106516258-1588358702893bidentrump2

How will Biden implement an ‘American domination plan’ compared to Trump?

Nedret Ersanel

Trump defends himself with such confidence and faith that, although data shows the complete opposite, you have doubts thinking, “Can he possibly win?” On Monday noon he posted a tweet saying, “I won the election.” In fact, it is said that he is going to resist departure from the Oval Office.

What comes to mind considering Defense Secretary Mark Esper’s dismissal, followed by the serial resignations and appointments at the Pentagon, China’s and Russia’s obstinence on not congratulating President-elect Joe Biden, Iran’s nuclear stocks, Al-Qaida reports, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s “determined call to action,” State Secretary Mark Pompeo’s statement that the “transition to the second Trump term is going to be smooth”, his visit to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel, the armed Trump supporters who gathered in Washington, or Israeli Haaretz’s article titled “Will Netanyahu attack Iran? Not likely, but Trump might”?

Of course, the U.S. presidency is not to be taken lightly. There is nothing that power circles would not do for this position. However, the real matter is how Biden, who is going to be a party of the “global cycle,” establish and implement an American sovereignty plan differently from Trump?

This is the main source of the U.S. internal conflict.

WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF ‘GREAT WAR’ TALK?

Primarily and including Biden, there is no individual or institution in a certain position in the U.S. that does not consider China as a threat. Though there are differences in expression, it is believed that the U.S. will eventually confront China.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is one of those who has been following the subject and, as a matter of fact, trying to set up all three phases of this showdown since Donald Trump stepped into office. We wrote about it very broadly earlier; the idea to draw Russia close to Washington and corner China is now evolving into depicting China as the rival and Russia as the enemy.

Kissinger attended the “New Economy Forum” held by Bloomberg, and said: “The incoming Biden administration should move quickly to restore lines of communication with China that frayed during the Trump years, or risk a crisis that could escalate into military conflict. Unless there is some basis for some cooperative action, the world will slide into a catastrophe like World War I. Current military technologies make it difficult to control such a crisis. America and China are now drifting increasingly toward confrontation, and they’re conducting their diplomacy in a confrontational way.”

The fact that this statement belongs to Kissinger increases its impact, but let us remember other critical figures who mentioned the Great War without using a subject.

The U.K.’s Chief of General Staff Nick Carter said, “The pandemic and the economic crisis have given rise to new security threats. The new world war risk has become a reality. History might not repeat itself, but there is a ‘rhythm’ between the current adverse circumstances and past disaster periods.” (“World War,” British Chief of Staff Nick Carter Nov. 9, Hürriyet)

‘DANGEROUS’ AFFAIRS

The first item triggering U.S.’s disquiet with China is the rivalry developing through global economy. It is a fact that China is spreading this competition throughout the world by way of high technology, military developments, the Silk Road, digital currency, the internet, and alliances.

There is also benefit in bringing to the table the reality that “regardless of how much they try to seem like chummies, they essentially have doubts and concerns,” a view that has generally been accepted with respect to its relations with Russia. China and Russia are taking certain reciprocal steps, and their partnership discourse is further solidifying. How the Biden administration will “contribute” to this is another matter that needs to be monitored.

However…

As a new and major development, it is now stepping up against the U.S. as a bloc. It is not only stepping up, but it is also causing some of the countries that are Washington’s allies in the transatlantic alliance to drift away.

Fifteen countries in the Asia-Pacific region (ASEAN countries: Singapore, Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, The Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam, as well as Australia, China, Japan, South Korea, and New Zealand) signed the world’s biggest free trade deal, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

This is not a deal to be taken lightly; it covers 2.1 billion of the world population, and holds exactly 30 percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP). Negotiations alone took eight years. The Malaysian prime minister said, “RCEP is a deal that has been reached as a result of negotiations involving blood, sweat, and tears. A new era is starting in the region.” (Nov. 16, Yeni Safak)

Meanwhile, the Chinese prime minister said the deal is the victory of “free trade” and “multilateralism.” These two items are the reasons underlying the dispute with the U.S. If you listen to the U.S., these items are matters advocated in the world as “American values,” however, when China is in question, they become “reasons for war.”

What is interesting is that it also includes U.S. and U.K. allies such as Australia, Japan, South Korea, and New Zealand (India was also meant to join this deal, but it backed out). It is impossible for such an agreement not to produce political results. The first that comes to mind is the increase of Chinese influence, while U.S. influence atrophies. What this will signify for Europe will be determined by the attitudes taken individually by European countries – particularly France, Germany, and the U.K.

This is due to the fact that all these countries have relations with both China and Russia, which need to be evaluated separately – very much like that with RCEP countries.

Considering the U.K.’s relations with Australia, how will London evaluate this deal? Can it be linked with the U.K. chief of General Staff’s above-mentioned statement? Also, what does former U.K. Prime Minister John Major’s Nov. 11 statement, “The U.K. is no longer a great power. We will never be so again. The U.K.’s global influence was based on the past” mean in this context?

In brief, the Biden era is going to lead to very interesting developments, and one necessarily wonders what President Recep Tayyip Erdogan discussed with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison on Nov. 11.

Posted in