Category Archives: Andrew Korybko

CPEC AND THE 21ST CENTURY CONVERGENCE OF CIVILIZATIONS, by Andrew Korybko

Source: Katehon

The current century presents a plethora of strategic opportunities for Pakistan, provided that Islamabad knows how to pluck the low-hanging fruit and take the initiative. The steady development of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is making the country ever more attractive for a wide variety of international partners, some of which have traditionally been aligned with Pakistan, and others which are entirely new and unprecedented. No matter which of the two categories these states fall under, it’s evident that they’re all interested in taking advantage of this game-changing series of infrastructure projects.

Never before has China had a reliable overland trade corridor to the Indian Ocean, and this in turn opens up a wide range of options for the People’s Republic and its economic partners. Moreover, the eventual completion of CPEC will allow Russia and the landlocked states of Central Asia to more easily conduct commerce with the broader Indian Ocean Region, thereby leading to the creation of previously uncharted trade routes which will invigorate each set of partners and profit the irreplaceable transit state of Pakistan. In terms of the bigger picture, each crisscrossing network of economic connections in one way or another is expected to pass through Pakistan by means of CPEC, thereby empowering Islamabad to leverage its crucial geostrategic position in pursuit of its national interests.

The convergence of so many diverse civilizational actors – including Europeans, Russians, Turks, Arabs, Iranians, Chinese, and Africans – in one state is made possible by Beijing’s One Belt One Road vision of global connectivity as manifested through CPEC, and it accordingly allows for Pakistan to mediate over a dialogue of civilizations in the 21st century. This is a pivotal role of the utmost importance and highest responsibility, and it has the very real potential of transforming Pakistan from a regional leader to a hemispheric Great Power within the next decade. This analysis will thus explore the way in which this grand strategy can be actualized, sequentially describing the overall concept, the various civilizational-connectivity channels, and the challenges that Pakistan can expect to face.

Concept

Abstract:

The economic attractiveness of CPEC serves as an irresistible magnet for all sorts of various actors to utilize its infrastructural connectivity in facilitating their trade objectives, whether it’s enhancing bilateral trade with China such as the EU, Mideast, and African states may naturally be interested in, or in acquiring a convenient outlet to the Indian Ocean such as what Russia and the Central Asian republics desire. The convergence of so many civilizational forces in Pakistan will propel the South Asian state to worldwide importance by gifting its leaders with the impressive potential to serve as the common middle ground between each of them, both literally in terms of CPEC connectivity and figuratively as it relates to the broader dialogue of civilizations concept.

The latter objective is wholly dependent on the former, meaning that Pakistan is unlikely to bring together a wide array of hemispheric interests and actors if the CPEC project isn’t completed or is severely undermined after the fact. Conversely, the completion of CPEC will enable Pakistan to do just that, which thus propels the country’s significance to global heights. The second and largest part of this research will describe the different connectivity channels that CPEC opens up between Pakistan and the rest of Afro-Eurasia, but at this point a lot more needs to be said about the grand strategy behind this exciting endeavor.

Once CPEC becomes fully operational, Pakistan will unofficially become China’s most important gateway to the rest of the world. Although the People’s Republic currently engages in a staggering amount of trade with each of its countless partners, the vast majority of this is conducted via maritime routes which traverse the bottlenecked chokepoint of the Strait of Malacca and the contentious waters of the South China Sea, both of which are uncomfortably vulnerable to an American blockade or similar sort of interference in the event of a conflict between the two Great Powers. It’s mostly for this reason and due to the foresight of Chinese strategists that Beijing decided to pioneer an overland trade route to the Indian Ocean through CPEC, relying on its decades-long and all-weather friendship with Pakistan in order to make this a reality.

Continue reading CPEC AND THE 21ST CENTURY CONVERGENCE OF CIVILIZATIONS, by Andrew Korybko

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on TumblrDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on StumbleUponFlattr the authorShare on RedditPrint this pageShare on LinkedIn

The Enemy Within: Secular Wahhabis In Service Of Empire, by Andrew Korybko

Source: Katehon

Original Title: CIVILIZATIONAL AGGRESSION: NON-WESTERN REVIVAL AND LEFTIST REBRANDING. PART II

Click here to read Part I.

_muslim_funeral_afghanistan

Understanding The Beast:

The chaotic socio-political processes that the US provoked in Europe have given rise to a dangerous group of ideologues that the author describes as Secular Wahhabis. Just like their Islamic jihadist ideological brethren, they have a burning hate for Western civilization and want to totally destroy it, even though most Secular Wahhabis were born, raised, and spent their whole lives within it and don’t have any practical experience living outside of this civilizational sphere. While it may initially come off as mind-boggling that a Westerner, or anybody for that matter, would want to facilitate their own civilizational suicide, it’s not at all strange when one realizes that these people operate under the guidance of an ultra-extreme leftist ideology that has essentially become a fundamentalist secular religion for them.

To explain, Secular Wahhabis abide by the literal interpretation of leftist theoretical texts from a bygone era, structurally mirroring the exact same thing that the Islamic Wahhabis do with the Quran. For whatever personal reason it may be, whether they misguidedly think in their own minds that such a move will strengthen multipolarity or if they’re just expressing an inferiority complex on a macro scale via civilizational sadism, they firmly believe in the sanctity of the leftist theoretic dogma for open borders and complete opposition to any assimilative and integrative policies on the part of immigrant-receiving governments. So strong is their belief in this radical ideology that they instinctively slur anyone who disagrees with it or stands in their way as “fascists”, typically accompanying their overly emotional and disproportionate reaction with the threat that “the only good fascist is a dead fascist”. In this way, they once more follow in the footsteps of the Islamic Wahhabis who always call their opponents “infidels” and oftentimes literally try to kill them.

The similarities don’t end there, however, since the Secular Wahhabis have a vile hatred for cultural and civilizational identity, even among their own “comrades”, that’s equal in intensity to that which the Islamic Wahhabis feel towards secularity and their fellow Muslims that go along with it. The reason why Islamic Wahhabis obsessively oppose secularism is obvious, but when it comes to the Secular Wahhabis, this can be attributed to the influence of Cultural Marxism. This label is an exonym that’s not self-applied by those who believe in it but is instead given by outsiders who note these people’s utter disdain for anything to do with cultural identity, thinking instead that the only social variables that matter in explaining the world are economic- and class-based ones. Accordingly, the Secular Wahhabis regularly engage in paranoid purges and “fascist” outings within their ranks against those who they suspect of believing in the practicality of incorporating ethnic and cultural identity factors into their world outlook. The verbal violence that occurs during these dark moments frighteningly resembles and is but one escalation point away from the physical violence that Takfiris commit against their own flock, further underlining the behavioral and ideological structural commonalities between the Secular and Islamic Wahhabis.

The rise of Secular Wahhabis has been directly facilitated by the polarizing ideological extremism that has resulted from the Immigrant Crisis, but even before this pivotal event was engineered, the Russian government had already predicted that such a hateful movement might one day rear its ugly head. In 2008, Russia’s then-Ambassador to NATO and present Deputy Prime Minister in charge of the defense industry Dmitry Rogozin warned that a very dangerous threat was brewing in the world:

“Until things get really tough, they are going to keep pretending that Russia is their opponent. I think that in the XXI century, the real threat is posed by a certain bunch of people who think that you and I are second-class people. Those close-minded people simply don’t recognize our right to live. They don’t care who they are dealing with – Russians, Jews, Tatars, French, or British, or whoever, – they are all the same to them. To them, we are just a worthless civilization that must be destroyed. Let’s hope our Western counterparts realise that those guys threaten us all in equal measure and that this plague advancing on the European continent will engulf us while we are all arguing.

There is a new civilization emerging in the Third World that thinks that the white, northern hemisphere has always oppressed it and must therefore fall at its feet now. This is very serious. If the northern civilization wants to protect itself, it must be united: America, the European Union, and Russia. If they are not together, they will be defeated one by one.”

Continue reading The Enemy Within: Secular Wahhabis In Service Of Empire, by Andrew Korybko

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on TumblrDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on StumbleUponFlattr the authorShare on RedditPrint this pageShare on LinkedIn

Eastring vs. Balkan Stream: The Battle For Greece, by Andrew Korybko

Russia wasn’t bluffing when it said that Turkish Stream would be the only route for Ukrainian-diverted gas shipments after 2019 , and after dillydallying in disbelief for over six critical months, the EU has only now come to its senses and is desperately trying to market a geopolitical alternative. Understanding that its need for gas must absolutely continue to be met by Russia for the foreseeable decades (regardless of trans-Atlantic rhetoric), the EU wants to mitigate the multipolar consequences of Russia’s pipeline plans as much as it feasibly can. Russia wants to extend the Turkish Stream through Greece, Macedonia, and Serbia, in a project that the author has previously labelled as “ Balkan Stream ”, while the EU wants to scrap the Central Balkan route and replace it with one along the Eastern Balkans via Bulgaria and Romania, the so-called “Eastring” line.

Although Eastring could theoretically transit Caspian gas being shipped through the TAP pipeline, the proposal being thrown around most lately is for it to link to Turkish Stream instead, likely because the possibly projected 10-20 bcm a year from the former (Azerbaijan’s reserves may not be capable of meeting the demand without Turkmen assistance, which is far from assured at this point) is dwarfed by the guaranteed 49 bcm from the latter. If Europe does intend for Eastring to connect to Turkish Stream, then Russian gas supplies would reach the continent regardless of the route involved (Central Balkans or Eastern Balkans), meaning that it’s a win-win for Russia…supposedly. The strategic differences between Eastring and Balkan Stream are actually quite acute, and coupled with the implied motivational impetus revealed by the EU’s Eastring-Turkish Stream connective proposal in the first place, it means that they must be analyzed more in-depth before anyone jumps to a predetermined conclusion about Eastring’s ‘mutually beneficial’ nature.

[Please click below to continue reading]
Continue reading Eastring vs. Balkan Stream: The Battle For Greece, by Andrew Korybko

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on TumblrDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on StumbleUponFlattr the authorShare on RedditPrint this pageShare on LinkedIn