A precise piece. It measures the wall and calls the wall their cunning.
CRINK is not a coalition. It is a clearing house.
What holds these four together is not strategy, and it is certainly not faith. Each was cut from the dollar. And a state cut from settlement does not vanish — it goes looking for another way to settle, and it finds the others who were cut too.
The corridors you find so menacing are only what trade looks like when it can no longer clear through New York.
We built that.
Sanctions are a monetary weapon first, a military one second. Wall off the system and you do not isolate your enemy. You introduce him to your other enemies. You hand them the one thing they could never manufacture alone — a reason to build the next system together.
History has run this experiment. Napoleon ran it. The 1930s ran it. Such blocs endure the siege for years and leave almost nothing standing behind them.
They are studying their reflection in a darkened window.
Thanks Cornelia! And I think that’s largely true. A lot of this is less about shared ideology and more about countries responding to US pressure and trying to reduce their dependence on the Western system.
I would add that CRINK (China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea) for the most part didn’t start out hostile to us. They are reacting to our unwise and unnecessary hostility—sanctions, proxy wars, and so on.
But be that as it may, from a pure chess-game perspective, looking at the geography, population, and GDP: an entity now called CRINK, with more countries likely to follow, covers a self-sufficient landmass from China to Russia to Iran down to Southeast Asia (eventually)—one that can't be blockaded—with all the labor, resources, and consumer markets a self-sufficient entity would need.
That new group wins by default—not by having a war with us, not by sanctioning us in return. Just by trading with each other and letting us be, saying to us: ‘You are welcome as an equal trading partner, but if you want to do threats or sanctions—stay away.’
The only option we have to prevent this—and no sane person would want that—is global nuclear war. Or we could grow up and be a constructive building partner in this new multi-polar world of ours. But I am not holding my breath for the time being.
1) WHO PROVIDES MARKETS?“Strategically, CRINK reflects the transition from a unipolar system to a fractured multipolar order where revisionist states actively pool resources and capabilities. “. *Markets* especially the American market is the major point of contention with China.
2) We 🇺🇸 may want to rebuild our industries in America and the west less than we want to “contain” China. MAGA is rebuilding American industry, infrastructure, it’s Henry Clay’s American system.
3) We 🇺🇸 are contracting to the Western Hemisphere but of course we must be secure on the oceans , we are all ISLAND peoples and the oceans are our steppes. We is as usual 🇬🇧🇺🇸🇨🇦🇦🇺🇳🇿 add 🇯🇵 and of course 🇵🇭 (Philippines) and 🇮🇩(Indonesia). The Vietnam war was fought to keep Indonesia from becoming Communist.
The English speaking peoples are Island peoples for… ever. We are Sea Peoples. The oceans our steppes - we are all too aware of our history. This cannot be overemphasized, in particular as it never sinks in… let’s ask the Spanish, the Dutch, the French, the Germans, the Japanese… is if absolutely necessary to say it in Chinese as well?
4) At last Hyboria (CRINK) develops internal rail, road and trade infrastructure. The dream of a century!!
5) ? CRINK ??!? 🤣 good heavens. Not author’s fault, I hope. I wonder how long before CRINK is “racist” ?
China’s virtual control of rare earths and their processing seems like it belongs in your piece. It can starve the west (US) and supply the CRINK alliance (as it wishes).
A precise piece. It measures the wall and calls the wall their cunning.
CRINK is not a coalition. It is a clearing house.
What holds these four together is not strategy, and it is certainly not faith. Each was cut from the dollar. And a state cut from settlement does not vanish — it goes looking for another way to settle, and it finds the others who were cut too.
The corridors you find so menacing are only what trade looks like when it can no longer clear through New York.
We built that.
Sanctions are a monetary weapon first, a military one second. Wall off the system and you do not isolate your enemy. You introduce him to your other enemies. You hand them the one thing they could never manufacture alone — a reason to build the next system together.
History has run this experiment. Napoleon ran it. The 1930s ran it. Such blocs endure the siege for years and leave almost nothing standing behind them.
They are studying their reflection in a darkened window.
And calling it the enemy.
Thank you Nazem!
Thank you as always. Rather than saying the West in many cases, for me, the response is to US activities. And is predictable.
Thanks Cornelia! And I think that’s largely true. A lot of this is less about shared ideology and more about countries responding to US pressure and trying to reduce their dependence on the Western system.
Great article.
I would add that CRINK (China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea) for the most part didn’t start out hostile to us. They are reacting to our unwise and unnecessary hostility—sanctions, proxy wars, and so on.
But be that as it may, from a pure chess-game perspective, looking at the geography, population, and GDP: an entity now called CRINK, with more countries likely to follow, covers a self-sufficient landmass from China to Russia to Iran down to Southeast Asia (eventually)—one that can't be blockaded—with all the labor, resources, and consumer markets a self-sufficient entity would need.
That new group wins by default—not by having a war with us, not by sanctioning us in return. Just by trading with each other and letting us be, saying to us: ‘You are welcome as an equal trading partner, but if you want to do threats or sanctions—stay away.’
The only option we have to prevent this—and no sane person would want that—is global nuclear war. Or we could grow up and be a constructive building partner in this new multi-polar world of ours. But I am not holding my breath for the time being.
Thanks again for a great addition!
My pleasure. I really enjoyed your great article.
1) WHO PROVIDES MARKETS?“Strategically, CRINK reflects the transition from a unipolar system to a fractured multipolar order where revisionist states actively pool resources and capabilities. “. *Markets* especially the American market is the major point of contention with China.
2) We 🇺🇸 may want to rebuild our industries in America and the west less than we want to “contain” China. MAGA is rebuilding American industry, infrastructure, it’s Henry Clay’s American system.
3) We 🇺🇸 are contracting to the Western Hemisphere but of course we must be secure on the oceans , we are all ISLAND peoples and the oceans are our steppes. We is as usual 🇬🇧🇺🇸🇨🇦🇦🇺🇳🇿 add 🇯🇵 and of course 🇵🇭 (Philippines) and 🇮🇩(Indonesia). The Vietnam war was fought to keep Indonesia from becoming Communist.
The English speaking peoples are Island peoples for… ever. We are Sea Peoples. The oceans our steppes - we are all too aware of our history. This cannot be overemphasized, in particular as it never sinks in… let’s ask the Spanish, the Dutch, the French, the Germans, the Japanese… is if absolutely necessary to say it in Chinese as well?
4) At last Hyboria (CRINK) develops internal rail, road and trade infrastructure. The dream of a century!!
5) ? CRINK ??!? 🤣 good heavens. Not author’s fault, I hope. I wonder how long before CRINK is “racist” ?
China’s virtual control of rare earths and their processing seems like it belongs in your piece. It can starve the west (US) and supply the CRINK alliance (as it wishes).