Why is Britain the most important enemy of the United States?

1:50, 27 августа 2021

МОСКВА, 27 августа 2021, Институт РУССТРАТ.

With my colleague Druid, we had an interesting discussion (here and here) about the possibilities of Britain to pull down (and/or replace) the United States on the world stage. Here’s what I would like to say briefly about this.

First of all, it is necessary to analyse the modern strategic relations of such countries, taking into account the deep context of US-British relations. What do we have here? The situation here is very interesting.

The first fact that needs to be taken into account is that the United States as a state grew out of a British colony. That is, the same as Poland in relation to Russia, only in profile. The War of Independence from Britain lasted for almost 8 years (1775-1783) and is the ontological basis of American statehood (Independence Day is July 4). For Britain, the founding of the United States was, on the contrary, one of the most negative facts of history and the beginning of the collapse of the Empire.

The second fact. During the Civil War, Britain supported the South, while Russia supported the North. In 1863, St. Petersburg sent two squadrons to support the Northerners. One became near New York, the second – near San Francisco, providing the northerners with gold trade.

Even then, Britain could not pay much attention to this issue, since the colonies were already burning (India), and tried to act in conjunction with France. In addition, London was much more interested in the colonisation of the eternal enemy – Russia (the Crimean War, which ended with the victory of Russia – the British squadron could not capture St. Petersburg).

At the same time, it should be noted that when the British made a mess in Poland, the Americans supported Russia.

The third fact. Already in the 20th century, the Americans from 1922-1927 were developing plans to attack Britain in order to deprive it of its colonies. It was planned to eliminate the British land forces in Canada and the North Atlantic. Seeing this threat from the United States, and realising that it would not be able to repel it, London, through the Federal Reserve controlled by international bankers (it was created for this), launched a stock exchange bacchanal in the United States and an unsecured growth in stock prices, which turned into the Great Depression.

The author of the idea of Britain’s financial attack on the United States was, by the way, Churchill. Even Wikipedia notes this: “The policy of ‘affordable money’ was largely due to the influence of the governor of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, B. Strong: it was a response to the decision taken by the head of the British Treasury, W. Churchill in 1925”. The European roots of the American Great Depression were also discussed by the President of the United States (1929-1933), G. Hoover.

The fourth fact. One of the versions of the reasons for the Second World War is the assumption that it was a continuation of the American-British conflict with the use of proxy forces (Germany and the USSR). Since the American military failed to encourage Roosevelt to directly attack Britain (since 1910, he was a Freemason, having reached the 32nd degree of the Scottish Charter), and seeing how Britain was pumping Germany (brought Hitler to power), the United States began to help the USSR with industrialisation.

The scheme was simple: Hitler attacks Poland, Britain enters for Poland, the USSR covers Hitler from the East, everyone is weakened, and the United States takes Britain’s colonies for itself. The British saw this scheme, so they did not enter for Poland. And Hitler fought against them purely formally, directing the main blow in collusion with London against the USSR. In general, the story went according to a different scenario, but the result for the United States was the same result as planned – Churchill signed a waiver of the colonies.

The fifth fact. Next we have Brexit. In fact, Britain’s exit from the EU destroys this structure, created by the Americans and the British themselves to control Germany, in the long term (since London was one of the main donors of this artificial structure).

This is what we are currently seeing (the fronde of Eastern and Southern Europe, the sword of Damocles over the budgets of the countries of Eastern Europe, primarily the Baltic States, the restoration of the role of Austria, etc.). One more push is enough and the EU will cease to exist in its current form.

That is, as the analysis of US-British relations shows, their entire history is a series of two positions: long-term truces are preparation for new and very tough clashes, up to destruction. What do we see? That the United States, in fact, grew out of the British Empire and since the 1770s, in a little less than two centuries, has gnawed it to the bone.

Therefore, the elite of Britain and the royal house are facing the most serious challenge in their entire history – either Britain becomes a third-rate country along with Poland (yes, Poland!), or it returns everything that was acquired by backbreaking work.

For this purpose, the withdrawal from the EU was carried out and the strengthening of the Commonwealth of Nations was intensified. Regarding Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, it is still difficult to say whose project this is – London or Washington, but the goals of this project in both cases are clearly traced. If this couple is a project of the United States, then they are going to kill the Commonwealth from Britain for themselves (the Royal House of the United States). If they are a project of the royal house, then through them Britain is going to return America to its crown.

What do we see today? That it is the British media and politicians who rinse America and Biden personally the most for leaving Afghanistan. To give Afghanistan to Beijing and Moscow, and then the whole of Middle and Central Asia, including then India, is the collapse of the entire centuries-old Great Game between Britain and Russia. Britain is not yet ready for a clash with a two-headed dragon eagle.

Therefore, it will play a different game – on the financial fields. As in the 1930s, use one’s advantage in international banking and financial affairs. Accordingly, Britain benefits from the collapse of the global financial system based on the dollar, and the transition to currency zones, where London will serve as the main broker, and China will be an industrial base.

That is, instead of the American project “Chimerica” or G2, London offers Beijing project “Chibritanica”, where the roles and portions will be approximately equal. Since the entire Commonwealth is a maritime state, as well as a part of China, the union of maritime powers can be very effective. Nevertheless, the question “how many divisions do you have?” does not lose its relevance.

If London regains control of at least one of the parts of the collapsed United States or the new United States, deprived of the function of a superpower, or a puppet controlled from London (which will be ruled by its own black queen BLM), then London will have such a fist. If not, then the scenarios are different.

The question is that no one will even fight with a weakened London – the other remaining global players (Russia, Germany, France) have neither the strength, nor the goals, nor a long-term strategy to challenge the new alignment of forces. Britain will not try to conquer the world by military means.

A certain consensus will be proposed with the consolidation of a certain share of the G7 or G20 countries – no matter which – in the management of the world with London playing a dominant role. This design will suit London quite well. Any other one will bring Britain to the level of Poland with a dominant Muslim population in 20 years. Therefore, control over the Afghan drug trafficking will give Britain the necessary financial resource for a radical transformation of the world.

Regarding Russia, Britain has two strategies. The first, a dead-end, is a war (as it is today), the second is to negotiate. You can read about the second scenario here. To do this, it is necessary to publicly apologise for Magnitsky, the Skripals, Russophobia, etc., the list is sizeable. We’ll see which way London chooses.

publication-5744Институт международных политических и экономических стратегий Русстрат