One Possible Outcome to a New World Order
Politics / New World Order May 22, 2023 - 07:27 AM GMTBy: Raymond_Matison
Our recent domestic financial fixed income markets have been bludgeoned by Federal Reserve’s raising interest rates, supposedly in order to reign in accelerated inflation – which can be argued to be the result of the FED’s own preceding policies of currency expansion induced by increasing government debt. Our equities and fixed income markets are highly volatile as perceptions tilt between inflation induced melt-up and increased interest rate and choked-off credit extension induced melt-down.
In the meantime, higher interest rates have reduced the market value of government and other bonds, thereby deflating commercial bank reserve assets, causing alarming bank runs and failures with profound reductions in the market value of most bank stocks. In addition, our banking system and domestic economy is further threatened by the increasing cost of interest rates in servicing our gargantuan national debt, a commercial property mortgage loan fiasco, and residential mortgage loan defaults. These dangerous conditions are not ours alone, but are global because our dollar has been and still is the majority currency of global trade and finance. To the extent that many international banks hold a large proportion of their banking reserves in dollars, a big reduction in the value of our dollar will force a change in acceptable reserves and guarantee the destruction of the global banking system. As a result, the global trade and economy, and financial system is at risk to markedly decline, even collapse, and then to evolve to a more decentralized multiple currency system that may include blockchains and various virtual currencies.
Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff in their classic book “This Time is Different” published in 2009, analyzed financial crisis of governments over eight centuries. They observed that “problematic political systems make external borrowing a tempting device for governments to employ to avoid hard decisions about spending and taxing.” They conclude (page 21) that “The duress typically involves a vicious cycle of loss in market confidence, spiraling interest rates on external government debt, and political resistance to repaying foreign creditors. Ultimately, default often occurs at levels of debt well below the 60 percent ratio of debt to GDP enshrined in Europe’s Maastricht treaty, a clause intended to protect the euro system from government defaults.” European Union’s debt to GDP now exceeds 90%, while that of the United States is at 120% - how do both comport in confidence and stability in our global financial and monetary system relative to the Reinhart and Rogoff eight centuries of guidelines? How should Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s rate U.S. and Euro debt for investment quality? Do you see how financial markets could crash, dollar’s value collapse, and a global crisis ensue?
The continuing and accelerating rapid build-up of national debt in our monetary system guarantees its eventual demise. As a result, our Federal Reserve will promote a CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) to the populace as a seemingly reliable or sound solution. This subterfuge is simply the next iteration of our old, failing fiat system with new additional and onerous potential suppression and total control of the nation’s money supply and your use of that currency, including total loss of privacy. The solution is a currency that cannot be inflated at will by government or central bank. It may call for competition or collaboration with our decentralized tech-savvy industry with some issuance of non-governmental virtual currencies.
A growing resistance to America’s petrodollar global reserve currency is confirmed by an increasing number of countries seeking to avoid the recently weaponized dollar – when the United States sanctioned Russia’s $300 billion Forex reserves at the beginning of the Russia/Ukraine war in 2022. Led by Russia and China to construct a commodity-backed alternative regional currency that could include gold would be used among like-minded nations for trade settlement, that would dramatically further reduce dollar global demand, use and influence. Unfortunately, that reduction in its demand for global trade transactions would concomitantly dramatically reduce its domestic purchasing value and dangerously increase price inflation in America.
A rapidly growing list of countries from every continent are joining BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) coalition, to become a powerful grouping of countries whose current objective appears to be to both promote trade, and gain some financial independence from the weaponized global reserve dollar, or influence from a U.S. dominated cultural and political interference. Such interference includes destabilization of a country’s elected government by a group such as an NGO (a U.S. non-governmental organization, but ultimately financed by our government) which overthrows a democratically elected and independently-minded foreign leader and replaces it with a leader to our own liking who will have a more accepting attitude towards U.S. policies. This coalition, therefore, is the global blowback to our geopolitical tampering. Collectively this coalition now exceeds the GDP of the G7 countries in size and population, and military power.
This coalition of countries originally started out as BRICS, but given that more than twenty countries have expressed an interest to join this coalition, it is now appropriate to use an acronym for its largest and most significant members China, Russia, India, South America, Iran, and South Africa. Thus, its acronym becomes CRISIS, and represents a true trade, monetary, and military crisis for the United States, Britain, and Europe. See: BRICS? No, CRISIS https://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article53009.html It is not expected that this acronym will be embraced as it promotes fear of coming change. Changes in leadership and global order take decades or even centuries to mature, therefore, we now take a brief look at causes to a coalescing of countries forcing a split from the Anglo hegemon and WEF (World Economic Forum) envisioned future.
China’s cultural and historical path
Chinese civilization predates both Muslim and Christian religious influence in our western world by thousands of years. Its civilization thrived with inventions of paper, paper money, and gunpowder, as Rome was barely aware of its existence. It took Marco Polo in the 15th century, before discovery of the North American continent, with his travel and amazing stories of spices, silks, and the developed Asia civilization to bring its awareness to the western world. China’s confidence in its long governing status led to it being self-defined as “the Middle Kingdom” referring to itself as the center of their then-known world – lessening its interest or need to explore far beyond its borders.
China’s culture and history had been greatly influenced by the philosopher and teacher Confucious who was born 551 B.C. His teachings emphasized moral virtue, reverence for family elders, education, harmony in social relations, enlightened governance, and unity. China’s society and its culture were based on the tradition of a multigenerational family led by its elders, whereby parental authority provided guidelines which were not to be challenged. Thus, parents instilled in their children a concept of self-control, unity, morals, responsibility, acquiescence, and avoidance of conflict - rather than individual rights or freedoms, which might be the case for children in America. For the overwhelming majority of its population, China does not have an official religious practice or organized religion comparable to that of the West. Constraints on their people’s actions are based on the concept of “loss of face” in their family or among peers, rather than the Western restrictions based on the concept of guilt or sin.
China’s early history of conflict attests to the fact that they fully understood the strategies, intricacies and nuances of war. Wikipedia notes that Sun Tzu, a Chinese general and military strategist, who lived in the same time period as Confucius, had written a book “The Art of War” that covers all the aspects of conducting successful warfare. Henry Kissinger in his book “On China” quotes a paragraph from the Art of War where it states: “The skillful strategist defeats the enemy without doing battle, capture the city without laying siege, overthrows the enemy state without protracted war.” In other words, one part of Sun Tzu’s war strategy is to achieve a position of such strength or dominance that the adversary recognizes futility in conflict and the winner essentially avoids war completely.
This self-isolating civilization remained uncontested from the western world until the 18th century when Britain’s galleons first arrived in China. China had previously fought many wars over thousands of years unifying many distinct cultures, as is underscored by over fifty different ethnic groups and languages spoken in present-day China. In the 13th century China was conquered by the Mongols, but their respect and admiration of China’s advanced culture ultimately led to their being assimilated into China. That confirms an amazing, unique and powerful culture.
However, China was not prepared for the technologically advanced military might of Britain, or the plunder that was to take place. Britain with its superior naval power, controlled ports and struck forced trade agreements such as the one-hundred-year lease of Hong Kong, and the devastating opium trade from India. While its land mass and population were too large to fully occupy or colonize, China was forced to recognize that it could not protect its ports or its capital. Thus, China lost its sovereignty and China’s emperor “lost face” as he could not defend against invaders who were considered “foreign barbarians”. China’s humiliation from foreign occupiers, loss of Taiwan to Japan in 1895, and long-term impoverishment from its partial colonialization became identified by China as its “century of shame”. See: China’s Long March To Saving Face. Part 1 https://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article55832.html
Grear Britain and Colonialism
Great Britain forged the greatest colonialist empire ever, and over a period of centuries of expansion could verifiably claim that it was an empire on which the sun never set. Other countries which then had a reasonably strong military force in Europe also took part in what must have seemed as a participatory sport called “military colonialism”. Each of the countries that at one time were seen as global leaders (Portugal, Spain, Holland, France, England, United States) and others sought and made colonial conquests. England justified its incursion, conquest, oppression, and administration of “lesser nations” as helping to develop backward peoples who could not administer their own regions or countries and needed stewardship from advanced, developed, and cultural England.
Their success came from developing a strong navy which permitted England to control increasing trade among countries, as sea routes were less expensive and more secure than long and dangerous overland routes. This success was augmented by its establishing of the first national central bank. Established in 1694, the Bank of England provided for a continuous source of money to fund wars which competing countries lacked, and therefore essentially guaranteed Britain’s military superiority.
However, Harvard history professor Caroline Elkins and Pulitzer-prize winning author in her second book entitled “Legacy of Violence” covers more than two hundred years of history “revealing a radicalized doctrine that relied on unrelenting violence to secure and preserve the nation’s imperial interests.” Over time, that violence became increasingly systematized, but when England could no longer maintain control of its colonies through violence its empire started shrinking, and British officials destroyed and hid the incriminating evidence of its policies and practices. Thus, British leadership proved themselves to be overly arrogant, and in some ways less civilized than the people of their colonized nations.
Her great expose book does not at all cover Britain’s activities of the last century as it relates to two of its largest and most troubled yet incomparably profitable colonies, Iran and India. In 1912, the British Navy recognizing the leap in efficiency from using oil as opposed to coal as a power source, and in order to keep its dominance of the seas, switched their ships from coal to oil. However, Britain itself had no oil within its boundaries, when it formed the Anglo-Persian Oil Company in order to exploit Iran’s oil. When Winston Churchill helped to seize Iran’s oil industry in the 1920’s, he called it’s “a prize from fairyland beyond our wildest dreams.” Britain had maintained its world power because of its persistence in exploiting natural resources of nations such as Iran. The British government had a fantastically lucrative monopoly on the production and sale of Iranian oil, and it was Britain’s most profitable enterprise. The injustice of it was that most Iranians lived in abject poverty.
As the British began to fully understand the incredible value of its oil concession and in order to more fully control it, Britain imposed a constricting Anglo-Persian Agreement through which the British took control of Iran’s army, treasury, transport system, and communications network - essentially eliminating Iran’s sovereignty. It was a brazen move, typical of colonialist Britain at the time, which only gained growing enmity for them from Iranian citizens.
By 1951, a charismatic Iranian politician Mohammad Mossadegh had risen to power who championed constitutional government and sovereign integrity free from foreign influence. He correctly saw that Iran’s own development as a country was suspended, as the lives of its citizens were sacrificed to those benefiting Britain. In 1951 under his leadership as prime minister, their parliament (Majlis) voted to nationalize Iranian oil, and the Shah signed a document revoking Anglo-Iranian concession and establishing a new National Iranian Oil Company. When the British were forced to leave Iran, they sabotaged the refinery, and asked the U.S. to help depose Iran’s democratically elected president. The CIA toppled Middle East’s only democracy, installing monarch Reza Shah Pahlavi who resumed the oil exploitation, quickly became unpopular, and required increasingly repressive policies in order to stay in power. This subversion and coup brought forth in a short twenty-five years the complete antithesis of what the United States had desired – loss of future oil profits, Iran’s 1979 seizure of the American Embassy and its employees for 444 days in Tehran, and an uncompromising Islamic revolutionary take-over which established policies contrary to American interests persisting today.
The United States no longer had credibility as a purveyor of democracy to Iran or other nations because of its active participation in destroying Iran’s democracy in 1953. Since then, Iranians came to believe that the United States was replacing a declining colonialist Britain, and wanted to control and extract its oil and build military bases on its soil - as it has done in other Middle East countries. There was ample evidence for Iran to take this position. In his book “Myths, Lies, and Oil Wars” author F. William Engdahl states: “A quid pro quo for the CIA helping their British cousins, Washington extracted a heavy price on behalf of the Rockefeller oil group. What had been in the sole domain of British oil since 1908 now had to be shared with the American Rockefeller companies. British Petroleum, as the company was renamed after the coup, would henceforth get a mere 40% share of Iran’s oil. Each of the five Rockefeller-linked US sisters got 8% or a total of 40%, and Shell got 14%, while the weaker French CFP got 6%.”
This coup’s initial success unfortunately prompted the U.S. to repeat the formula for deposing leaders they did not approve of in other countries - which later also brought undesirable consequences. In his book “All the Shah’s Men” author Stephen Kinzer notes that “Later the CIA set out to kill or depose foreign leaders from Cuba and Chile to the Congo and Vietnam. Each of these operations had profound effects that reverberate to this day. Some produced immense misery and suffering and turned whole regions of the world bitterly against the United States.” See: Iran: Public Image Versus Historical Reality Part 2. https://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article59864.html
Evolved colonialism by financial means
Recall that before its independence, America had been a colony of England. Even after it won independence, England’s continuing influence on America was manifested through its influence of our nation’s first important banks. The First National Bank of the United States (1791-1811), and The Second Bank of the United States (1816-1836) had foreign investment, and were thought to have significant ownership and influence from England.
Author G. Edward Griffin in his exhaustingly documented and immensely important book “The Creature from Jekyll Island” states: “The Rhodes Scholarships, established by the terms of Cecil Rhodes’ seventh will, are known to everyone. What is not so widely known is that Rhodes in five previous wills left his fortune to form a secret society, which was to devote itself to the preservation and expansion of the British Empire.”
“The purpose of that group was nothing less than world dominion and the establishment of a modern feudalist society controlled by the world’s central banks. Headquartered in England, the Rhodes inner-most directorate was called te Round Table. In other countries, there were established subordinate structures called Round Table Groups. The Round-Table Group in the United States became known as the Council of Foreign Relations. The CFR, which was initially dominated by J.P. Morgan and later by the Rockefellers, is the most powerful group in America today. It is even more powerful than the federal government, because almost all of the key positions in government are held by its members. In other words, it is the United States government.”
The preceding could explain a lot of enigmatic history related to American to entry into WWI and WWII, despite American citizen’s opposition. It explains why the head of our Federal Reserve system in the 1920s, Benjamin Strong, helped the Bank of Egland with policies that decidedly moved America’s own economy towards and into the depression of the 1930’s. It also would explain why America helped overthrow Iran in 1953 after Britain’s oil concession in Iran was nationalized. It clarifies why both Egland and the U.S. are deeply embroiled in Ukraine – a war to weaken Russia in order to prevent it or its ally China from becoming stronger challengers to an Anglo-led present world order.
It is the privilege for the winners in wars to write its predominant history, so Britain’s version of its colonialism and America’s version of global leadership over the last century will largely prevail. Governments want their version of “truth” to prevail, so if the facts are different from its desired version, governments can and will simply lie. Such examples include the false Gulf of Tonkin attack related to the justification of war on Vietnam, the lack of weapons of mass destruction related to the war in Iraq, our justification for war in Afghanistan related to a Saudi Arabian Osama Bin Laden, our justification for our presence in Syria, etc.
But there are also other countries that are writing their version of history. Iran’s subjugation by both Britain and the U.S. forms long-term memories and enemies. Most BRICS countries, and scores of those now interested in joining this alliance have suffered militarily, financially, or both at the hands of the last two global hegemons. Countries have long memories of conquest, and depredation; and with the information revolution and computerized translations it is easier to document and preserve such history than ever before. With scientific advances in military weapons becoming powerful enough to destroy nations, and maturity of our interlocking institutions, military colonialism has given way to financial colonialism. Accordingly, sanctions and currency manipulations have been recent potent and destructive weapons. In addition, the global use of our dollar for trade and as a reserve currency has massive value, which also can/is being used as a financial weapon.
No one country is strong enough to oppose a global hegemon, and even less so when opposing the last two global hegemons at one time. It is for this reason that the afflicted countries are joining this alliance – by uniting they can oppose what rightly or wrongly they perceive as repeated long-term oppression, and are standing up to the English-speaking countries’ geo-policies. Finally, one needs to ask the question: to what extent are United States policies influenced, or direct extensions of continuing British global colonialism/domination strategies? Perhaps another name for Great Britain - United Kingdom was intended to include its former American colony, and we are carrying out their policies today.
J.P. Morgan, the person, and J.P. Morgan bank today seem as American as apple pie. But author G. Edward Griffin states in his book: “J.P. Morgan was driving force behind the Council of Foreign Relations, the American branch of a secret society established by Cecil Rhodes for the expansion of the British empire. In truth, the Morgans were more British than American.”
Is it possible that the reasons for which we have loved our country, the freedoms provided by our Constitution and our Bill of Rights, have been captured by some combination of forces including, WEF, Big Tech, socialism, communism, or continued British colonialism - and are getting America do things that it would not do on its own? Are we a free people, or are we being manipulated?
China’s reemergence to Middle Kingdom status
China was an incredibly poor country when Mao Zedong and the Communist revolution had taken control of the country. President Nixon, in order to politically cleave China from Russia and prevent both Communist countries from joining forces against the West, visited China that started a relationship which over years dramatically changed the course for both countries. China recognized its need for economic development, and to provide employment for its then starving masses. The United States was looking to access China’s huge market and find a means to reduce its manufacturing costs, thereby increasing trade and corporate profits while also reducing stateside inflation.
China’s leaders declared that “poverty is not socialism” and that “it did not matter whether the cat was black or white as long as it catches mice”, meaning that as long it brought jobs and economic development, China’s communist leadership was willing to accept some free enterprise, and stepped back from total government control. These decisions brought forth economic growth that neither China nor the U.S. could have imagined. China’s economy is currently acclaimed to be second largest in the world, as new and modern manufacturing plants over years have been built in China, or the Asian region. Reflecting such growth, stock markets in both countries exploded to record levels.
There is ample public discourse that U.S. and China have become more than just economic competitors, and that China is seeking to displace the U.S. as the global leader. After Mao Zedong’s death China re-established its traditional Confucius-based culture, and government’s stated goal to “meshing socialism and capitalism” with no mention of the term communism. As substantial private ownership of private property and business exists in China today, contrary to Communism requiring the ownership of all private property, we could reasonably conclude that China is not communist today. Comically, with respect to socialism, famous billionaire commodity investor Jim Rogers has stated on You Tube that California is more socialist today than China. Eighty years after WWII, and thirty plus years after the collapse of Communist Soviet Union, perhaps it should be acknowledged that fear mongering over Communism is a ruse only for the benefit of a specific geopolitical agenda.
Will the US need to go to war in its attempt to maintain its declining hegemony? China was humiliated two centuries ago because of its military weakness; it will not allow itself to be shamed again. China fought the US to a standstill in Korea when it was poor and weak. What is the possibility that the U.S. could bring a war to China half a world away and win, given China’s immense and growing economic and military might? In addition, the citizens of this country do not want war; it is the unelected leaders who benefit from war who are driving the false conflict. Building on each other’s strengths, everyone has more; with destructive war, the people have less.
The U.S. is now fighting a proxy war in Ukraine in order to weaken Russia, as it increases Europe’s dependency on America’s oil, gas, weapons, and military protection. In the meantime, China is exercising the power of a global leader, as it brokered a surprise reestablishment of diplomatic ties between two former Middle East enemies – Saudi Arabia and Iran. America is against such normalization, because it wants Iran suppressed, as Saudi oil backs the petrodollar and America’s global dollar reserve hegemony. Having peace in the Middle East eliminates the reason for the U.S. to protect Saudis, which has been the basis for Saudis selling oil exclusively for dollars.
China now becomes a promoter of peace; regardless how incongruent it seems to have a country arguably ruled by the Communist party being the broker for Middle East rapprochement. China now has followed up its diplomacy with a proposal for peace in Ukraine, again contrary to U.S. interests, or at least the neocon military/industrial leadership. China is acting as a global leader, while Briain and the U.S. seem to be playing the roles of declining or failing hegemons. In a broader sense it confirms that the century of shame for China is over, and that it is recovering its Middle Kingdom status.
Monetary aspects of the New World Order
As presented at the beginning of this article, inordinate debt (the discussion of which generally excludes recognition of our huge unfunded debt, or the political theatre of our debt limit), budget deficits, and out of control money spending is destroying our fiat money system, such that the FED can no longer control it or prevent its demise. Over years, ever larger cycles with increased amplitude of money supply or rising interest rates have been needed to affect markets or the economy, as its centrifugal force is breaking apart the unbacked fiat money system. This means that central banks, commercial banks, and people will be forced to go through a period of failures and difficult financial readjustment.
Expanding BRICS nations are developing an independent and alternative money system to the dollar, which will be embraced by countries seeking to escape their previously costly experiences with the global dollar currency, and IMF policies. To the extent that this alternative currency may be commodity or gold-backed would increase its perceived advantages and speed its acceptance. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) can create a global currency – one that would compete or replace individual government’s central banks money. Many countries have experienced adverse effects from dealing with the IMF and its loan “conditionalities”, and therefore, are critical of its policies. Also, since this IMF “money” is also an unbacked fiat currency, and its governance would be controlled by the U.S. through its veto voting power, it would not be eagerly accepted by any of the countries supporting BRICS.
Crypto currency is sought and used more in countries that are unbanked or somehow in disharmony with the U.S. or IMF policies. As a result, the Global South and Middle East has more advanced digital asset regulation, adoption, and use. Digital assets, virtual currencies, and various crypto platforms and tokens are a real threat to commercial banks, central banks, and governmental fiat money systems. Therefore, it is being attacked by the incumbent central bank monetary system and governments with the intent to kill-off this competitor. Bitcoin is a store of value which must be destroyed, or at least made inconsequential for the central banks to retain control, just as gold had to be deligitimized and destroyed as publicly held money. However, since there are countries which oppose the present Anglo-hegemony, there are countries which will support Bitcoin and other blockchain platforms guaranteeing that virtual assets will not perish completely, and over time will take their rightful place in the economy of tomorrow.
As our present banking systems spins apart, our dollar is to lose the confidence of its citizenry. Our currency is beyond repair, and is not likely to recover. It is too early to lament or hold a funeral wake of our dollar, which may require several decades to reach the unimportance of a British pound, but the direction of this trend is not in doubt. A new competitive financial order is taking form.
Economic aspects of the New World Order
Climate-saving proponents would reduce or eliminate the use of carbon fuel. Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Iran as well as many other oil producing countries will not embrace this geopolitical strategy, as it would likewise eliminate national revenues rendering these countries immediately poor. Regardless of whether the climate agenda has merit or not, this is currently a deceptive war on their economic resources in order to diminish their collective growing influence. Accordingly, these oil producing nations will continue to use cheap and abundant carbon fuels, and those who propose to compete in global manufacturing using alternative energy sources will do so at a significant economic risk.
Recently, arguments have been proposed that robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) will increase manufacturing efficiencies, and that it will dramatically increase global unemployment. In addition, Elon Musk has stated that AI is a grave risk to mankind. That should not be surprising, since AI gets its knowledge from “reading books”, and all history of humans is related to war; therefore, a well-intentioned robot could try to eliminate horrific future wars by simply eliminating humans. But it is more insidious and complicated; some AI has been weaned on liberal or perhaps even “wake” information. It is comparable to a time in computer development some fifty years ago when certain input to a program produced a predictable output. The truism of “garbage in – garbage out” was recognized. It is true today with AI and robots, and is also true with all information systems including falsified history.
American global interventionism has been at the forefront of news events. Our proxy war in Ukraine is now corroborated with information of British and American advisors on the ground in Ukraine. U.S. led NATO is now opening an office in Japan!? Congress considers bombing Taiwan’s chip factories should China invade Taiwan! The British have given Ukraine Storm Shadow missiles which supposedly could be used to directly attack Moscow! Their actions show the desperation of our real Anglo leaders to deter change. Are we all totally nuts!? We will not need AI to destroy humanity, we will soon do it all on our own! Our politicians are acting like high school bullies in a bad neighborhood instead of being honest or intelligent representatives of the people who do not want war. We lack intelligence, artificial and human.
One possible future
The fiat monetary system of central banks will experience loss of control, and some individual country failure, as trust in our traditional currency gets destroyed. Our financial markets will experience severe “adjustments” concomitant to the decline in the value of our currency. The forever postponed recession’s arrival will finally be acknowledged, with an observation that we in America have also been experiencing a depression of sorts ever since our national debt started accelerating higher.
Our political influence in the world will decline not only because of our debt and monetary system’s problems, but because the rest of the world is becoming stronger. Countries are uniting and coming together to counter the decades long leadership of the current world order, with expectation of multipolar power sharing. Russia and China ready their version of the global South commodity-based money, which they expect will be fairer, less manipulative and more useful and valuable than our current fiat currency. China’s use of its digital currency in trade among its Belt and Road Initiative countries will reduce the use and value of the dollar, and reaffirm China’s historical Middle Kingdom status.
Despite the obvious baiting, the West will not be able to draw China into a war. Because of their Sun-Tzu war strategy, China will simply continue to grow economically and militarily stronger until the West or the U.S. concludes that it would be self-defeating to start a war conflict with China. More strident sanctions against China or Russia at this time will simply cause more backlash increasing the number countries which will join the BRICS collective, and make it stronger, and speed its collective growth. In addition, the alternative trade currency will make sanctions in this future ineffective. An unstoppable change in the global leadership is occurring, which will take more than a decade to play out completely. The BRICS caterpillar may well metamorphose into a beautiful new financial and economic world butterfly.
Raymond Matison
Mr. Matison was an Institutional Investor magazine top ten financial analyst of the insurance industry, founded Kidder Peabody’s investment banking activities in the insurance industry, and was a Director, Investment Banking in Merrill Lynch Capital Markets. He can be e-mailed at rmatison@msn.com
Copyright © 2023 Raymond Matison - All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilising methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisors.
© 2005-2022 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.
