The long-term geopolitcal fallout?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: AE Geopolitical Institute
Forum Discription: Implications of Strategic Policies.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25759
Printed Date: 24-Apr-2024 at 08:11
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The long-term geopolitcal fallout?
Posted By: Kevin
Subject: The long-term geopolitcal fallout?
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 01:27
|
I have been wondering what will be the long-term geopolitical effects of the current financial crisis? This is such a loaded question I don't where to begin. However if the last worst financial crisis of the past 80 years is an indicator of where something like this can cause as the Great Depression as we all know helped usher in the Second World War. It is truly interesting to think what effects this one might have on World Affairs. |
Replies:
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 14:33
|
I don't think it'll lead to another world war. At least not on the scale of the last two.
The main industrialised nations in the world (Europe) won't go there. The US might because too many of their inhabitants are ignorants. However, the chances of regional conflicts in the third world are there, with the possibility of something happening in Latin America. Strife is already apparant with the Venezuala/Ecuador/Columbia scenario which blew up last year. ------------- |
Posted By: Kevin
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 15:33
The US won't go there ether rest assured because the US doesn't have the prestige, money nor manpower and willpower to attempt something like Iraq perhaps ever again due to the effect this has had on our nation's foreign policy. However I agree third World conflict's pose a huge risk and I think they are one's that could and will boil out of control quickly. Also I think Eastern Europe will be at risk also, especially the Balkans for what I have been reading. |
Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 15:56
|
Rearmament has already begun on the part of Russia, China, India, and numerous lesser powers. Third World conflicts will only get so far - sooner or later, these powers will step in as regional security bosses, effectively forming new blocs or empires under the pretext of peacekeeping. World war or conflict between major powers is only a scenario if these ambitions should be challenged. Such as, for instance, if China were to destabilize Taiwan and cause a civil crisis there, and undertake a police action, which were to be challenged by the US. |
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 18:03
|
The US would have to intervene if something happened in Taiwan. If they did though, it could be disastrous. ------------- |
Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 18:25
Not necessarily. Taiwan's value to the US is largely as a way of containing China. However, in a scenario where the US can no longer afford to maintain the global status quo through military force, it's alot less important. There's no economic imperative to intervene in such a scenario, and a US that has given up its role as global cop has no strategic interest in Taiwan. |
Posted By: Kevin
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 18:59
I think it depends how it would turn out as ether side in the conflict has alot to lose in the event of defeat. However I don't think such a conflict is very likely in the future now since it looks that Taiwan's Government is one that is on better terms with China for the time being. I also don't think the Chinese would want to lose face with the West in the aftermath of it's coming out party, and the possibility that it could be the West's savior in the current economic crisis. As it has been touted recently |
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 05:46
The EU can either centralise more or fray at the edges as the weaker countries start to default. Russian foreign reserves are starting to diminish, i am told by 25% already, so their currency may crash in the not to distant future. Look back at the 30's to see what happens when people are angry, hungry or simply disenchanted with the system, they will be attracted to populist, strong sounding and ultimatly self centered-narrow type politics. rom there what happens is anyones guess. The social diruptions and poitical outcomes are going to exist but troublesome to predict. eastern europe, the baltics, and southern European countries are what I am talking about (and in that order). other flash points is China and the ME. Everyone is going to be impacted somehow by this, because the scale of the damage so far is, well, beyond what most people imagine ------------- 
|
Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 06:08
|
I think they're always attracted to those sorts of things ... its just that there's a lid on social conflict when times are good. When times are bad, people (and political groups) show their true colours - for better or worse. |
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 08:55
|
I don't think we'll ever see a return to the far right. Though films like 'V for Vendetta' are discouraging...
------------- |
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 10:03
|
Hello to you all
Well I beg to differ with you Parnell.
Ever since 9/11 the obsession with the "Islamic threat" have gripped european and international politics. Citizens of europe who belong to the Islamic faith have been literally persecuted and/or targetted by everyone except minor leftist and libertarian parties. Before 9/11 Pym Fortuyn and his freedom party, Jean Marie Le Pen and Jorge Heider all , well maybe except for the last guy, in the dark side of european politics. After that these guys began to push their racist ideas and got alot of support. So much so that so called "mainstream" parties began to adopt their policies. Just look at recent events in the last year and you will understand how wild this phobia about Islam has went.
Here is the newest obsession with muslims:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/17/counterterrorism-strategy-muslims - http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/17/counterterrorism-strategy-muslims
What we are now seeing is a contest between "maistream" parties and those on the "fringe" on who is more extreme towards muslims. Now if this isn't a move towards facism I don't know what it is.
AL-Jassas
|
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 10:40
|
I strongly disagree with Al Jassas. Though I can't really comment on most European countries, because I'm not well enough informed, I think the tendency in Britain has been the exact opposite, in political circles at least. The BNP got 0.7% of the vote and have been exaggerated beyond all proportion both by the political class (Want to scare people into thinking they have a reasonable chance of being a viable party) and the petty media, like the Daily Mail (Who not so secretly are in love with the BNP. Not even to mention the Daily Express, the vilest newspaper in Britain today) Labour has introduced restrictions on free speech under the pretence of 'protecting minorities'. In fact, the rallying call of protecting minorities seems to be a constant amongst the three British parties. Saying this is a move to fascism could have some grounds (The encroaching destruction of personal liberty) but to blame it on Islamophobia is fanciful talk to say the least. ------------- |
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 13:16
|
Al Jassas the threat in this case, is the EU, big business, UN or any thought of overarching body. Culmating into economic nationalism and protectionism which may progress into something more aggressive at a later point. right now most people dont give a sh*t about terrorism, Islam or the ME, just their jobs and their debts.
-------------
|
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 13:28
|
Hello to you all
Well the reason why the BNP doesn't have that popularity is because the party simply doesn't have any solid program like the UKIP (which has pretty much the same hate filled rhetoric the BNP has and gets some 5% of the vote). Its just a group of people who just hate everything and directed it using politics.
Plus if the other "maistream" political parties are doing fine in their phobic policies towards muslims why should people vote for the BNP? I mean have you even read what the new program proposed by the "leftest" Nulabour (Contest 2) says?
The holocaust started like this by the way. First blame the jews for every folly, then claim that they are subservient to foerign powers (in those days communists, nowadays its the sharia ruling islamic caliphate which exist in their sick minds) and finally stick a badge to identify them (in this case classify every single muslim in your country and with the new ID and current technology, who need crescent shoulder badges). Finally "rehabilitate" them in camps where they will never come back from.
Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 13:51
Jesus Al Jassas, what propagandist crap do you actually read?
Its well known that the UKIP did well because they had at one stage every housewifes favourite celebrity, peter kilroy, running for office. He gave them A LOT of prestige and voting power, and they are now back more or less to the pre Kilroy days.
No, I haven't read that. I've already said I'm talking about Britain particularly, I can't comment on what happens on the continent quite as well. How are the mainstream parties Islamophobic exactly? How is blocking Wilders entry into the UK an example of Islamophobia? How is the prosecution of 'hate speech' an example of Islamophobia? The disproportional number of Muslims in the police force in major cities? Where is your proof?
Reductio et Hitlerum. Making comparisons and judgements like these only serve to take the piss of the holocaust. You've no proof, and the Holocaust has origins and causes vastly different than our present situation. ------------- |
Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 14:29
|
What does all this have to do with long term geopolitical fallout from current financial issues? Let us not get into it over who is paranoid about his neighbor being a "sleeper" for a theological plot, or the yellow journalism of tabloid trash. We have had far more than enough of that garbage in Current Affairs for years. How will current financial realities affect geopolitical powers and their associated/dependent state entities, and how might it affect competitors and theirs? What might be expected, and who might be involved?
I suggest we look at this in terms of historical vital interests, and in terms of recognized spheres of influence. We need an historical perspective after all.
|
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 14:36
|
Well it is relevant in a sense. The cries of fascism and nazism always arise during recession and the threat of recession - even though it is highly unlikely.
------------- |
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 14:51
|
Hello Parnell
Please read the Guardian link above, on second thought, here it is again:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/17/counterterrorism-strategy-muslims - http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/17/counterterrorism-strategy-muslims
This thing is serious and it can easily develope. Muslims in europe don't differ from the maistream european society yet you will always here some guy caling for forced integration for people who are already well integrated.
Al-Jassas |
Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 14:54
Should the thread move into current affairs, it will need to be moved to Current Affairs. 
|
Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 17:19
|
Not the far right of the past, perhaps. But groups don't always have to be electorally succesful to get their policies across, sometimes getting the other parties to steal platform planks works as well. |
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2009 at 03:22
FFS, I wanted to discuss the bigger political implications of the financial crisis not a why the 'west hates Islam', we have enough of those threads. Dont mix it up Al Jassas, that topic is not related to the economic crisis. -------------
|
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2009 at 12:43
|
I though i'll add this post to add context to the polictical talk, I'm not sure anyone will be strong enough to take advantage of this, though nationalism will rise. I think we should look at the 30's for some inspiration. Europe context snapshot  http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1436798,00.jpg "I don't remember any time, maybe even in the Great Depression, when things went down quite so fast, quite so uniformly around the world," Volcker told a luncheon of economists and investors at Columbia University. http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE51J5JM20090220?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews - http://www.dbresearch.com/servlet/reweb2.ReWEB;jsessionid=D83D3DDB226A4E9E3D0B08D62A618B4F.srv12-dbr-com?rwdspl=0&rwnode=DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD$CDS&rwsite=DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD - http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12339 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4648 http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13144925&source=hptextfeature http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/19/globalrecession-marketturmoil -------------
|
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2009 at 13:56
|
Hello Leo
My post is actually relevant to the thread. The rise of anti-muslim feeling in europe coincides with the rise of anti-immigration based right wing parties and all this is related to the current finicial crisis.
Immigrants come almost exclusively from muslim countries. Crime within immigrants in some places is quite high and this is used by right wing parties to link them all up and blame the crisis, or at least some aspects of it on the muslim population of europe. While the cirsis might end the campaign of right wing parties will not.
Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2009 at 14:07
This attitude is close to hijacking the thread for purposes other than discussing geopolitics. Immigrants into and among European countries are not factors in state interest policies that impact vital interests on a geographic scale.
Leo's point about us not needing another thread about why the West hates Islam is well taken. We do not need another about why Islam hates the West either.
If the thread degenerates in that regard, it will be moved to Current Affairs where it can be better accomodated. Or, someone might just close it.
|
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2009 at 14:39
|
Hello to you all
This is the last time I will explain myself so please understand.
I said nothing about the "west" hating Islam or the opposite. I just merely suggested that the rise in anti-immigration and anti-Islamic policies within certain parts of the political spectrum of european politics is fueled in part by the financial crisis. That is all.
bus since you are insisting on discussing pure geopolitical fallouts here is my contribution. I think we might actually see a collapse in certain states and them turning into failed states particularly in the Balkans. This may actually lead to a renewal of the conflict. The economic conditions in former Yoguslavia are appaling to say the least. zero growth, almost 50% unemployment, ultranationalists gaining the upper hand. Stability even in some countries though to be quite stable like Greece is under question. Although it is quite early to say what will happen the Balkans with all its troubles must be viewed with interest.
Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2009 at 14:55
|
Al Jassas, I am not trying to jump on you, but this IS a subforum about geopolitics. I don't see the relative importance of social or internal political factors in determining state interest policies predicated on vital interests. Those interests are the same whether economies are good or bad. Failed "states" have tended not to address any interests other than those of the criminal enterprises which always become the most influential. Thus far, the criminal enterprises diffuse both resources and attention and just compete with one another internally for the most part.
|
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 13-Mar-2009 at 13:19
I've been concerned about three impacts,
|
Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 14-Mar-2009 at 14:01
|
Before we get too hung up on "the Apolcalypse," it is important to remember that the very recent incident of Chinese vessels shadowing a US navy ship resulted in a small military controversy. One way to divert attention from this, and to humiliate the US, is to call into question the financial viability of US debt.
Whose bonds are they going to buy instead?....Venezuela? Sudan? Russia? I don't think so. This is politics, not finance. The threat of China selling off US bonds is ludicrous. If they are not worth holding, who will they sell them to? China needs the interest income to create more toxic waste dumps and to anesthetize a billion paupers.
|
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 15-Mar-2009 at 06:51
remember the spy plane issue over the south china sea when Bush first came in? i think this is a similar test of Obama. He should stand up on this, south china sea is to vital to be owned by any one power. The bond issue has been bubbling along in the background. I have heared chatter via private channels that all the bond holders (Arab, Japanese, Chinese) are very nervous. Who is the first to flinch will kill the other holders. My quoted comment was the first time some one just said it in public. The Chinese are just stating they want to diversify. That is, they will pair back the T Bills purchases. not stop it. I dont blame them. I asked the question to a bond analyst ;where is all this new money going to come from? He couldnt answer it. Its not only the US but the AUS, UK & other EU countries. Everyone is launching massive amounts of government bonds at the same time. You mentioned interest income what the yield on the various T bills? AFAIK after inflation your in the negative, these are only good for capital preservation at this point in time. The other risk for the holders; is currency related and that long term interest rate which is expected to increase. Both will erode foreign investor's original capital. No one can be confident the US dollar will remain high. The printing press is about top get cranked up, so that shortage today can be quickly and inadvertently turned into excess. Then inflation, raising rates - just to much risk in the one position. Considering the US is about to leverage up in eye watering amounts, this foreign anxiety could make things pretty tricky for them. Also consider that the PRC is about to spend a massive on themselves, rather than deposit in the US treasury. The question is; if the binding bear grip the two powers have can be loosened - if the Chinese can stimulate their own economy (without the help of the once all powerful US consumer) - will this creditor/debtor "MAD" situation continue (ie - stability) or can they screw the US in the near term? I think if they can channel their money internally and save themselves (decouple) you could be screwed. -------------
|
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 15-Mar-2009 at 12:10
Same place all fiat money comes from ultimately. Thin air.
The central bank just credits the government with $x billion dollars and debits its counter-account (treasury holdings). Hey presto. ------------- |
Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 18-Mar-2009 at 11:18
|
They were expecting the Chinese to step up with the money, but printing money is something they have been talking about. Risky business that is, at the end of the day the people pay via inflation (tax) and/or high interest rates if and when the artificial caps are lifted. Just came back from a one day investment conference, EU break up was raised as real possibility in the next few years. Good news - seems the US is advanced in the downturn, bad news is - Europe has more to come, Australia as well. -------------
|