THE WORLD AT CROSSROADS

Recent events appear to indicate that the world as we know it might soon be gone as it is no longer dominated by the United States who, since the fall of the Soviet Union, ruled the world virtually unopposed. Russia and China are becoming more and more aggressive players in the world geopolitics. Russia has recently achieved some victories on the world stage, unheard off since the fall of the Soviet Union: it prevented the West's intervention in Syria, derailed economic treaties between European Union and Armenia and Ukraine respectively, humiliated the United States by snatching Edward Snowden (and facilitating his unleashing of plagues befalling the NSA and the United States, both made pariahs in the courts of public opinion in the United States and over the world), played its role in what might turn out to be an appeasement of Iran, and, as if to stress Russia's recent victories, president Putin has been voted the most influential person in the world in 2013 by the Forbes magazine. China was more subtle and quiet, concentrating on the economy, yet they still were able to project their economic standing by becoming more assertive in the world's geopolitics. Recent proclamation of Air Defense Identification Zone over large areas of East China Sea, and sending its aircraft carrier on a maiden expedition toward the disputed Senkaku Islands are symbolic steps, foretelling more of similar, and perhaps, more aggressive steps in the near future. It seems that China already embarked on a road to convert its economic success into military might. As soon as China acquire means to project its military power over the seas, they will attempt to take over the control of East China and South China Sea in order to secure unobstructed access to oceanic routes. As it is, Japan and the United States are able to easily disrupt China's commerce due to Japan's control of various islands between Taiwan and the main islands of Japan, and the United States' ability to project its military power in Pacific and Indian Oceans. Apparently, China will not stand ay longer for the status quo, and will try to secure control over the seas leading to oceanic routes. The more militarized China would become, the more probable would be scenario of China's attempt to take over Russia's Far East, which economically seems to have closer ties to China than to Russia proper. India is not going to sleep at the time when its rival, China, grows its military might, and will also develop its aircraft carriers. In fact, recently they acquired a new aircraft carrier, which is supposed to take place of an old one, being decommissioned. We cannot forget of course about the unpredictable North Korea and volatile Iran-Israel situation and its potential for inflammation of major military conflict between Christianity and Islam. We seem not to appreciate how blessed Europe and North America has been since 1945, more or less, without necessity of dealing with war at our homes, except for the Balkans. If we are not prudent in our next steps, the peace might become a distant memory. What steps should the United States and the European Union undertake to avert the above dangers? Anyone out there with ideas?

Janusz Andrzejewski is a New York City based attorney, writing on various important community topics. You can get in touch with him by telephone: (212) 634-4250 or through e-mail: janusz@januszandrzejewski.com

IS WAR WITH IRAN ON THE CARDS?

All the signs seem to indicate that the world order as we know it will not exist for long. The fight between the proponents of the new world order concepts and the conservative traditional nation state supporters is going on; in fact, it is becoming more intense. It seems that in an age of quickest movements of people in history of mankind, such terms as nation, state, homeland, traditions, religion, are being devalued whereas concepts of globalization, political correctness, free trade, world without borders are making headways constantly. However, the new world order has been in the making since the second half of 18th century, from the time when the ideas of enlightenment caught the imagination of people, and nothing substantial came out of it, notwithstanding that various efforts have been made to institutionalize transnational organizations governing various sectors of either continental or world affairs. League of Nations or present United Nations, and various offshoot organizations have been such attempts. However, these organizations are quite toothless when it comes to the most vital and contentious affairs of the contemporaneous world. Obviously, it concerns the sources of energy and possession of geostrategic masses of land. It seems that the United States at the time of neoconservatives heyday - during Gerge W. Bush's presidency - embraced an old Zbigniew Brzezinski's game plan, drawn in his book "The Grand Chessboard", regarding if not conquering Eurasia, than definitely not allowing any single power to dominate it. Obviously, Eurasia has 75% of the world population and it also has 75% of known sources of energy. If any of the world powers would succeed in achieving domination of Eurasia landmass, the United States would become a peripheral non-entity. Therefore, it does not matter who wins the 2012 presidential elections, whether it is Romney or Obama, the global policy of the United States will not get any major reset. Everything seems to confirm prediction that there will be next war in Middle East or Central Asia region. Currently, there are following powers with potential for domination of Eurasia region: Russia, China, India and European Union. Out of these four powers, only China and Russia must be considered by the United States, at this time, as the players in an expected future war. However, with each passing year, the Russian position will deteriorate, as Russia would still be preoccupied in keeping her vast territories in one piece, whereas China will be gaining in amassing its economic power as well as in capabilities of projection of that power by military means. Apparently, the US geostrategists must have realized that, and will have to preemptively use any pretext to make additional gains in Middle East and in Central Asia, before China's military power and capability to project that power has grown beyond control. The thinking must be that the US cannot afford to wait, if it is to remain a player on the world stage. For the foregoing, it seams that war with Iran is inevitable, no matter what is the pretext under international law. However, it appears that Zbigniew Brzezinski himself is now against his old "game plan" as he is afraid that war with Iran would ignite the whole world of islam against the United States. So, what is it going to be?