The new world scenario: teleonomic

The French biologist Jacques Monod in his essay “Chance and Necessity” (1970) explains that the variables of logos and chance of human evolution. He posits that these would be necessary complementary aspects of evolutionary adaptation of living beings to drastic changes, that would ensure their reproductive success (survival). With this we would see the emergence of a “teleonomic scenario” as opposed to so-called “teleological scenario” force in Western society today. The Brexit then marks the settlement of a “teleological scenario” in which the purpose of the creative processes was planned by finite models that could be intermodal or simulate various alternative futures. These would prioritize intent, purpose, and foresight, and replace the “teleonomic scenario”, marked by extreme doses of volatility affecting especially complex systems such as climate change, detection and prevention of epidemics, immigration, the Stock Exchange, and the geopolitical organization of the New World Order.

 

 

All of this would be on the eve of the start of the geopolitical landscape of the new global destabilizing wave, caused by economic reasons as well as cultural and geopolitical. Along economic lines, there is of course the decline of the global economy. Along cultural lines there is the decline of Western formal democracies, due to the culture of corruption, the democratic deficit in the US reflected for example in PRISM (carried out by the Obama Administration), and the loss of democratic credibility of countless governments of Western countries and in the third world. Then of course is the geopolitical factor, the emergence of a new world geopolitical scene after the return of the recurring endemic Cold War between the US and Russia. This strategy will involve the implementation of soft power that would have Honduras, Paraguay, Egypt, Ukraine, Iraq, Thailand and Yemen as paradigms, with the clear aim of replacing defiant (to the US) regimes by military or autocratic regimes, producing an antidemocratic drop that will result in becoming a new global reactionary wave that will reach every continent, and have special virulence in the Middle East (Lebanon, Turkey, Tunisia, Pakistan and Azerbaijan) and Latin America (Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Haiti, El Salvador, Panama and Venezuela).

 

 

Prior to the intervention of NATO in Libya, what should have happened is that China and Russia should have vetoed this at the level of the UN, so that we could witness the birth of a Russian-Chinese alliance led by Putin would have communicated this with the appearance on the global geopolitical landscape of the Eurasian Union as an economic alternative to the Western hegemonic bloc. Nevertheless, according to Reuters, Russia and China have sealed a stratospheric oil contract that became one of the largest in the history of the energy industry by the Russian company Rosneft, (the largest oil company in the country), which will supply oil to the Asian giant for 25 years, worth 270,000 million dollars (205,000 million euros), which together with the mega-contract signed by Gazprom and Chinese CNPC, by which Russia will supply to China 38.000 million cubic meters of gas Natural for approximately $ 400,000 million for a term of 30 years, through the pipeline Sila Sibiri (the Force Siberia). This would lay the economic foundations of the future Eurasian Union which began its journey on January 1st, 2015 as an economic and military alternative to the proposal by Obama to create a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP by its acronym in English), the centerpiece of the US in its policy reaffirmation of economic and military power in the Pacific region. This is in contrast to a possible Russian-Chinese offensive along with the other BRICS countries to change the world monetary standard, and replace the role of the dollar as the global reserve currency.

 

In this decade we find the possibility the end or resolution of the unipolarity of the United States and its role as world police, and its replacement by the new doctrine of multipolarity or Geopolitics Inter-Pares, formed by a Troika of the US, China and Russia (G3), which will mean the beginning of the dismemberment of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India and China) economic group that would have intensified their political cooperation to obtain agreements on trade and extract political concessions from developed countries, (nuclear cooperation proposal with India and Brazil), and would have the potential to form an economic bloc with a higher status than the current G-8 (it is estimated that on the horizon of 2050 would be more than 40% of the world population and a combined GDP of 34,951 Billion $ ), passing the EU, Japan, India and Brazil in the new geopolitical scenario.

 

 

The return of the endemic Cold War between the US and Russia began openly after the crisis in Ukraine, and mutual sanctions between the EU and Russia marking the beginning of the split of the once monolithic position of NATO against Russia. Thus, in retaliation for sanctions imposed by the EU in 2015, Moscow responded with an embargo on European food products which had as a side effect some estimated €150 million a day, according to the leader of Italy’s Liga Nord and Deputy of the Italian Parliament, Matteo Salvini, including a total of more than 100,000 million.  According to the EC itself, exports to Russia of the EU in 2013 would have amounted to € 120,000 million. As a result, a current led by Italy, Finland and Hungary has emerged that is in favor of suspending the sanctions on Russia, while the antinomian shore has Poland, Britain and the Baltics as champions to continue implementing those sanctions in the near future. Finally, we can not rule out that after the elections in France and Germany in 2017, we will witness a belated reaffirmation of European sovereignty by both countries included as a genesis of a new European project (EU-Seven), composed of France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Luxembourg and Austria, the rest of peripheral European countries (Portugal, Spain, Ireland, Greece, Slovenia, Malta and Cyprus) gravitating in their orbital rings while the Nordic countries will come to the gestation of the Scandinavian Federation (consisting of Norway, Denmark , Sweden, Finland, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania), that will pivot in the present Russian-European trade uncertainties.

 

 

In September 2009, President Obama, being pressured by the establishment or power in the shadow US state, approved the implementation of a new European system of anti-missile defense, European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA), which actually is an anti-missile shield which interceptor missiles, deployed on mobile platforms, can bring down targets in a common space, based on data transmitted by all radars and optic-electronic reconnaissance systems.

 

At first, Russia and NATO had agreed to cooperate in the creation of anti-missile shield for Europe in November 2010 in the Bilateral Lisbon Summit, as for Moscow this was vital that NATO offer real assurances that this system is not aimed at Russia and have a legally binding document, but the Obama administration following the mimetic inertia of the Bush Administration has rebuffed Russia has so far and refused to offer such assurances in writing, but after the outcome of the crisis in Crimea and a return to scenarios reminiscent of the Cold War, it is foreseeable the US finally has decided to complete the fourth phase of the deployment of the missile shield in Europe (Euro DAM), which would be aimed at the facility in Kaliningrad, the new inter-continental ballistic missile 100 Tm, ( “the killer of the US missile shield” in the words of Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitri Rogozin), which in the words of political scientist Vladimir Abramov “The Kaliningrad region will play the role of a gun to your head in Europe, as it was two decades ago.”

 

Meanwhile, according RT TV, Russia is negotiating to install its military bases in Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Seychelles and Singapore with the clear goal of expanding the Russian military presence, because according to the analyst Lajos Szaszdi “the opening of bases outside is necessary for strategic deterrence of Russia, intelligence, and to verify the agreements of disarmament and to determine what are the plans of the Pentagon in case of operations or interventions abroad ", not ruling out that during a recent visit of Putin to the island, we saw the signing of a new treaty of Russian-Cuban military collaboration, (recalling the Secret Pact signed in 1960 in Moscow between Raul Castro and Khrushchev), that would include the installation of a radar base in the abandoned base military Lourdes, to comfortably listen to the whispers of Washington, and installing Iskander missiles can revive the Kennedy-Khrushchev missile crisis of October 1962, and the subsequent signing with Khrushchev the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1962.

 

Following the approval of Congress and the US Senate of a statement prepared by the Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and Democrat Robert Menendez, pointing categorically that “if Israel is forced to defend itself and take action (against Iran), the US will be there to support it militarily and diplomatically,” we witness the increased pressure of the pro-Israeli lobby in the US (AIPAC) to proceed to the destabilization of Syria and Iran for expeditious methods in the post-Obama stage. This war will be a new local episode that would exemplify the recurring endemic US-Russian Cold War, and involve both superpowers having as their collaborators necessary regional powers (Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran), encompassing geographical space extending from the Mediterranean area (Lebanon, Libya, Syria and) to Yemen and Somalia and Iraq as its epicenter (recalling the Vietnam War with Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969), and whose outcome could have as a side effect a new favorable geopolitical interest of the US, Britain and Israel with the implementation of the Greater Israel ( “Eretz Israel”). This would mean the restoration of the Balfour Declaration (1917), which drew a State of Israel provided with a vast area of nearly 46,000 square miles stretching from the Mediterranean to the east of the Euphrates covering Syria, Lebanon, northeastern Iraq, northern Saudi Arabia, the coastal strip of the Red Sea and the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt as well like Jordan. Jordan in such a scenario would take on the character of Palesjordan, after being forced to accept the entire Palestinian population of the current West Bank and Gaza forced into a massive diaspora, as a new Nakba.