. A week before the exercise began the Pentagon reported that "The Army plans to deploy 17 of its Stryker combat vehicles this month to India for the first exercise of its kind in the country.
"This is also the largest deployment of the Strykers outside of those sent to Iraq and Afghanistan." [3]
Far from being an isolated case, the joint U.S-Indian operation is emblematic of unprecedented military cooperation between the two nuclear nations over the past few years, in fact a strategic military partnership whose major purposes are to supplant Russia as India's decades-long main defense ally and arms supplier and to consolidate a U.S.-led military bloc in the Asia Pacific region aimed at containing China and furthering the encirclement of both that nation and Russia.
A U.S. Defense Department release on the currently ongoing exercise in question mentioned that "more than two years in the planning, [it] comes as the Defense Department continues to reach out to India to increase its military collaboration. Pacific Command's top officer, Navy Adm. Timothy J. Keating, last month traveled to India and said officials there have committed to increasing their military relationship with the United States." [4]
While the drills immediately address more modest goals - ostensibly practicing counterinsurgency and anti-terrorist techniques - "Hundreds of soldiers using heavy transport aircraft and battle tanks are participating in the biggest-ever war games between the two countries which were on the opposing side of the Cold War but now seek to build strategic and military ties.
"With an ally in India, Washington also seeks to keep an eye on the Chinese army's growing military mobility and strength in the area." [5]
In addition, an Indian press source reported that "Mid-way through Yudh Abhyas, yet another exercise named Cope India-09 between the air forces of the two countries will begin at Agra Oct 19." [6]
The Times of India reported on September 24 that an annual Chinese-Indian military exercise held each December since 2007 "as a major confidence-building measure between them" has been cancelled for 2009.
How far the displacement of Russia as India's major military ally has progressed against the backdrop of the Pentagon's plans for an Asia Pacific analogue of NATO was detailed by the Voice of America recently:
"For decades, India mostly depended on, first, the Soviet Union and then Russia for its military supplies. But as the Cold War ended and India's relations with the United States began improving during Bill Clinton's presidency, New Delhi gradually increased its military cooperation with Washington....Today, besides holding joint military exercises with the U.S. military, India has also been buying U.S. armaments worth billions of dollars."
The same article quoted the Indian ambassador to the United States, Meera Shankar:
"Our militaries once unfamiliar with each other now hold regular dialog and joint exercises in the air and on land and sea....Our defense trade was negligible a decade ago. We placed orders worth $3.5 billion last year and it could grow even more in the future." [7]
Heightened full spectrum - ground, air and sea - military collaboration between the U.S. and India is in part related to the escalation of America's and NATO's war in South Asia: Afghanistan and Pakistan, India's neighbor.
On October 13 the Washington Post revealed that the White House will send 13,000 support troops to join the additional 21,000 combat forces already and soon to be deployed this year and the BBC announced the following day that "the Obama administration had already told the UK government it would soon announce a substantial increase to its military forces in Afghanistan," to be formally confirmed next week at a meeting of NATO defense chiefs in the capital of Slovakia. [8] On the 15th the NATO regional commander in southern Afghanistan, Major General Mart de Kruif, said of Helmand province and adjacent areas that "we need at least two additional brigades of coalition forces, somewhere between 10,000 or 15,000 troops." [9]
NATO's Military Committee, the senior military authority in the Alliance, just completed a tour of inspection to Afghanistan. "In attendance were Military Representatives from all 28 NATO member states as well as Military Representatives from the 14 non-NATO nations who also contribute forces to ISAF." [10]
India has been assigned a role to play in the "stabilization" of the subcontinent as Afghanistan and Pakistan alike have been plunged into war and chaos since the U.S. and NATO invaded the first nation on October 7, 2001.
But the New Delhi-Washington axis is fraught with even grander designs and potentially catastrophic dangers.
With the North Atlantic Treaty Organization expanding into Eastern Europe - practically all of Eastern Europe - over the last ten years and its upgrading of military contacts and deployments through various partnership agreements (Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean Dialogue, Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, Contact Countries, Trilateral Afghanistan-Pakistan-NATO Military Commission), the world's only military alliance spans five continents, the Middle East and the South Pacific, effectively taking over other former Cold War military blocs like the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS) and thus constituting history's first international military alliance.
The four nations identified by NATO as Contact Countries - Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea - are all in the Asia Pacific area and in varying degrees all have contributed troops and naval support to the U.S.-NATO war in Afghanistan.
Initiatives like the U.S.-instituted Proliferation Security Initiative [11] naval surveillance and interdiction operation, begun in and still primarily focused on Asia, and the global missile shield program [12] both integrate major NATO member states and candidates for an emerging Asian NATO.
India as a nuclear power and the world's second most populous nation, one bordering China and with historical strategic ties with Russia, is pivotal in Western designs to establish worldwide military superiority so that, in the words of an Indian analyst several years ago, the U.S. can complete its vision for dominance over every sector of the globe with this stratagem: To have closer state-to-state relations with every nation in the world than all other nations have with any other nation, even neighboring states.
Just as in 1978 former rivals Egypt and Israel were reconciled unilaterally by the U.S., which is nowhere near the Middle East, so now any two countries in the world in a conflict situation - from South Asia to the Caucasus, from Africa to the Balkans - must go through Washington and Brussels to resolve their differences. That role, like so many others, has devolved from the United Nations to the United States and NATO.
U.S. and general Western military strategy in Asia is not limited to India, however preeminent a role that country has in the West's plans. Australia, which earlier this year released a Defence White Paper [13] announcing its largest-ever arms buildup and plans to arrogate to itself the role of a regional military power, is "pushing to rebuild its defence ties with India, risking the potential ire of China by formally requesting Australia be allowed to participate in the annual India-US joint naval exercise Malabar." [14]
The Malabar naval war games are an integral component of U.S. plans to integrate India into its Asian and global military nexus. An Indian news sources reported the following in relation to this year's exercise:
"The exercise in the Malabar series will take place [April 2009] off the Japanese coast in which Indian warships will carry out training manoeuvres in naval warfare alongside US Navy and Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force warships.
"The Malabar exercise, which began as a bilateral exercise in 1992 with the Americans, has in recent years taken on a multi-national character with greater participation from US allies and has made China sit up and take note.
"The last Malabar trilateral exercise involving India, the US and Japan was held in early 2007 off the Japanese coast. In the later part of that year, India joined the multilateral 25-warship Malabar exercise involving the navies of Singapore and Australia too, apart from US and Japan in the Bay of Bengal." [15]
Australia's intention to participate in the next Malabar drills - "an exercise obviously intended by the US to be a foil to China's strategic military might" - also comes "in the wake of the [Prime Minister Kevin] Rudd government's controversial defence white paper, which called for a build-up of naval capacity and appeared to suggest Australian defence strategy in coming decades would be shaped by China's military expansion." [16]
While visiting the nation recently Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith "invited India to participate in multilateral Australian Defence Force-hosted exercises Kakadu and Pitch Black." [17]
India borders China as do several other countries where the U.S. and its NATO allies have stationed troops and where they regularly conduct or will conduct military exercises, Afghanistan and Pakistan among them.
The Pentagon's Pacific Command has been holding annual joint Khaan Quest military operations in Mongolia, which borders both China and Russia.
In July Mongolia announced that it was providing troops to NATO for the war in Afghanistan, with an American news report stating "the country plans to send troops to Afghanistan, in a cooperation that stems from its 'third neighbor' policy to reach out to allies other than China and Russia," and "Mongolia's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan has helped cement its alliance with the United States and secure grants and aid." [18]
Last month NATO conducted a twenty-nation disaster response exercise, ZHETYSU 2009, in Kazakhstan, which also abuts China and Russia. French president Nicolas Sarkozy has just secured rights to transit his nation's military forces through the country.
On September 27 the Chinese press reported on a multinational military exercise to be conducted in Cambodia, one nation removed from China, next year:
"[M]ore than 2,000 military men are reserved for the first-ever event in the country and they will come from more than 20 countries, of which 1,500 will be from the United States.
"[D]uring a four-day visit to Washington D.C., Tea Banh, Cambodia's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defense, had met with U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and discussed security cooperation between the United States and Cambodia." [19]
On October 14 reports surfaced on Taiwan conducting its "largest-ever missile test...launched from a secretive and tightly guarded base in southern Taiwan."
The report also said the missiles were "capable of reaching major Chinese cities." [20]
With President Ma Ying-jeou observing, "the drill included the test-firing of a top secret, newly developed medium-range surface-to-surface missile with a range of 3,000 kilometres, capable of striking major cities in central, northern and southern China." [21]
The following day's news reported that the Defense Ministry of South Korean "plans to equip the Navy's 7,600-ton-class Aegis vessels, including a King Sejong-class destroyer, with the newest-type American-made SM-6 missiles" and that "to ensure proper use of SM-6 [Extended Range Active] missiles, the South Korean Navy will naturally be linked to the U.S. missile defense system, considering that it will need the assistance of some intelligence reconnaissance devices, including spy satellites and radars, in the U.S. MD [missile defense] system." [22]
Each year the Pentagon leads the multinational Cobra Gold war games in Thailand. This year the armed forces of the host country, the U.S., Japan, Singapore and Indonesia were involved and several other nations "participate[d] in various roles during the exercise": Australia, Brunei, France, Italy, Britain, Bangladesh, India, the Philippines, the Peoples Republic of Cambodia, China, Canada, Germany, South Korea, Laos, Nepal, Pakistan, Vietnam, and Mongolia. [23]
Excepting China, the above roster is a faithful representation of a NATO-Asian NATO axis in formation.
On October 14 the USS Bonhomme Richard amphibious assault ship arrived in East Timor for the latter's "first joint military exercise with the United States" and it was reported that "manoeuvres with 2,500 US troops and Australia forces are to last through October 24." [24]
The American ambassador to the new nation, Hans Klem, said that the exercises would focus on "jungle training, urban training, infantry training [and] beach landings...." [25]
The Pentagon's military penetration of Asia and encroachment on China, coordinated at every turn with Washington's NATO allies, is part of an international campaign to achieve military presence in and domination over every longitude and latitude. The European continent has been subsumed almost completely under NATO.
America's new Africa Command recently completed a 25-nation military exercise in Gabon and will soon begin multinational maneuvers in Uganda.
The war in Afghanistan has recently provided the U.S. and NATO new basing and military transit rights in the Central Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. "The United States has secured 'lethal transit' deals with Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan....Both the Kyrgyz Ministry of Defense and the US Embassy in Bishkek confirmed earlier that the Manas Transit Center is facilitating the shipment of military freight going to Afghanistan....[T]he transit of supplies into Afghanistan via Turkmenistan 'is possible'...." [26]
Of the three nations in the South Caucasus, Georgia and Azerbaijan are veritable Pentagon and NATO military outposts on Russia's borders and Armenia just announced it might send troops to Afghanistan to serve under NATO command.
Washington has recently secured the use of seven new military bases in Colombia and has announced similar plans for two naval facilities in Panama two years after reactivating U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command.
Even uninhabited areas of the world (and their energy and other resources) are not beyond the Pentagon's and NATO's purview.
On October 9 the top military commander of U.S. European Command and NATO, Admiral James Stavridis, "warn[ed] of conflict with Russia in [the] Arctic Circle" as The Times of London phrased it.
Last week an Indian writer offered this concise perspective:
"The arc of encirclement of Russia gets strengthened. NATO ties facilitate the deployment of the US missile defence system in Georgia. The US aims to have a chain of countries tied to 'partnerships' with NATO brought into its missile defence system - stretching from its allies in the Baltic to those in Central Europe. The ultimate objective of this is to neutralise the strategic capability of Russia and China and to establish its nuclear superiority. The National Defense Strategy document, issued by the Pentagon on July 31, 2008, portrays Washington's perception of a resurgent Russia and a rising China as potential adversaries." [27]
The analyst doesn't exaggerate.
In February 2008 a Reuters report said that, "The United States is worried that Russia, China and OPEC oil-producing countries could use their growing financial clout to advance political goals, the top U.S. spy chief told Congress...."
National Director of Intelligence Michael McConnell told the Senate Intelligence Committee that he had "concerns about the financial capabilities of Russia, China and OPEC countries."
His concerns, however, suggested military rather than economic and trade matters. A summary of his testimony had little to say of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and much about Russia and China.
"Russia, bolstered in part by oil revenues, was positioning itself to control an energy supply and transportation network from Europe to East Asia, and the Russian military had begun to reverse a long decline....China has pursued a policy of global engagement out of a desire to expand its growing economy and obtain access markets, resources, technology and expertise." [28]
Shortly afterward Russia "demanded an explanation from America over a report by the director of American national intelligence in which Russia, China, Iraq, Iran, North Korea and al-Qaida are described as sources of strategic threats to the U.S, ITAR-TASS has been told by a source close to the Kremlin." [29]
That is, Russia and China had effectively been added to the infamous "axis of evil" targeted by former president George W. Bush in January of 2002.
Though Bush's departure from the White House and his successor's arrival there haven't changed anything, except if anything to makes matters progressively worse.
An Associated Press story of May 1, 2009 mentioned that "The Obama administration is working to improve deteriorating U.S. relations with a number of Latin American nations to counter growing Iranian, Chinese and Russian influence in the Western Hemisphere, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said....[30]
In the latest quadrennial National Intelligence Strategy report last month, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair claimed "Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea pose the greatest challenges to the United States' national interests." [31]
China and Russia have replaced subjugated Iraq in the ranks of remaining "axis of evil" members Iran and North Korea.
Blair's report asserted that Russia "may continue to seek avenues for reasserting power and influence in ways that complicate U.S. interests." A paraphrase of the document said of "China, which trades regularly with the United States and owns billions of its national debt," that "Beijing competes for the same resources the United States needs, and is in the process of rapidly modernizing its military." [32]
In 2006 an article appeared in Foreign Affairs, the magazine of the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, called "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy," coauthored by Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, which explored in the frankest manner how the U.S. could deal with its Chinese and Russian "challengers."
As the piece's title indicates, the focus is on nuclear weapons and America's superiority in regards to them.
Its basic contention is summarized in this paragraph:
"For four decades, relations among the major nuclear powers have been shaped by their common vulnerability, a condition known as mutual assured destruction. But with the U.S. arsenal growing rapidly while Russia's decays and China's stays small, the era of MAD is ending - and the era of U.S. nuclear primacy has begun." [33]
That appraisal inevitably led to the conclusion that "It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike."
The authors examine with coldblooded detachment comparative advancements in each of the U.S.'s triad of nuclear weapons delivery systems - ground-based missile, air and submarine - and how in all three instances Washington could launch crippling first strikes on China and Russia alike.
For example, they state "The U.S. Air Force has finished equipping its B-52 bombers with nuclear-armed cruise missiles, which are probably invisible to Russian and Chinese air-defense radar. And the air force has also enhanced the avionics on its B-2 stealth bombers to permit them to fly at extremely low altitudes in order to avoid even the most sophisticated radar."
And they list both nation's vulnerabilities in an almost gleeful manner:
"The more Russia's nuclear arsenal shrinks, the easier it will become for the United States to carry out a first strike.
"The real U.S. war plan may call for first targeting Russia's command and control, sabotaging Russia's radar stations, or taking other preemptive measures - all of which would make the actual U.S. force far more lethal than our model assumes.
"According to our model, such a simplified surprise attack would have a good chance of destroying every Russian bomber base, submarine, and ICBM.
"China's nuclear arsenal is even more vulnerable to a U.S. attack. A U.S. first strike could succeed whether it was launched as a surprise or in the midst of a crisis during a Chinese alert. China has a limited strategic nuclear arsenal.
"According to unclassified U.S. government assessments, China's entire intercontinental nuclear arsenal consists of 18 stationary single-warhead ICBMs."
To confirm that their study is indicative of not only their own conviction, the authors add that "The improvements to the U.S. nuclear arsenal offer evidence that the United States is actively seeking primacy...The current and future U.S. nuclear force, in other words, seems designed to carry out a preemptive disarming strike against Russia or China.
"The intentional pursuit of nuclear primacy is, moreover, entirely consistent with the United States' declared policy of expanding its global dominance."
In view of what has developed in the interim since its publication, the article provides the unadorned truth about so-called missile defense in stating "the sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one - as an adjunct to a U.S. first-strike capability, not as a standalone shield. If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal - if any at all.
"At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would have so few warheads and decoys left."
The piece ends in acknowledging that with the demise of the Warsaw Pact and any pretense that American and NATO nuclear weapons would be needed against a superior conventional military attack and no further intent, as with Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, to compel adversaries to spend themselves into bankruptcy on a strategic arms race, "Washington's continued refusal to eschew a first strike and the country's development of a limited missile-defense capability take on a new, and possibly more menacing, look. The most logical conclusions to make are that a nuclear-war-fighting capability remains a key component of the United States' military doctrine and that nuclear primacy remains a goal of the United States."
As much as words like competition and challenges may factor in the speeches of U.S. and other Western politicians when relating to domestic matters, the White House and the Pentagon will tolerate no serious competition and allow no challengers in their drive for global military, political and economic domination.
When all else fails, and even before, Washington's ultima ratio consists of its nuclear arsenal and delivery systems.
-------
Notes
1) Indo-Asian News Agency, October 12, 2009
2) Russian Information Agency Novosti, October 12, 2009
3) U.S. Department of Defense, American Forces Press Service, October 6, 2009
4) Ibid
5) Reuters, October 12, 2009
6) Indo-Asian News Agency, October 12, 2009
7) Voice of America, October 8, 2009
8) BBC News, October 14, 2009
9) Agence France-Presse, October 15, 2009
10) NATO, October 15, 2009
11) Proliferation Security Initiative And U.S. 1,000-Ship Navy: Control Of World’s Oceans, Prelude To War Stop NATO, January 29, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/proliferation-security-initiative-and-us-1000-ship-navy-control-of-worlds-oceans-prelude-to-war/
12) U.S. Accelerates First Strike Global Missile Shield System, Stop NATO, August 19, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/u-s-accelerates-first-strike-global-missile-shield-system
Global Military Bloc: NATO’s Drive Into Asia Stop NATO, January 24, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/global-military-bloc-natos-drive-into-asia
13) Australian Military Buildup And The Rise Of Asian NATO, Stop NATO, May 6, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/australian-military-buildup-and-the-rise-of-asian-nato
14) The Australian, October 15, 2009
15) Outlook India, April 10, 2009
16) The Australian, October 15, 2009
17) Ibid
18) Reuters, July 22, 2009
19) Xinhua News Agency, September 27, 2009
20) Radio Taiwan International, October 14, 2009
21) Deutsche Presse-Agentur, October 14, 2009
22) Chosun Ilbo, October 15, 2009
23) Embassy of the United States of America Bangkok, January 13, 2009
24) Deutsche Presse-Agentur, October 14, 2009
25) Ibid
26) EurasiaNet/Eurasia Insight, October 13, 2009
27) Younes Bhat, Crisis from the Balkans to Caucasus: Munich Speech to Reset Button Mainstream Weekly, October 11, 2009
28) Reuters, February 5, 2008
29) Voice of Russia, February 8, 2008
30) Associated Press, May 1, 2009
31) Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, September 16, 2009
32) Ibid
33) The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy, Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006-
Rick Rozoff is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Rick Rozoff
38 comments:
In South East Asia, History shows that the U.S. come and go... but China is HERE TO STAY.
Cambodia, a mere INSECT in the region, must devise a global strategy to survive and grow.
I strongly believe we should cultivate closer ties with China than the US, without becoming a chinese satellite.
Without becoming a chinese'satellite? How can it be? Take a good look at Israel, Kuwait, Taiwan, Singapore and many more small countries in the world that are not under the influence of commusinism. How can they survive? The nature of Khmer rulers is that none of them can rule their country without being a puppet of their neighbors. No doubt abou it because history shows the truth.
Dangerous conflict between creditor, oil producing countries and debt country.
Signed,
Hun Xen
It just shows how sick human races can be.
Instead of working together to eliminate global poverty and help everyone enjoy the basic necessity of life, the human species work hard devising plans to destroy each other.
The world is still too big for a few nations to want to live in by themselves.
Learning to share and understand each other is the key to human race survival.
The Americans are very smart and at the same time very stupid as well.
Cambodia will always need China to counter the influences and ambitions of the Vietnamese and the Thais.
But Cambodia has been equally controlled by both Khmers and Yuons.
How can Cambodia take itself out of Yuons' ambitious influence?
Hi friends.
It is nice to read comments from all sort of backgrounds.
To a friend 12:19am.
You compare Cambodia to Singapore, Taiwan, Kuwait and Israel, but you forgot to look at the geopolitics of each country.
Let list each of them separately.
Singapore, a small nation with about 4 millions and most of them are Chinese. Not long ago th ePrime mInister of Singapore gave a speech to students at the University and he appreciated them for making Sigapore a best land they can be, but he also reminded them that with this kind of world recession, Singapore may become part of Malaysia or Indonesia, who knows? The only way Singapore could survive from the Malay and Indonesia is to to ride on the dragon (China). You can check his speech on the internet.
Taiwanese are Chinese protected by the US (but how long will it last?).
Kuwait ruled by a group of richest families who discovered oil protected by the US; and Israel a small powerful nation supported by the US, and the Israel people today seemed to rule the world with their mighty fortune and talents.
Most media in the US controlled by the Jews, and at least in Europe Sarkazy, President of France is Jew. Billion dollars of US tax payers yearly support the Jews.
Now look at the geopolitics of Cambodia. She is squeezed between Vietnam and Thailand and the Vietnamese were million already mutated into Khmers have lived in Cambodia since mid 16th century.
Look back during the French colony. Did khmers fell into Youn strategies? Yes. That's why the French elevated the Youn to be their favorite people and the French allowed the Youn supervised Cambodia and Laos.
Now again, the US have supported Thailand since 1780's and the US knew that the Youn never left Cambodia and why the US stay silent?
To survive Cambodia must cultivate closer ties with China or with the US without becoming a satellite of either one of them, depends on the situations.
If the US works with Thailand and Vietnam, then ignoring Cambodia, Cambodia must side with China. As is today China is silently invading Vietnam, but if Vietnamese changes strategies by giving more land to China as long as China allows them to control Cambodia and Laos like the French did, then Cambodia must side with the US.
1;06am.
Your question: "But Cambodia has been equally controlled by both Khmers and Yuons.
How can Cambodia take itself out of Yuons' ambitious influence?"
I don't believe anyone has the answers to this most bizarre situations as Cambodia has. But the only bashers bragg to know the answers. Many Khmer leaders tried to liberate Cambodia from the Vietnamese, but failed and all they received were accused of killing their own people, because they refused to be under the Vietnamese control.
Today they joined the Vietnamese avoiding the killing of their own people, and they again receive same hate & curse.
I don't see the way out how anyone can reach up and pull down the powerful elites and their authoritarian system, if step by step the Vietnamese behind this government force those elite and powerful Khmers to enter the retirement, then new faces from somewhere in Vietnam speaking fluently Khmers replacing them.
Many of bashers know only one thing is "blaming" but if we were to put on the hot and dangerous seats like the Khmer leaders like King Sihanouk and Gen. Lon Nol who fough to free Cambodia from the Vietnamese, we won't come out alive.
Correct' my post 1;53am.
Many of bashers know only one thing is "blaming" but if they were to put on the hot and dangerous seats like the Khmer leaders like King Sihanouk and Gen. Lon Nol who fough to free Cambodia from the Vietnamese, they won't come out alive.
it is when the superpowers play game against each others that is dangerous for the non-superpower nations out there. watch out the whole world!
I hate fucken US interfere in SOUTH-EAST ASIA, they should had enough bombards my beloved cambodia, now they trying to repeat these bullshit again, US is the most evil-Govt on earth, US policy always goes around and pure gassoline on fire....
Edited of post 1:20 AM
"Hi friends.
It is nice to read comments from all sort of backgrounds.
To a friend 12:19am.
You compare Cambodia to Singapore, Taiwan, Kuwait and Israel, but you forgot to look at the geopolitics of each country.
Let list each of them separately.
Singapore, a small nation with about 4 millions and most of them are Chinese. Not long ago the Prime Minister of Singapore gave a speech to students at the University and he appreciated them for making Singapore a best land they can be, but he also reminded them that with this kind of world recession, Singapore may become part of Malaysia or Indonesia, who knows? The only way Singapore could survive from the Malaysia and Indonesia is to to ride on the dragon (China). You can check his speech on the internet.
Taiwanese are Chinese protected by the US (but how long will it last?).
Kuwait ruled by a group of richest families who discovered oil protected by the US; and Israel a small powerful nation supported by the US, and the Israel people today seemed to rule the world with their mighty fortunes and talents.
Most media in the US controlled by the Jews, and at least in Europe Sarkazy, President of France is Jew. Billion dollars of US tax payers yearly support Israel.
Now look at the geopolitics of Cambodia. She is squeezed between Vietnam and Thailand and the Vietnamese were million already mutated into Khmers have lived in Cambodia since mid-16th century.
Look back during the French colony. Did khmers fall into Youn strategies? Yes. That's why the French elevated the Youn to be their favorite people and the French allowed the Youn to supervise Cambodia and Laos.
Now again, the US have supported Thailand since 1780's and the US knew that the Youn never left Cambodia and why the US stay silent?
To survive Cambodia must cultivate closer ties with China or with the US without becoming a satellite of either one of them, depends on the situations.
If the US works with Thailand and Vietnam, then f the US ignores Cambodia, Cambodia must side with China. As of today China is silently invading Vietnam, but if Vietnamese changes strategies by giving more land to China as long as China allows them to control Cambodia and Laos like the French did, then Cambodia must side with the US."
Great works US!
It doesn't matter how many more million khmer must dye under communist China?
Siam ,Singapore,Indonesia,Malaysia and Philippine they not bother to mass killing human for their surviving country.
Communist=starving =death
Cambodia doesn't need to take sides if we have a smart leader. a well educated leader can run the country with dignity like Swiss. Swiss is small country with over 6 millions people but no super power can touch swiss territory.
Cambodia do need big brother like CHINA! King sihanouk make a good move, small boat with big engine is better than paddling...
8;07am
I understood your analysis, but I can't understand what these 6:44am and 6:55am trying to acomplish.
Now they try to brag and telling the world that they are smart and they can lead cambodia to becoming like Swiss.
Oh no not that Chinese salty crab legs eaters no more ,let the old wound heal ,Cambodian people do not need that death wish once again
The big engine with the small boat ,it will be sinking to the bottom of the water because the boat can't handle with the weight. Do not let her sink once a gain please ,she fully in pain.
11:58 AM,
The Youn hate Chinese so much because of recently invasion in Vietnam by the Chinese, and now the Chinese are rising through out the globe, even the US still cannot face China directly. Inspite of hatred still Youn cannot kick Chinese out from Vietnam, so where would you run from the 1.3 billion Chinese?
Why'd you be so stupid to put a big engine on a small boat? You should ride on the big boat with a big engine like the PM of Singapore said.
12:10PM
First I would say thank you for your in-civilize words by attracted me directed,unfortunates I won't think that is the big deal.But with your ignorant that I can't stand it so apologize is any errors occurred on my comments ,what is you bragging about?1.3billion people with a lot money? Yes it definitely people that has some brain defected like you ? Bicycles in the Capitol city? Pollution concern? yes you damn right ,because the one point three billion they have one brain so people this day they do not count on quantity but quality of people ,so please roll your tong hundred times before you speak out.
Sorry just can't stand
12;35pm
You wrote "The big engine with the small boat ,it will be sinking to the bottom of the water because the boat can't handle with the weight. Do not let her sink once a gain please ,she fully in pain."
Was it not your mockery toward other posters or you simply being stupid yourself by thinking that anyone would use a big engine on a small boat? It is a small boat that is riding on a big boat with a big engine, that exactly like PM of Singapore gave his speech.
The one whose brain is being defected cannot climb on the internet and write to you, idiot.
Yes the 1.3 billions have money and have powerful weapons, you cannot dismiss them easily. They are all over in Vietnam, Laos, Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia and Phillippines and now in Cambodia.
Our tongues, you or mine are rolling when we are talking, moron.
smell fresh old cool war
these people are cruel murderers
the conflict of these powerful countries caused too much genocides and suffering to innocnent people like the one killing filed which seek Cambodia into yuon genocide and conolisation till today
12:51PM I'm definitely am,because sound like people had been through the China topple have never exist,so that kind of people they like the free and dangerous ride.nothing is free and better unless we earn it and work hard for it.You were stating about the Singapore President speech ?What the fuck about that president of Singapore anyway? We talked about Cambodian death wishes to depend on China winch they have never learned the lesson,go ahead your dummy,no brain retarded like you no wonder Cambodia have never gone from miserable because people like you still living,and I personal appeal to all Cambodian people the china communist is sucked if Cambodian have a chance Aus,Cana,New,US,Briton is the best boss for us .so let that zombie12:51 go and five on engine put on his palm canoe to drown him and her to death.So while him or her already been in hell ,then no chances to bullshit any more .I hope my comment can rehabilitate your Alzheimer and low syndrome to cure.
12:35pm,
You're so outdated. Have you seen China lately? You'll be surprised and flabbergasted of her transformation and belittle of your ignorance. Go China!!!
I hate to say this but unfortunates
4:07pm you made me laugh,because i had never think that .99products made in China they're attract me,if you do not mind would you tell me what kinds of car manufacturing China made?Cell phone or television?
I only see salty egg,crab and tofoo and the others words I hate to pad the bicycle through the big capital while my accura MDX and BMW 2008 run 80to 90miles on the free way for some trip it take five days none stop?
Shall I take salty egg or Jack in the box or pizza Hut??
You should just eat salted eggs, dude.
7:36 that for you thanks
Don't compare Singapore prime minister with Khmer. Singapore prime minister is smarter than Khmer PM, Hun Shit.
Khmer has been sided with the wrong people for so long and no wonder we lost a lot of land (By Hanoi) and get a lot of people kill (By Beijing). Why did n't Sihanouk ask his long friend, China, to take Hun Shit out of power?
If Khmer leader is smart, they should side with the USA for a long time. Without the US tries to protect the small country, all of you might live with the communist. Now who eliminate the communist countries out of the world map? Is it the US? Sure it is, my friend.
The people who hates America, but they still send their kids to American school like Ah Hun shit. Why don't you go to Chinese school or Soviet school?
Go America and kick ass Ah Chinese. Don't let them become strong.
Some Khmer put their kids to learn Chinese because they think China is good for their children in the future. You're wrong my friend. Master English proficiency and you will be success in life. don't worry about Chinese language. Who cares to speak their language. Globally English language is dominant, not chinese. If China can't speak English, it's their problem.
Some khmers claims they're chinese even they are born in Cambodia. Some of them don't even speak chinese. Damb it just call yourself Cambodia, dude. Even I have chinese blood and my name is chinese, but I told people that I'm Cambodia,not stupid chinese.
Thanks5:23AM you got them all .
My posters above have been attacked with the communist China head all the way,but that communist wanted to be is no one else beside ah Hun Sen cronies or ah Hun Sen human leeches that like to steal donation money for enrich them selves and making khmer people live in miserable.
Go to hell ah communist suckers!!
5:38AM,
I read a few of the comments of yours and theirs, I don't see their views are Communists or anti-Communists or vice versa. Their comments are toward the ASEAN problems and the sinking of the world edoconomy, and the foreign policies of the US and China toward ASEAN. And your post was making fun of it. You aren't interested to debate to learn from each others, so what is the point and why are you pissed off?
Is this your post?
"The big engine with the small boat ,it will be sinking to the bottom of the water because the boat can't handle with the weight. Do not let her sink once a gain please ,she fully in pain.
12:01 PM".
You cannot debate, but all you can is resorting to cursing. This debate is above the confrontation between US/India v. China/Russia, and it has nothing to do with Hun Sen. Stick to the subject and to the environment around, not Hun Sen a small useless leader.
5:23 AM
You too cannot debate.
Your gangsters are good with cursing and barking up the wrong tree. You are in the bashing cathegory of the braggarts and how would you know being the leaders of the country like Cambodia that controlled by Vietnamese/Siem for more than 500 years is so easy?
People expressed their opinions based on the situation that escalated between US/India v. Russia/China and the recent US's policies toward Junta in Burma; and ASEAN conflicts.
Stop using Hun Sen and other studpid stuffs to make your points, but tell us what will happen to this ASEAN when US and China are competing?
I let those guys to come back and nail you flat on the floor.
American never like India, but because India now has nuclear bomb, all of a suddent, will you be my friend? The reasons behind all this is because of china is becoming closer to India now then ever and American had to make a quick move before everything is too late. This is called politic! USA always knowing what to do when it comes to their national security.
"The big engine with the small boat ,it will be sinking to the bottom of the water because the boat can't handle with the weight. Do not let her sink once a gain please ,she fully in pain.
12:01 PM". isn't make the common senses to you?
Once again above comment is mine ,I am really delight to debate with the scholar or intelligence like your self at this forum.To start with I want to ask you to get your eyes check also if some of your psychiatrist open on the weekend you should need that too. Those comment referred to only China is not the right partner for Cambodia,so I and one of commenter that you insulted that me and him is incompetent to debate? I and 5:23am sided with USA . Because the right partner for Cambodia to be prosper and well protected must be USA but the opposer they bragged about China ,we gave the comparison between China and USA which is the best bet. Why you came nowhere to look down us that we can't debate? Like I mentioned already you your self that not better to debate either your assumption made you think your self is the judge ? Hahahah please don't Judge the book by its covers I have so much times to comfort you all the way as long as you please ,even thugs ,gangsters words when you are ready the same website the same times ,even you are one of the judge but you are not you must one from the States or you are no bodies.
Thanks you so long
12:27pm.
You said: "The big engine with the small boat ,it will be sinking to the bottom of the water because the boat can't handle with the weight. Do not let her sink once a gain please ,she fully in pain."
I say "It is too stupid to anyone to use a big engine with a small boat; but it is not stupid to put a small boat on a big boat that already has the big engine. This makes more sense."
I didn't see anyone claimed to be scholar but simplied "learning from each others".
If you really enjoy debating then why are you having so much inferioty complex and resorting to a personal attack?
If you told other posters "don't judge the book by its cover" then why did you suggest your rivals to seek a psychiatrist?
So what if they bragged about China, and you bragged about the US? Those were only opinios of citizen who concers, though it may never happen. And perhaps, they knew how to identify the global geopolitical games by the great powers like US and China,and you don't.
You bragged about how Cambodia should choose her partners, but you are clueless that Cambodia is under Vietnamese controls for 500 years. Many Khmer Leaders tried and tried to protect and to free Cambodia from the Vietnamese from King Suryavaraman II to King Sihanouk, but failed. Withouth exaggeration, may be 95% of Cambodians about the ins and outs of the genocide story blaming each others while the real killers (Hanoi) are still controlling Cambodia over Hun Sen.
Do you really believe that the great powers like the US and China care for a small Cambodia?
Hell no. They both fight and each has tried to reshape the world geopolitic space. Each of them will do everything to benefit itself. Recently the US changed its policy and now the US is friend with Than Shwe of Burma, the dictator.
From what I see, Cambodia won't be spared, but she will belong to the disapora like Palestanians.
My post is @ 3:51 AM.
To 3:51AM
To be honest with you your comment didn't make sense either ,first at your comment stated we should side with the US I agreed with you ,but what I disagreed is some one above they bragged about China and I don't secondly you stated the viet control Cambodia 500 years ,you death wrong since I opened eyes to see cambodia world,number 3 you said King Sihaknuk he try but he failed .Yes you damn right Sihaknuk called youn to hide in Cambodia and called USA drop the bomb on vietcong per Sihaknuk requested the States did drop the bombs ,and Sihaknuk called for international to help and judge US as the bad guy.First sihaknuk breached his owned neutral contract by help Viet to figth with US ,so that not mean this king tried and fail,this called this king his burnt his own country own with his own hands,beside hiding Vietcong this king his wife brother in law and mother in law supplied vitcong with the rice ,fresh and dry food,medicine and weapons this is called try out?
And while Lon Nol kicked his ass out he called Vietcong to help him to restore his power from Lon Nol again and he sleep with you wife Monique Crazee what kind of trying he was? Trying to finish khmer country to youn in his hand under his youn wife lead him by the nose that sound making all Cambodian people easy to understand better?
To fuck all enemies and united Cambodian is to give people with justice and laws!
No shithead or fucking family should rule Cambodia. WE all should serve the country under one law!!!!!!
Keep screming loser 12;24am.
Post a Comment