The unipolar system , which seems to have been filed by history, has entered a deep crisis together with the U.S. – led Western system. The economic and financial collapse and the loss of a reliable partner in the “geopolitical building” such as Turkey determined the end of the U.S. expansion. The U.S. are now on the crest of a very important decision: shelving the project of the world supremacy, and therefore sharing the political and economic choices with other global actors, or instead, insisting on the hegemonic plan, risking their very survival as a nation. The choice will be dictated by the relations that will be established in the short to medium term, among the pressure groups that influence the U.S. foreign policy and the evolution of the multipolar system.
The new multipolar system is being consolidated. The main actors are the US, China, India and Russia. While the European Union is completely absent and in hiding in the framework of indications-diktats coming from Washington and London, some South American countries, particularly Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina and Uruguay, are showing their steady willingness to actively participate in the construction of the new world order. Russia, with its central position in the Euro-Asian land mass, its vast size and its current orientation stamped on foreign policy by the Putin-Medvedev tandem, will probably be the keystone in the new planetary structure. But to achieve this epochal function, it must overcome some internal problems: first of all, those regarding the demographic question and the modernization of the country, while on the international level it must consolidate relations with China and India and establish strategic agreements with Turkey and Japan as soon as possible. Above all, it must clarify its position in the Near and Middle East.
In his famous book The Clash of Civilizations Samuel Huntington affirms that the true problem of western world is not the Islamic fundamentalism, but...
The year which just ended was undoubtedly plenty of successes for the Kremlin. In spite of a rather low economic growth, Russia can still...
The report is made on the initiative of the Member of the Committee on Banks and Banking of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, Chairman of the Board of the Millennium Bank, Mikhail Baydakov, under the scientific leadership of the Director of the Schiffers Institute for Advanced Research, Prof. Yury Gromyko and of the Economist and Member of the Scientific Committee of the Italian journal “La Finanza”, Paolo Raimondi.
Defeated during the Second World War, occupied by the United States after its liberation, integrated into NATO by force during the Cold War, compelled to dissolve into the European Union, Italy is today a prisoner of its past while international relations are speeding ahead. According to Tiberio Graziani, even though Rome may not yet be in a position to frame an independent foreign policy, the time is ripe to start contemplating an exit strategy in keeping with its historical and geographical characteristics. Italy feels the call of its natural environment … the wide Mediterranean sea.
Jean-François Thiriart was born in Bruxelles on March 22 1922 in a liberal-oriented family which had come from Lieges. During his youth he was a member of the Jeune Garde Socialiste Unifiée and in the Socialiste Anti-Fasciste Union. During a not short period he cooperated with professor Kessamier, president of the philosophical society Fichte Bund, originated from the national-bolshevist movement; then, with some other far-left elements supporting the alliance between Belgium and the national-socialist Reich, he became a member of the association Amis du Grand Reich Allemand. Because of this reason, he was condemned to death by the Belgian dealers of the Anglo-American forces in 1943: the English radio putted his name in the proscription list that was communicated to the résistance with all the instructions.
Among the many events in international relations, two are, in our opinion, of pivotal importance for their contribution to the upsetting of the former geopolitical asset, based at the time on the conflict between the United States and the URSS. We are speaking of the Islamic revolution in Iran and of the Russian military involvement in Afghanistan. Following the takeover of Iran by the Ayatollah Khomeyni, one of the essential pillars of the western geopolitical architecture, with the USA as a leader, was destroyed. The Washington strategists, in agreement with their bicentenary “geopolitical of chaos”, persuaded the Iraq under Saddam Hussein to start a war against Iran. The destabilization of the whole area allowed Washington and the Western Countries enough time to plan a long-lasting strategy and in the meantime to wear down the soviet bear.
A power struggle between local oligarchies and a variable element in the “Great Game” being played out in Central Asia between America, Russia and China. This is the opinion expressed by Tiberio Graziani, editor-in-chief of the geopolitical magazine Eurasia, on the recent political turbulence in Kirghizstan. At the beginning of April President Kurmanbek Bakiyev was removed from power following a series of revolts and street clashes marked by violence with at least 80 people killed and over 500 wounded. Five years ago it had been Bakiyev himself, who has now taken refuge in Minsk under the protection of the Byelorussian head of state Aleksander Lukashenko, who had come to power using street protests in which a number of people were killed, removing his predecessor Askar Akayev after what was renamed the “Tulip Revolution.”
In order to address properly, without any ideological prejudice, but with intellectual honesty, the question about drug production in Afghanistan and the related international problems, it is necessary and useful to define (even if in broad terms) the geopolitical framework and to further clarify certain concepts, usually assumed to be understood and widely shared.