Wednesday News Breakdown | Blinken in China, US funding for Israel

Okay. So there are two stories that I wanted to talk about today for the news breakdown. Now I know I'm two installments behind at this point. I hope you can excuse me, I'll try to make it up for you. I assume that most of the members that are members for the Middle Nation channel are also members on the Telegram discussion group.

And we do discuss news, and, you know, current events and so on, on the Telegram channel on an ongoing basis. So I hope that that, kind of makes up for the shortcomings in terms of producing the news breakdowns over the past week or so. But okay. Today, I wanna talk about, Anthony Blinken going to China and about the recent US bill, that was passed for funding for Ukraine, Taiwan, and Israel, specifically with regards to Israel, of course. But, okay.

First things first. Anthony Blinken, has just gone to China. He's there now. And his is just the latest visit by Washington official to Beijing where a discussion between The US and China, basically, with the mission of trying to get China to agree to stop being, more, financially and economically successful than America would like them to be. When, Janet Yellen went over there recently, she demanded that China, cut back what she called China's excess industrial capacity, you know, to stop the, so called overproduction, of things like electric vehicles and, batteries and solar power, solar energy products and so on.

So basically, their position is, China is making too much stuff. Too many people are buying their stuff. And this is being deemed by America as creating an imbalance in the global markets. But of course what that means is an imbalance that's going the wrong way because American capitalism is all about creating imbalances but in America's favor. So rather than, increasing their own industrial capacity, America is demanding that China reduce their capacity.

I don't know if you saw, there was this recent video that went viral of a Chinese, marathoner competing against Ethiopian and Kenyan runners where the African, marathoners visibly slowed down, just before the finish line so that they could ensure that the, Chinese marathoner won because the race was being, run, or the race was being ran, in Beijing. So the theory is that the, the, African runners, were potentially paid off, or bribed in some way, to allow the, Chinese runner, the Chinese marathoner to win the race. And you could visibly see the, Ethiopian and the, two Kenyan runners slowing down at the, just as they approached the finish line. So this went around the Internet as a sort of disgraceful scandal, and an example of how China, needs to rig competitions in order to win. But okay, this was just some, you know, some little marathon in Beijing.

But this is literally what The US is demanding of China in terms of manufacturing and exports. Deliberately slow down so that America can keep up, so so that America can compete, and so that America can actually win. They're asking China to actually, slow down and cut back on what they're calling excess production. Why is it excess? It's not like people aren't buying their products, you know, they're not they're not producing, more materials than the market can handle.

They're, producing more materials, more goods, than America can compete with. So America is demanding that they slow down just like those marathoners were apparently required to slow down so that China would win. America is requiring China to slow down so that America can win and they're not even offering them a bribe. So now we have, Blinken going over to China. But what he's going to demand, like, like Biden did in his meeting, I think it was last month with, Xi, Xi Jinping, where he demanded that China, cut their ties with Russia.

So that's what Blinken is going over there to demand. Now the pretense for that demand, is that, the target, of Washington is Russia. In other words, they want China to believe and they want the world to believe that they want China to cut ties with Russia because Russia is bad and Russia is dangerous and so on, and that the last two years of Western policy against Russia have only failed to weaken Vladimir Putin because of China. So they're saying, that China has to stop dealing economically, with Russia so that American policy towards Russia or against Russia, can actually succeed. You know, so that the sanctions against Russia can actually weaken Russia as they said they would because they haven't so far.

And now they're saying that the reason that they haven't weakened Russia is because of China, not because it's a bad policy. So they want, China to cut their ties with Russia so that maybe Ukraine can win. So in other words, at this point, they're admitting that the, that victory in Ukraine doesn't depend on American support, and it doesn't depend upon American policy, but apparently, it's all in the hands of China. But of course the truth is that this has nothing to do with Russia. And in fact it doesn't even have anything to do with China.

Blinken is just using the the Russian angle to, you know, the the demand to cut ties with Russia because he knows and everyone knows that China is not gonna cut ties with Russia and, Xi Jinping made that clear to Biden's face when they met. The point here, is to insist on it, is to insist on cutting ties with Russia knowing very well that they will not cut ties with Russia So that when China does refuse and they will refuse, then they can have an excuse to sanction China and start implementing against China some of the same economic isolation policies that they have imposed against Russia that haven't worked on Russia. But they wanna be able to do that now against China. And the only reason, that they want to do that, again, it has nothing to do with Russia and it has nothing to do with China. The primary reason that they want to do that is because this is part of the destabilization project against Europe.

They're not really interested, in driving a wedge between China and Russia, but between China and Europe. If The US sanctions China, and starts those same economic isolation policies against China like they have done against Russia, just like with Russia, the EU is very likely to follow suit, and that will be absolutely devastating for Europe and particularly for Germany. I said at the start of the Ukraine war, and at the start of the Russian sanctions that The US doesn't want Europe to have any choices. Don't wanna have them to have any alternative to The United States in terms of sustaining their economy. They wanna make Europe completely, a dependency of The United States.

They want Europe to be completely cut off. They want them to be completely isolated, from any economic lifeline besides America. So this isn't about isolating Russia, and if they impose sanctions against China, it's not about isolating China, it's about isolating Europe. That's what, in my opinion, that's what's really going on here. That's the that's the game that's at play right now and I believe that that's where Blinken's trip is probably leading.

Because look, China has become Germany's top trading partner. Roughly 20% of German industrial revenues come from sales to China. Roughly 12% of German imports come from China and those are very strategically important imports for strategically important for the economy, important industries in Germany like the car manufacturing sector and so forth. They receive parts from China, they get rare earths from China and so on. So it's not just the 12% but that but that 12% of imports affects some very important and influential industries inside of Germany.

I mean, the the fact of the matter is that over the last ten, twenty years or so, really the most important and influential industries in Germany have become dependent upon their relationship with China. And not only that, according to economics experts, German banks are heavily tied to local businesses in Germany. German banks are tied to local German businesses, and to, local German industries that are completely reliant on China, completely reliant on the trade relationship with China. So in other words, if The US sanctions China, and then Europe follows suit and sanctions China, then there's gonna be obviously a a major, rift, in the relationship between Germany and China, and that will lead, inevitably and predictably, to businesses in Germany that are reliant upon their relationship with China, that will that will result in those businesses defaulting on whatever loans they have with those German banks, which is going to cause a financial collapse or or or a collapse of the, financial sector, the financial system, in Germany. So put simply, The United States exacerbating, tensions with China and potentially inducing Europe to sanction China, to reduce or to halt their economic relationship with China, you know, supposedly as a punitive, measure against Russia, would do nothing but punish Europe.

It would punish Europe itself, and it would punish Europe even more, than the, Russian sanctions have punished Europe, which have already been devastating for the European economy, especially, for the German economy. But just like with Russia, just like they went along with it for the sanctions against Russia, I would expect that they would go along with sanctioning China as well. The same way they went along with sanctioning Russia, they'll go along with sanctioning China, most likely. Now what would China do in response to those sanctions, American sanctions and potentially European sanctions? How will China, try to protect and, preserve and maintain, their economy if they face, basically Western sanctions by the collective West?

Well, would predict that just like with Russia, I imagine that the outcome of, sanctions against China would actually be beneficial, to the Chinese economy and to BRICS and to the global South overall. China will likely bolster their economic ties with non Western countries, with the BRICS nations and so on, with countries in the Global South. They will put more and more emphasis on their relationships with the countries in, for example, in Africa and in The Middle East and so on, and simultaneously they will try to boost or promote domestic consumption of Chinese products. They will accelerate, just as Russia has done, accelerate in their own technological development and so on. They will probably try to increasingly decouple from Western led from the Western led financial system, they will probably increase in their de dollarization or their diversification of their reserve currencies and they will probably continue focusing on or or push even further in what you can call the internationalization of the UN.

And like I say, they will focus on building and deepening their relationships with Africa where they're already ahead of The United States, they're already ahead of Europe in making their connections and building their relationships and deepening their relationships with Africa and with the BRICS nations and so forth. This I think, just like the, sanctions against Russia, have proven to be, I think that sanctions against China, would would would end up being a major boost to the economic transition or the transition or the pivot of the global economy to the South and to the East. And in my opinion, this is probably actually the plan that's being pursued here. The intensified deterioration of Europe and increasing Europe's dependence on The United States while decreasing the dependence on The United States by everyone else. The repercussions of this, if they do it, and I expect that that's as I say, that's the that's the trajectory of American policy as it stands now.

The repercussions of this, will reverberate, throughout Africa and throughout The Middle East, and I think that, in the context of, Palestine, I think that this will give a greater impetus for a non Western led resolution to the situation in Palestine and Allahu Alam. Which leads me to the next story that I wanted to talk about, is The US aid bill to Israel, money to Israel. This was passed by the US House of Representatives the other day and it was just signed today by Joe Biden into law, so it's gonna happen. This is a $26,000,000,000 funding bill, so called, wartime assistance bill that's gonna be going to, Ukraine, Israel and to Taiwan. But let's just leave, Ukraine and Taiwan for the moment.

So the bill total bill is about a close to a $100,000,000,000, think. So $90,000,000,000 or something like that. And 26,000,000,000 of that is so called wartime assistance that's gonna be going to Israel. And reportedly about a billion dollars of that funding, that allotment will be going almost immediately to Israel with the rest of it being allocated over the next several weeks. I think we all understand what funding for Ukraine is about, I think we all understand what funding for Taiwan is about.

So let me just take a moment to explain and to clarify what US financial aid to Israel, actually means. Because I think that there is a good deal of misunderstanding about what that means. Because it doesn't mean what it apparently means. It doesn't necessarily mean what the headlines will tell you or what you might draw from the headlines. First of all, what this funding bill does not mean, is that Israel is going to get $26,000,000,000.

It means actually that Israel is going to get, roughly $7,000,000,000. And American defense companies like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are going to get roughly $19,000,000,000. That's automatic. And you should know that this is the case with any funding package, any funding bill, any financial assistance or military aid or what have you, anything in terms of money that's going from The United States to Israel, this is always going to be the case because by law, all of these allocations, to Israel require, that Israel spend, 74% of the money given to them by The United States. 74% of that money, by law is required to be spent by Israel purchasing, weapons, technology, goods and services and so forth from American companies.

So except for the portion of the funding that's in that bill that is supposedly earmarked for humanitarian relief aid to Gaza, pretty much all the rest of that money is slated for updating, upgrading, servicing, replenishing and so forth, repairing Israel's Iron Dome system, their Iron Beam system, and what's called David's Sling, the David's Sling system. Now all of these systems, the Iron Dome, Iron Beam, and David Sling, all of these are joint projects between the Israeli weapons company Rafael and American companies Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. So this aid package is not so much an aid package for Israel as it is an aid package for the military industrial complex in The United States. And this is generally what US funding for Israel always is. And this is why I've said before, that, Muslims and pro Palestinian activists and so forth should never overemphasize the alleged power of the, so called pro Israel lobby.

You know, politicians, and Washington insiders, they like to scapegoat, in my opinion, scapegoat, the so called Jewish lobby and their, the the supposed influence, the alleged influence, of the Jewish lobby, as being the most important reason, you know, the sort of, irresistible, undefiable reason behind America's support for Israel. And they sort of, act as if their hands are tied because of the power of the Jewish lobby and so on. But the truth is that the so called Jewish lobby or the pro Israel lobby or the which is a collection of lobbies actually, when we say the Jewish lobby or the pro Israel lobby, it's a it's a collection of a variety of lobbies that you can maybe say headed by IPAC, a I p a c, the Israel pro Israel lobby, the main pro Israel lobby. But the fact of the matter is that they have very little to do with US policy. They have very little to do with US policy for Israel.

In fact, in my opinion, American policy towards Israel, would be exactly the same over the past fifty years, if there had never been a Jewish lobby, if there had never been pro Israel lobby. I mean, consider the fact that, IPAC is the most infamous, you can say, pro Israel lobby, and they spent, last year, around a $100,000,000 lobbying politicians. In 2023, they spent around a $100,000,000. Okay. That sounds like a lot.

But the defense and aerospace lobbies spent roughly $9,000,000,000 in the same period. So approximately 90 times as much as the so called Israel lobby. And it's their industry, defense sector and the aerospace sector and so on, it's their industries, that are the, primary beneficiaries of American support for Israel. So it's fairly obvious to me who has the most influence here. In my opinion, this aid package actually represents recognition by The United States and by the, OCGFC, by the owners and controllers of global financialized capital, and by the, defense sector and by the aerospace sector and so on, these, weapons industries, that have been the traditional recipients and beneficiaries of American policy towards Israel, it's it's it's in my opinion a recognition by those factions that the window of opportunity is closing for The US to use Israel, to continue using Israel, as an instrument for funneling money into the defense sector, into the military industrial complex.

And they are therefore, trying to sort of max out as much as they can before this window closes. It might also represent something of a consolation prize for those American weapons industries, a sort of a parting gift or even a bribe for them to try to convince them to accept the paradigm shift that's underway, the paradigm shift that's taking place with the global economy and getting them to accept how The US is going to have to operate in that new paradigm. As I've talked about before, the owners and controllers of global financialized capital today represent a diverse set of financial interests across a broad scope, a broad spectrum of business sectors. The military industrial complex is not viable, it's not as viable as it used to be as a management system for the American economy and therefore as a driver behind US foreign policy. Forever wars are not going to work moving forward, at least not forever wars in the Global South because the OCGFC, have a wide array of interests, investment projects and so on in the Global South, and they're going to want stability.

In the coming decades, I believe, that Europe, more than any country or any region in the Global South, I think that Europe is going to be the center, of the, so called, what you can call the war economy. I think that America is gonna be focused on arming and perpetuating conflicts across the EU, probably spilling over from Ukraine with maybe a sort of a chain reaction moving through say Moldova, Belarus, Poland and so on. And then with major Western European countries, getting pulled into those conflicts. I think that's another reason, and I think that that's one of the reasons why The US is contemplating leaving NATO, because they don't want to be, obliged to defend, countries, in Europe who get involved in conflicts knowing full well that once a a NATO country becomes involved in the conflict, then all of the NATO members are obliged to participate in that conflict. And America doesn't want to have to do that, they want those people over there, to fight each other and to kill each other, and America would just provide them with the weapons.

So I think that there's going to be, as I've said many times before, I think that Europe is going to be a conflict zone, conflict between states and conflict internally in the European countries, countries like Germany. I think there's gonna be internal strife as the populations get increasingly angry and increasingly desperate over their diminishing economy. The economy that is being diminished by design. By, for example, measures as what I talked about when I was talking about the first story. So I don't see this funding bill by The United States, this funding to Israel.

I don't see this being indicative actually of American persistence in maintaining their support for Israel. I see it as America realizing that Israel will not be viable much longer as a tool, for supporting their domestic weapons and defense sectors. And their, domestic, defense sectors have historically been, the, the main drivers of manufacturing, of technological innovation and overall productivity in The United States. So this is very important to them. So I think that they can see that supporting Israel is not going to be viable much longer, and there's going to be a period between their suspension of their traditional relationship with Israel and the commencement of continent wide conflict in Europe.

So during the transition period, they want to make sure that their weapons and defense sectors have a significant bonus to tide them over until Europe can actually explode into a conflict zone. So though I think it's counterintuitive, I know, but I think that this new funding package, is otherwise utterly bizarre, it's utterly bizarre for America to allocate $26,000,000,000 in funding to Israel at this time, in this context, when the when the when the majority of American citizens, when the American when the majority of the American electorate between the ages of 18 and say 35 are actually opposed to US funding for Israel amidst an ongoing genocide in, an election year. It simply doesn't make any sense for you to do something that is so wildly unpopular, and it's such a dramatic, dramatically large amount of money that you are supposedly making available to Israel but you're actually making available to your own defense sector. To me I think this represents a desperate money grab by the defense sector that's similar to, say, shoppers on a Black Friday just before closing.