The United States is transitioning from confrontation with the Global South to a strategy of leading it, creating the "Asian Five" (C5) to contain China.
Europe has become an object of economic exploitation for both superpowers, who are ready to sell the EU "security services."
Without its own army, new industrial policy, and ideology, Europe is doomed to buy protection from either the US or China.
America is forming four operational security zones, planning to profit from allies to concentrate resources on the main direction—the Indo-Pacific region.
A year ago, I first wrote that the US goal is not to fight the Global South but to "lead" it.
"— Will you fight this?
— Are you crazy? I intend to lead it."
The concept of the "Asian Five," or C5, confirmed my predictions.
Those experts who wrote about "the struggle between democracies and autocracies," about "the struggle between the US and the Global South," only confirmed that they are incapable of thinking outside the mainstream paradigm.
Even if it is hopelessly outdated.
They will understand this only when they are officially informed about the death of Pax Americana 1.0 and the birth of Pax Americana 2.0.
The US understands that its absence from projects like BRICS or SCO only weakens American influence on the Global South and strengthens China's role in this conglomerate.
For obvious reasons, the US cannot "apply" to join BRICS, much less SCO.
But the US can initiate the creation of C5 as a mechanism for American influence on the Global South and an instrument for containing China.
At the same time, the US is not bringing the EU into this project.
The fact is that both the US and China perceive the EU not as a partner but as an object of "skimming."
Europe still has a lot of accumulated capital.
Therefore, China wants to sell its goods in the EU while simultaneously achieving deindustrialization of the European economy.
And the US wants to sell its energy resources and weapons in the EU.
The US also offers Europe the option to buy security services.
But China will soon offer Europe to buy the same thing—security.
Mongol Empire 2.0 is being created for this purpose: to sell goods, ensuring domestic employment, and security services ("tributes" that the kings of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth paid to Tatar khans until the end of the 17th century).
That is, both the US and China will promise to protect Europe from Russia, and each side will name its price for this service.
At the same time, China will try to devalue US guarantees for Europe, and the US will do the same with China's guarantees.
For example, the US will offer Europe a new format of modus vivendi relations with Russia.
And China will offer its "security label" without a format of new relations with Russia in exchange for trade corridors and a market for Chinese goods.
That is, the US will try to impose on the EU a new format of relations with Russia to "ensure security," while China will act "more humanely," providing security to Europe without "communication" between the EU and Russia (which is entirely in Beijing's interests).
What can Europe counter this with?
Let's start with a continental security bloc and a "European army" of up to one million.
A new industrial policy.
New energy. For starters—Germany's return to nuclear power generation.
A new ideology of geopolitical "masculinity."
A new system of effective management of EU structures.
But none of this exists even "in draft form": no ideology, no new industrial policy, no pause in the green course, no "masculinity," no new management system.
That is, Europe will not be ready either in two years or in ten.
An honest dialogue between the EU and Ukraine could only be in the format: "Europe needs two years to form a European army; provide us these two years, and we, having created a continental security system, will then cover Ukraine with our shield, as you now cover Europe."
But, as you understand, there are no such approaches from the EU.
Europe's entire strategy is to wait out the current Republican ascendancy in the US and wait for Biden 2.0.
This is an extremely naive and immature approach. Therefore, the EU is "on the menu," not at the table.
All this will end with the EU simply "buying" security services from China or the US. Or from both China and the US.
Can you imagine how our politicians will have to change the geopolitical mainstream then?
And at what cost in sacrifices?
Although the fragmentation of NATO into several security sub-blocs is predetermined.
The US is forming four operational security zones: Indo-Pacific, Arctic, Middle Eastern, and European continental.
And the US will not increase its presence everywhere.
In some operational zones, America plans to earn quite well.
To then spend what it earned on the main direction for the next 30 years: the Indo-Pacific region.
