Casual observers are convinced that Trump is a madman with no method behind his madness,but the reality is that he and his team – collectively known as Trump 2.0 – are slowly but surely implementing their grand strategy against China.
Every one of their moves abroad should be seen as a means to this end.
They want tocomprehensively contain Chinaand then coerce it into a lopsided trade deal that “rebalance[s] China’s economy toward household consumption” per theNational Security Strategy.
Trump 2.0 doesn’t want to go to war over this, however, which is why they’recareful to avoid replicating the Imperial Japanese precedent.
Piling too much economic-structural pressure on China at once could spook it into lashing out in desperation before the window of opportunity closes. They therefore decided to graduallydeprive China of access to markets and resources, ideally through a series of trade deals, in order to imbue the US with the indirect leverage required to peacefully derail China’s superpower rise.
The US’ trade deals with theEUandIndiacould ultimately result in them curtailing China’s access to their markets under pain of punitive tariffs if they refuse.In parallel, the US’special operationin Venezuela,pressure against Iran, and simultaneous attempts to subordinate Nigeria and other leading energy producers couldcurtail China’s accessto the resources required for fueling its superpower rise.The combined effect thus far is already placing immense pressure upon China to cut a deal with the US.
This is the grand strategic context within whichRussia’s talks with the US and Ukraineare taking place.
It too is coming under immense pressure after Trump 2.0 unexpectedly (from their view) perpetuated the proxy war in Ukraine, pioneered a breakthrough to Central Asia through last August’s “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” across theSouth Caucasus, and got India tocurtail its oil imports.
Russia must now decide whether tocut its own deal with the USor become more dependent on China.
The first scenario could include a resource-centric strategic partnership with the US in exchange for compromising on its maximalist goals in Ukraine, which could deprive China of access to the deposits that the US invests in as explainedhere.
Source: ZeroHedge News
