The SCO Summit and the Need for a New Global Security Architecture

The clock is ticking fast and if we miss this opportunity now, the only peace the world may ever find will accompany a long nuclear winter.

During a meeting held between Putin and Xi at the recent Shanghai Co-operation Organization Summit in Samarkand, the Chinese leader re-affirmed his understanding both of the historical moment now shaping the world and also the vital role he understands both Russia and China must play in navigating humanity through this storm saying:

“Dear President Putin, my dear old friend. I am very pleased to meet again. In the face of tremendous changes of our time on a global scale unprecedented in history, we stand with our Russian colleagues to set an example of a responsible world power”.

The meeting was especially strategic as it was the first such meeting featuring Iran as full member and Belarus on the fast track to join in the short term alongside other states including the UAE, Bahrain, Myanmar, Kuwait and the Maldives. It is extremely apparent that the foundations for a new alternative security architecture are coming online, which also includes a vital financial component; which is perhaps why convenient fires were also lit with bloody confrontations launched by Azerbaijan against SCO member Armenia and also between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (both SCO members hosting Russian bases and Chinese BRI-connected vital infrastructure). While not all the details are yet known as to the arsonists lighting these fires, the timing and character of conflicts smells of Anglo-Intelligence operations.

The common theme amongst the discussions of the SCO Summit and broader multipolar alliance is shaped around the common good, common security and coordination of action towards improving the conditions of life of peoples and sovereign nations as outlined by the UN Charter (which is a very different creature than the “rules based international order” which unipolarists love bandying about these days).

Unfortunately, even the saner voices with even a modicum of political influence among the western states seem to be completely unaware of the epoch-making decisions now being made by allies of the Multipolar Alliance, who have made it incredibly clear that they would prefer cooperation with the trans-Atlantic community as allies over going to war, although events have forced them to prepare for the later in ways few thought possible just a few years ago.

If there were ever a time for humility and self-reflection amongst the leaders of the west, that time is now.

The Nature of Peace Summits of the Past

In the pre-nuclear weapon epochs, peace-conferences were arranged too often only after years of devastating war and bloodshed had become unsufferable.

We saw examples of such conferences in the form of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, which emerged in the wake of the 30 Years’ War and which established the framework of the modern sovereign nation state system at the heart of international law. We saw a weak attempt at another conference in the form of the Congress of Vienna in 1815 after two decades of Napoleonic wars decimated Europe. We saw an attempt arise again arise in the form of the League of Nations in the wake of the meat grinder of WW1 and again in the form of the United Nations and Bretton Woods System that were brought online after WW2.

Sometimes these international conferences were shaped by honest agendas and sometimes not, but in all instances it was agreed by all parties that that a new system was necessary to avoid a plunge into war.

Unfortunately, human memory is weak and the Byzantine web of power politics in which the Anglo-American deep state operates is not easily transformed by conferences or agreements to play nicely with neighbors.

Sitting as we are now on the precipice of yet another plunge into war and economic collapse, the very existence of atomic bombs has made the errors of the past intolerable in the 21^st century. While some Rand Corp think tankers and representatives of the military industrial complex may believe a new world war is an exciting prospect and even a winnable endeavor (according to their computer modelled scenarios), the reality is far different.

The objective reality is that such a war could never be won, and the very existence of the next generation hypersonic missile technologies unveiled by both Russia and China, including underwater drones, has demonstrated that a first strike monopoly by NATO is a pipe dream. No attack on Russia or China could be done without a vicious retaliation that would take out every major city across the Rules Based International free world.

So what is to be done?

Of course, one option would be for Russia, China, India and other nations currently organized around the multipolar alliance to abandon 1) their sovereignty and 2) desires to establish a new system based upon win-win cooperation.

These nations would also need to agree to a Great Reset of the world on the terms of a nest of technocratic unipolar priests managing a new world government from above the structures of elected regimes. This would mean of course, erasing or re-writing the UN Charter, which currently premises international law on the sacredness of national sovereignty, non-military interference of one state into another and mutual cooperation. These states would also have to agree to new systems of draconian population reduction under the rubric of “decarbonization”. If this were done, we are told that a new world order of peace, degrowth, and sustainability were attainable and a long-awaited utopian “end of history” would finally be unveiled.

Based on the profiles, words and performance of the leaders of the Multipolar Alliance as witnessed over the past decade, they won’t do this.

The need for a different kind of Reset

The other option would be for a summit to occur BEFORE the next nuclear war turns humanity into a failed experiment, and rather than an anti-humanist Great Reset or transhumanist New World Order, instead shaped the terms and goals of this emergency Summit upon solving objective problems that all people of the world can agree on and which Franklin Roosevelt had outlined in his Four Freedoms.

Freedom from want, freedom from fear of war, freedom of speech and freedom of conscience are universal and set the backbone of both the spirit of the Atlantic Charter (pre-Biden/Bojo edits), UN Charter, and the original designs of the Bretton Woods system. These universal freedoms were again outlined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights of 1947 and in the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence that emerged out of the Bandung Conference in 1955 which set the tone for the Non-Aligned Movement.

At Bretton Woods, a new financial system was created in two weeks founded upon principles of banking that demanded fixed exchange rates to block unbounded speculation which had been used as economic warfare against poor nations for centuries. It was premised originally on the idea of emitting long term credit for large scale projects to internationalize the New Deal under an age envisioned to be an era of multipolar cooperation and win-win development. The UN as envisioned by FDR or Henry Wallace was also never meant to be a world government but rather a platform for dialogue and harmonization of security and economic interests among civilizations.

Despite the fact that the Bretton Woods Institutions such as the IMF and World Bank (and US government itself) were hijacked by deep state operatives representing the worst oligarchical inclinations of humanity in the post WW2 years, the truth of the noble origins of these institutions which John F Kennedy (and to a lesser but relevant extent Trump) attempted to revive should not be ignored.

Why not arrange a similar conference today bringing together representatives of diverse national representatives?

As I mentioned in the beginning of this report, this discussion has already begun, and leading figures representing the majority of the world’s population are having it as we saw in Samarkand.

The development programs already unveiled by the productive financial architecture of China and its growing array of allies has already unleashed over $3 trillion in large scale infrastructure investments around the growing Belt and Road Initiative. Tied increasingly to the Eurasian Economic Union, which is quickly preparing the groundwork for a fully integrated new financial architecture founded upon real world values outlined by Sergey Glazyev on numerous occasions, this healthier compact of civilizational forces has made clear their desire to both survive and thrive in the 21^st century and beyond.

The irony of FDR’s Four Freedoms now being advanced by Eurasian powers, considered by many to be the most “un-American” groups on earth, should not be lost on anyone.

There is no shortage of cooperative projects to build together across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the Americas which could easily create real employment, rebuild our decayed factories and infrastructure and establish trust amongst nations who have been set at each others’ throats for too long. Sane forces unwilling to sacrifice their traditions and people among the western citizens and policy makers would do well to organize like never before to bring their nations into harmony with this healthier discussion now underway.

The clock is ticking fast and if we miss this opportunity now, the only peace the world may ever find will accompany a long nuclear winter.

************

Source