Officials characterized the meeting as a mini Indo-Pacific summit. On August 18, 2023, United States President Joe Biden hosted South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida at Camp David, “a 125-acre country retreat for the President of the United States, located in the wooded hills of Catoctin Mountain Park,” 100 miles north of the White House. The Japanese and South Korean leaders of sizeable nations and huge populations in the Indo-Pacific, traveled to Maryland, USA to meet with a leader whose nation has a few islands and relatively few citizens in the Indo-Pacific. During one meeting, the presidents pontificated upon the International Rules Based Order. The Voice of America (VOA) quoted Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida: “‘The free and open international order based on the rule of law is in crisis,’ Kishida said, pointing the blame at Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, continuing North Korean nuclear and missile threats and a ‘“unilateral attempt to change the status quo by force in the East and South China seas.”’
The International Rules Based Order is a heading for the liturgy of how liberal democracy and its capitalist ventures, promoted and enforced by the United States, have brought peace, prosperity, and stability to the post-World War II world. The constant pounding of the words “Rules Based Order” into psyches has a coda to the liturgy; the Rules-Based Order is now threatened by Russia, China, and Iran, the new axis-of-evil.
Western media attaches a price tag to everything China does well. Does the International Rules Based Order come with a price tag? History certifies that the words International Rules Based Order and its Western neo-liberal capitalist system come with a price tag and that price tag will be shown to have been war. Revelation is a preliminary step to resolving the ineptitudes of a world order and a capitalist system so they lead to peace and not continuous wars. Revealing the emptiness of the International Rules Based Order and discarding its use are gigantic steps for achieving global harmony. The last great war fought by Western nations will be the war in Ukraine. War no more is the banner for the coming era and war no more will be achieved.
During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union faced one another along divided German borders. No military confrontations occurred between the World War II allies and several wars occurred due to them. The Cold War posed as a testing ground for two systems, arbitrarily linking the rhetoric and saber rattling to determine which system, capitalist or socialist, was more able to achieve peace, or stated another way, more likely to wage war. Examination of the conflicts occurring during the Cold War and after the decline of the Soviet Union provides an answer to the question. The Cold War served as a distracting slogan and euphuism for hot wars that raged for Western society to establish global hegemony. The wars, from the 1946 Greek Civil War to the contemporary war in Ukraine, weave a pattern in which their sum total composes World War III.
A chart of the history of wars from 1946-1991 tells the first part of the World War III story. Additions to the chart in the years that succeeded the collapse of the Soviet Union and its communist system add to the story. The examination does not end with the militarized wars. Economic warfare, which attempts to subdue an adversary without firing a shot, the War on Terrorism, with terrorism being an outgrowth from other conflicts, and the battles to resolve mass immigrations, which previous wars produced, complete the study of the post-World War II conflagrations.
The chart describes major and local wars from 1946 to 2023. After the fall of the Soviet Union, a counter-western bloc slowly appeared. Peruse the chart, absorb the immense scale of conflicts, and then read the summary.
(1) Major wars (shown in red) consider engagements by one nation against another nation.
(2) Local wars (shown in green) are confined to civil wars/uprisings.
(3) Military interventions (shown in purple) are involvements by a nation in another nation’s internal conflict
(4) Only offensive wars, in which NATO or a Soviet bloc nation (Warsaw Pact or China) fought, are considered.
Summary
Analysis of the chart indicates that, before the fall of the Soviet Union, the Socialist bloc, except for the war in Afghanistan, engaged in brief wars, had minimal casualties, and exhibited rare opportunities to increase global hegemony. In one virulent war, the Soviet Union tried to maintain Afghanistan in its orbit and caused severe consequences to itself. In retrospect, by losing the war, Moscow caused havoc to the United States. CIA assistance to Pakistan enabled the Taliban to capture Kabul, rule Afghanistan, and permit Osama bin- Laden to convert his construction enterprise into the terrorist al-Qaeda organization.
The Soviet Bloc militarily assisted communist nations in distress — North Korea, North Vietnam, Cuba, and Angola — but did not have its soldiers participate in the ground wars. Interferences in uprisings of other nations remained localized to nations of the Warsaw Pact — Hungary and Czechoslovakia. Except for Afghanistan, the Socialist Bloc never intervened with troops beyond its borders, did not try to convince newly struggling nations to become socialist, or attempted to overthrow existing governments.
China acted as an aggressor in several border wars — Soviet Union, Vietnam, India, and Tibet. Operating independently of the Socialist Bloc, China seized opportunities to satisfy historical grievances, or, in the case of the Korean War, defend itself against incursion upon its territory. After assisting the Vietnamese in the Indo-China war and supplying armaments and manpower for logistical support during the early years of the Vietnam War, Beijing abruptly dropped support and prevented Russian arms shipments through its territory in the last years of that war.
Claiming protection of interests, which were mainly economic and political, the capitalist Western nations went beyond their borders and homeland security interests and, with an apparent ease that eschewed compromise and diplomacy, initiated several violent and catastrophic wars – Suez, Vietnam, and 1st Gulf wars. In the Korean War, the United States and its allies invoked the UN charter. The intensity of that war went beyond containment and its inconclusive resolution clouds U.S. intentions in fighting the war. Less violent, but more characteristic of capitalist Western intentions were suppressions of uprisings and interferences in civil wars — Indo-China, Algeria, Kenya, Nicaragua, Angola, Salvador, and Chad. Allied to the interferences were several interventions that either intended or succeeded in overthrowing existing and legitimate governments — Cuba, Guatemala, Chile, Grenada, Dominican Republic, Panama, and Brazil — and replaced them with leaders favorable to American political and economic interests.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the capitalist Western nations displayed a militant and aggressive attitude that showed the Cold War was not the primary cause of belligerent actions and often used as an excuse for unrelated hostilities.
(1) U.S. battles with Somali militia groups unfavorable to the U.S. resulted in the emergence of the Al-Shabaab terrorist group.
(2) U.S./NATO intervention determined the outcomes of the Libyan, Bosnian, and Kosovo civil wars.
(3) The intention of subduing Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda after the 9/11 attack on American soil turned Afghanistan into another violent civil war that lasted 21 years and spawned a Taliban rebirth.
(4) The U.S. unnecessary invasion and occupation of Iraq caused enormous casualties and destruction and produced the ISIS movement.
(5) U.S. support for Saudi Arabia enabled the Saudi Kingdom to pulverize the Yemenite Houthi population.
(6) Since 1967, U.S. military sales and logistic assistance to Israel have enabled the Israelis to win wars, seize Palestinian lands, and oppress the Palestinian population.
All this mayhem and destruction occurred with guidance from the International Rules Based Order. Other silent killers added to the exposed and violent wars.
Economic Warfare
Warfare is visualized in terms of dead soldiers, battlefield blood, eerie noises, and bombed-out structures. Economic warfare is silent and deadly. The country that takes the offense becomes the aggressor, and the destruction to the defending state is brutal. In most cases, the economic war is a one-sided battle; the civilian population of the defending nation suffers greatly and the aggressor country suffers few losses.
Since the end of World War II, the United States has embargoed and sanctioned more than 35 countries in its economic warfare. Start with Iran; then wander around the map to Libya, Nicaragua, Burma, Sudan, Iraq, Cuba, Liberia, North Korea, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Russia, Syria, and other countries. Economic warfare, of which sanctions are one part, intentionally reduced living standards and promoted starvation. By starving and debilitating a population to gain economic or political advantage, economic warfare is a major crime and a form of terrorism.
The most punishing sanctions by the United States have been against Cuba, North Korea, and Iraq. Iran replaced Saddam Hussein's Iraq as the most sanctioned nation on the globe and, after Russia invaded Ukraine, Iran relinquished its #1 rating to Russia.
Sanctions against Iraq are an example of how economic warfare harms the civilian population. This senseless and vicious policy transformed Iraq from an emerging country with moderate prosperity into an impoverished country with a starving population. Statistics from a UN Report on the Current Humanitarian Situation in Iraq, Mar. 1999:
Maternal mortality rate increased from 50/100,000 live births in 1989 to 117/100,000 in 1997.
Low birth weight babies (less than 2.5 kg) rose from 4% in 1990 to about 25% of registered births in 1997, due mainly to maternal malnutrition.
Calorie intake fell from 3,120 to 1,093 calories per capita/per day by 1994-95.
Malnutrition in Iraqi children under five increased from 12% to 23% from 1991-96.
The World Food Program estimated that access to potable water in 1998 was 50% of the 1990 level in urban areas and only 33% in rural areas. On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright, then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, appeared on the CBS program 60 Minutes. Commentator Lesley Stahl asked the ambassador, "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. Is the price worth it?" Madeleine Albright replied, "We think the price is worth it."
Economic warfare, following Madeline Albright’s words, has become the principal means for the U.S. to maintain the International Rules Based Order.
War on International Terrorism
United States administrations have exhibited a strange method for repelling terrorists; let them enter an area, establish themselves, become strong, commit atrocities, and then attack them ─ the spider approach. This characterization became apparent after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. Muhammad Atta and his eighteen partners freely entered the United States, studied how to go up and not come down, and did their dirty deeds. After the catastrophe on 9/11, the U.S. started its war against terrorism. Trace it carefully and we find that international terrorism arose from other conflicts in which the U.S. directly or indirectly participated.
Osama bin Laden would have not been able to establish al-Qaeda without the Taliban victory, which is owed to the CIA's assistance to Pakistani intelligence.
Intelligence and strategy failures by President Bill Clinton elevated al-Qaeda to an international enterprise. Originally part of a United Nations force, and allegedly sent to prevent starvation in Somalia, U.S. troops squashed the potential power of those who fought against United Nations directives. President Clinton's policy in Somalia created a mistrust of American authority among East Africans and anarchy that eventually led to the emergence of The Islamic Courts Union ( ICU), a group of Islamists who preached Shariah as law and ruled Somalia during two periods. After being defeated, the ICU evolved into Al-Shabaab, an al-Qaeda look-alike in East Africa.
President George W. Bush continued the intelligence lapses and contributed to the major policy failures that enabled al-Qaeda elements to evolve into ISIS (Daish). The invasion of Iraq and the disposal of a Saddam Hussein regime that had prevented al-Qaeda elements from establishing themselves exposed Iraq's porous borders to Radical Islamic fighters. Founded in October 2004, al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) emerged from a transnational terrorist group created and led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. His cohorts entered through Jordan, while al-Qaeda forced out of Waziristan in Pakistan found a haven in Iraq. Fighters trained in and wandering through the deserts of Saudi Arabia hopped planes to Istanbul and Damascus and worked their way across Syria into Iraq. Disturbed by the U.S. invasion and military tactics, Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim Ali Muhammad al-Badri al-Samarrai, later known as Al Baghdadi, founder of the Islamic Caliphate, transformed himself from a fun-loving soccer player into a hardened militant and helped to establish the militant group that scorched Syria and northwest Iraq.
Following a similar pattern, the battle against ISIS developed from U.S. allies providing finances (Kuwaitis and Qataris), weapons (Saudi Arabia), a path for ISIS to enter Syria (Turkey), and permitting the Islamist extremists to establish themselves, become strong, and commit atrocities.
After previous disastrous policies prepared the framework for ISIS to establish its caliphate and spawn "look-alikes" in Yemen and throughout North Africa, President Barack Obama joined forces with the French-led NATO intervention in Libya. Portraying itself as a humanitarian mission designed to prevent civilian casualties by establishing a no-fly zone, NATO air force and U.S. drones sought targets that would enable a rebel victory and rid the world of Moammar Gadhafi. Not wanting to betray his French ally, Obama brought his country into the fray and the result was foreboding ─ Radical Islamists and their terrorists found a haven in the new Libya. A news report described the situation that evolved from the disposal of Moammar Gadhafi.
Washington Post, June 6, 2015
In Libya's civil war the Islamic State shows itself as the main threat, By Hassan Morajea and Erin Cunningham
MISURATA, Libya — As the Islamic State scores new victories in Syria and Iraq, its affiliate in Libya is also on the offensive, consolidating control of Moammar Gaddafi’s former home town and staging a bomb attack on a major city, Misurata. The Islamic State’s growth could further destabilize a country already suffering from a devastating civil war. And Libya could offer the extremists a new base from which to launch attacks elsewhere in North Africa.
The Libyan affiliate does not occupy large amounts of territory as the Islamic State does in Syria and Iraq. But in the past few months, the local group has seized Sirte, the coastal city that was Gaddafi’s last redoubt, as well as neighborhoods in the eastern city of Derna. Security experts estimate there are as many as 3,000 fighters loyal to the Islamic State in Libya. The country has become one of the primary locations to train with the group outside of Syria and Iraq. Volunteers from Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other countries have flocked here to fight with the extremists and other jihadist organizations.
After the overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi, a leader who constrained Radical Islam and its terrorist activities, militants from Libya flowed east, through friendly Turkey into Syria and Iraq to form ISIS. Weapons captured from Ghadaffi's stockpiles flowed west to equip al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), where AQIM led a 2013 attack on a gas facility in southern Algeria. Terrorists trained in Libya attacked tourists at beaches and museums in Tunisia, and Boko Haram spread havoc throughout northern Nigeria and parts of Chad.
Al-Qaeda, remnants of ISIS, and a multitude of terrorist organizations perform periodic bombings, killings, and insurrections, a result of policies by U.S. administrations after Ronald Reagan assumed the presidential office.
Mass Migrations
The world is on the move, driven by climate change, sporadic hunger, and refuge from war. The Iraq wars, Syrian civil war, and the Ukraine war forced millions of people to seek shelter out of their country. UNICEF reports “Nearly 5.6 million registered (Syrian) refugees ─ including more than 2.6 million children ─ reside in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Türkiye.”
UNHCR conducts refugee status determination under its mandate in 17 of the region’s 18 countries. In 2022, it registered almost 200,000 individuals, a 60% increase on 2021. Of these, 32,100 were new asylum-seekers, 44% of them were children and primarily Malians, Sudanese and Syrians. In total, 117,000 refugees and migrants crossed by sea from North Africa to Europe, 23% more than in 2021. No refugees appeared in Gadhafi’s Libya. Enabling ISIS to challenge the Syrian and Iraqi governments and the anarchy resulting from the deposition of Moammar Gadhafi are principal reasons for the refugee crisis.
War no More
Violence in the world has neared its climax. The mayhem that succeeded World War II and composed World War III was almost entirely due to Western nations. Direct person-to-person confrontation rarely occurred from the Socialist bloc. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the violence continued in spades —Gulf War 1991, Balkans 1995-1999, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, and Libya 2011. Beginning in 2011, at the start of the Syrian civil war, new forces emerged, namely from Russia and Turkey, and contended the International Rules Based Order.
From fatigue, public disapproval of the continuous wars, new and effective opposing forces, and not much more to contain, the U.S. and its orderly allies have been more subdued in pursuing military actions. The International Rules Based Order is a relic, especially noted by the desertion of U.S. Middle East allies to alliances with China and rapprochement with Iran. U.S. involvement in the Middle East brought continuous conflicts, civil wars, refugee crises, terrorist attacks, and tighter autocratic control. U.S. administrations constantly talked of stability, human rights, freedom, and democracy. After 75 years of U.S. meddling, where is democracy and freedom in the Middle East?
The people of Asia recognize what happened in the Middle East. They may say kind words to American leaders but they know America is using them for its own interests. They also have their own intelligence and understand that the damnation of China is based on fiction and the “flashpoints” are manufactured.
For centuries, Taiwan has been an integral part of China and almost all the world’s nations recognize its attachment to Beijing. By history and international law, the mountains, rivers, seas, and public lands of Taiwan belong to the Republic Of China. Taiwanese are doing well by going alone and it is understandable they regard change and its unknowns with trepidation—just a matter of mindset. Change the Straits of Taiwan to the Straits of East China and the only differences the Taiwanese will notice are: (1) TSMC will increase its manufacturing capability, and (2) The Chinese population will eat more Ba wan dumplings.
One area where the international community may be correct in condemning China’s policy is its claiming sovereignty of the islands in the South China Sea and making the Sea a lake for itself The islands are not habitable but the possible oil and fishing reserves surrounding them are significant. Pumping up the dispute by asserting that China intends to control the shipping lanes intentionally confuses the issue. It is not in China’s economic and political interests to control shipping lanes, legally and militarily China cannot enforce control, and retaliation from other nations will cripple China.
The U.S. can continue to wave an arm, shout an alarm, bluster, fluster, and sound aggressive and important, but the baby knows it cannot fight a war against nuclear-armed China and Russia. When words wear out and people get wary, rationality will prevail over chaotic minds. Western populations want global cooperation and not global confrontation. They want peace, prosperity, and security and not radioactive dust in their backyards.
When America and China become locked in an embrace, Russia will have nowhere to turn for succulence. By that time, the Ukraine counteroffensive will have countered offense from the Ukrainian people and they will regard the war as an unnecessary intrusion upon their lives. Ukraine does not need Crimea and Donbas to survive. They may be good to have but who wants millions of insurgent Russians among the true Ukrainian masses? Having the principal cities — Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odessa, and Lviv — remain Ukrainian, and Ukrainian grain flowing throughout the world are more important.
The communique will read, “All silent on the Eastern Front,“ and the battle-weary soldiers will emerge from the trenches and run and embrace one another. “Tovarich, let’s have a bit of vodka and Yabluchnyk (Apple Cake) together.”
This is not reality TV; this is the reality. Only Africa, constantly torn by disputes, may continue to suffer aggression. The Western World’s World War III is coming to an end. War no more is the slogan of a new generation.
China acted as an aggressor in several wars??
Which ones, pray tell.