The New Great Game - Will US Hegemony Last Forever:

WakeUp

The original great game referred to a tussle between the old British and Russian empires with both powers vying for control and supremacy over central Asia from to early 1800s to the early 1900s. The phrase was coined by an English man of Irish descent named Arthur Conolly who worked for British intelligence at the time. The British feared Russian expansion into eastern Asia as they felt it threatened what was then one of the most important parts of their empire – India. Afghanistan and Persia were central to this too for various reasons. To cut a long story short this early period rivalry played out with each side controlling and influencing certain states and what not and it eventually shifted to encompass parts of the east China, Mongolia and Tibet. The Anglo-Russian agreement was signed in 1907 and this brought to an end the first round of the great game with both powers recognising shifting their focus and becoming concerned with the rise of Germany and her influence in the Middle East. Russia recognised British control of Afghanistan and the British gave guarantees that Afghanistan would not encroach on Russian territory. Persia was chopped up into three zones one Russian one British and one neutral separating the two of them.

The second phase of the great game between the two began after the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 and encompassed various moves and counter moves. World war 2 seen a short lived alignment of interests against the Germans. Once the war ended the Americans then entered the fray and a complete geopolitical realignment began to take shape leaving the world with two superpowers the US and Soviet Union which would lead into the cold war. The British began to disengage from Central Asia and the middle east a couple years after the end of WW2 and so began the decolonisation of the British empire. The cold war culminated in the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.
From that time onwards the term new great game began to emerge describing competition between western powers dominated by the US and Russia and China for control and influence in central Eurasia and the middle east. The competition isn’t about territory per se but about control of resources and access – oil, petrol, pipelines shipping lanes stuff like that. These are the prizes up for grabs.

What is happening now in Ukraine for example I believe is just another part of the new great game between the powers that be. The Russians and now the Chinese ever more so appear to be challenging and positioning themselves to challenge what has been for the past couple of decades US primacy. This can be seen in events taking place in eastern Europe, middle east, Asia pacific, Antarctica the big boys are making moves all over the shop. Empires come and go and nothing lasts forever will US hegemony survive in what is now viewed by many as multi-polar world? Or will they put all challengers down and continue for now and into the decades ahead as the sole superpower and the main shaper of destiny in so many ways down here on planet earth....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWBV2Mn7NyM

Concentration of production means>>>> Eurasian Balkans
Concentration of energy resources>>> Central zone global instability
Strategic maritime area>>> New global pivot
Strategic mountainous area>>> Pentagon five seas region
Nuclear power>>> Potential maritime barrier
_______________________________________________________





________________________________________________________





_____________________________________________________________

Iwasfrozen

Will US Hegemony Last Forever, certainly not forever but US hegemony will last for the foreseeable future in my opinion.

George Friedman's book "The next 100 years" is a very interesting read if you're interested in the potential future of geopolitics. So far with regards to Russia George seems to be quite accurate. Though I think he underestimates islamic fundamentalists. Summed up on wikipedia:

Second Cold War

In the 2010s, the conflict between the US and Islamic fundamentalists will die down, and a second Cold War, less extensive and shorter than the first, will take place between the United States and Russia. It will be characterized by Russian attempts to expand its sphere of influence into Central and Eastern Europe, coupled with a buildup of Russian military capabilities. During this period, Russia's military will pose a regional challenge to the United States. The United States will become a close ally to some Central and Eastern European countries, all of whom will be dedicated to resisting Russian geopolitical threats during this period. Friedman speculates in the book that the United States will probably become a close ally of some Eastern European countries: Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania. Around 2015, a Polish-led military alliance of countries in Eastern Europe will begin to form, which is referred to in the book as the "Polish Bloc."

Russian and Chinese fragmentation

In the early 2020s, the new Cold War will end when the economic strain and political pressure on Russia, coupled with Russia's declining population, and poor infrastructure, cause the Federal government of Russia to completely collapse, much like the Dissolution of the Soviet Union. Other former Soviet Union countries will fragment as well.

Around this time, China will politically and culturally fragment as well. The book asserts that the rapid economic development of China since 1980 will cause internal pressures and inequalities in Chinese society. Regional tension in China will grow between the prosperous coastal regions and the impoverished interior. The end result will be regional fragmentation of the country. Although China will remain formally united, the central government will gradually lose much of its real power, with the provinces becoming increasingly autonomous.

In the 2020s, the collapse of the Russian government and the fragmentation of China will leave Eurasia in general chaos. Other powers will then move in to annex or establish spheres of influence in the area, and in many cases, regional leaders will secede. In Russia, Chechnya and other Muslim regions, as well as the Pacific Far East will become independent, Finland will annex Karelia, Romania will annex Moldova, Tibet will gain independence with help from India, Taiwan will extend its influence into China, while the United States, European powers, and Japan will re-create regional spheres of influence in China.

nokia69

as much as the US would like it to happen Russia won't collapse anytime soon

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Though I think he underestimates islamic fundamentalists. Summed up on wikipedia:

I think the middle east is only going to get worse, its only a matter of time before the saudis are removed and replaced by an ISIS type regime, sooner the better IMO

Iwasfrozen

nokia69 wrote: »

I think the middle east is only going to get worse, its only a matter of time before the saudis are removed and replaced by an ISIS type regime, sooner the better IMO

Are you actually serious? As bad as the Saudi's are, ISIS are many factors worse. I would post pictures to illustrate my point but I'd only get banned.

nokia69

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Are you actually serious? As bad as the Saudi's are, ISIS are many factors worse. I would post pictures to illustrate my point but I'd only get banned.

it going to happen at some stage anyway, as it stands now the saudis are allowed to spend billions building mosques all over the west, which is pushing the most vile version of islam, and we let them do it because they own western politicians

I can see very little difference between the saudis and ISIS, most islamic terrorism has its roots in saudi arabia, once ISIS are running the place something might be done to stop it

WakeUp

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Will US Hegemony Last Forever, certainly not forever but US hegemony will last for the foreseeable future in my opinion.

George Friedman's book "The next 100 years" is a very interesting read if you're interested in the potential future of geopolitics. So far with regards to Russia George seems to be quite accurate. Though I think he underestimates islamic fundamentalists. Summed up on wikipedia:

I havent read his book but will make a point of doing so he does have some interesting opinions I just watched some of his videos on youtube in this one here he foretells of three great powers in the future - Japan, Turkey ( claims they have the best army in Europe though the vast majority of Turkey is in western Asia ) and Poland. Without getting into Poland Turkey is an interesting call considering the sultan of constantinoples overtones to the Russians and what that pipeline will mean to them should it come to fruition a future Ottoman empire take 2 maybe??.. and his turning a blind eye to jihadiland for his own national reasons ( Assad ). Finland annexing parts of Russia and Romania annexing Moldova not sure how that would pan out or if even doing so with a weakened Russia is a smart thing to do I find that a bit far fetched myself to be honest and then Taiwan extending into China. Ill read his book though when I get a chance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpAkT5YnpEA

nokia69

I don't see Turkey becoming a great power, they don't have the natural resources and they are at risk of losing the Kurdish parts of the country

I don't see how anyone would want to annex parts of Russia, it would be a foolish move

Iwasfrozen

WakeUp wrote: »

I havent read his book but will make a point of doing so he does have some interesting opinions I just watched some of his videos on youtube in this one here he foretells of three great powers in the future - Japan, Turkey ( claims they have the best army in Europe though the vast majority of Turkey is in western Asia ) and Poland. Without getting into Poland Turkey is an interesting call considering the sultan of constantinoples overtones to the Russians and what that pipeline will mean to them should it come to fruition a future Ottoman empire take 2 maybe??.. and his turning a blind eye to jihadiland for his own national reasons ( Assad ). Finland annexing parts of Russia and Romania annexing Moldova not sure how that would pan out or if even doing so with a weakened Russia is a smart thing to do I find that a bit far fetched myself to be honest and then Taiwan extending into China. Ill read his book though when I get a chance.

With regards to Russia George is trying to emphasise he believes a falling population, poor (and degrading) infrastructure, increasing dependence on exports, rising nationalism amongst the various ethnicities present in Russia and the continued enmity of the United States with the political isolation inherent in that stance will cause Russia to fragment. Other countries wouldn't be annexing parts of Russia per say because Russia as we know it wouldn't exist at that stage.

nokia69 wrote: »

I don't see Turkey becoming a great power, they don't have the natural resources and they are at risk of losing the Kurdish parts of the country
I don't see how anyone would want to annex parts of Russia, it would be a foolish move

Turkey are already a great power, they have the strongest military in Europe apart from maybe the British. They have huge sway in the Muslim world and they have the capability if they desired to block access to the Suez canal or Bosphorus.

nokia69

I disagree that Turkey has the strongest military in Europe, France and the UK have nukes and Germany could have them if they wanted

in any case what countries would Turkey want to invade, in the modern world invading other countries is a piss poor idea

WakeUp

nokia69 wrote: »

I don't see Turkey becoming a great power, they don't have the natural resources and they are at risk of losing the Kurdish parts of the country

The Ottomans certainly have potential and if the Russians build that pipeline and start shipping our ( EU ) gas to the Turks who will then ship it to us its going to transform them it really will. though in the wider scheme of things what does that mean for Russian/Turkish relations and Turkish/Western relations and Nato. questions that will eventually come up if physical work looks like beginning on the pipeline. and will Turkey be politically stable enough to attain such a status between the moderates and the conservatives.

_________________________________________________________

Turkey: Rising Power in the backyard of Europe

According to Alice Lyman Miller, Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School, the definition of a superpower is “a country which has the capacity to project dominating power and influence anywhere in the world, and sometimes, in more than one region of the globe at a time, and so may plausibly attain the status of global hegemony”. A superpower is not only militarily strong but also has a strong economy as well as is self sufficient and politically stable.

Turkey bridges Asia and Europe, geographically and culturally, and occupies a strategic geopolitical position on the world map. The land, which was once a hub of trade routes, is now a hub of strategic pipelines. It is the 17th largest economy in the world and, according to Goldman Sachs, it would be breaking into the elite club of top 10 economies by 2050. Turkey is the voice of modern Muslim world as well as a member of NATO. Hence, it is believed that the country can play a major role in initiating a peace process between the Middle East and West.

John Feffer, the co-director of Foreign Policy in Focus at the Institute for Policy Studies says, “All roads once led to Rome; today all pipelines seem to lead to Turkey. If superpower status followed the rules of real estate — location, location, location — then Turkey would already be near the top of the heap.”

http://www.theworldreporter.com/2012/04/turkey-rising-power-in-backyard-of.html

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

With regards to Russia George is trying to emphasise he believes a falling population, poor (and degrading) infrastructure, increasing dependence on exports, rising nationalism amongst the various ethnicities present in Russia and the continued enmity of the United States with the political isolation inherent in that stance will cause Russia to fragment. Other countries wouldn't be annexing parts of Russia per say because Russia as we know it wouldn't exist at that stage.

Ok I see what you are getting at here and all this could happen by the early 2020s so between six maybe ten/twelve years he is predicting the collapse of Russia?? or fragment into what?? Russia has a number of ethnic republics as it is and where if something like that was to happen it might possibly be plausible for ethnic republics with Russian minorities to maybe try and do their own thing. not so much though when Russians are in the majority like Karelia where he thinks the Finns might have a pop at.

nokia69

and tonight the saudi king has died

Hell is not hot enough, nor eternity long enough for that scumbag

and the great game continues

Manach

Interesting post from OP. The historical analysis is fairly close to the classic text "Great Game" by Peter Hopkirk. The ideologies of the players might change but not the essential flow of expansions and retrenchments on the playing board.

DarkyHughes

nokia69 wrote: »

it going to happen at some stage anyway, as it stands now the saudis are allowed to spend billions building mosques all over the west, which is pushing the most vile version of islam, and we let them do it because they own western politicians

I can see very little difference between the saudis and ISIS, most islamic terrorism has its roots in saudi arabia, once ISIS are running the place something might be done to stop it

As horrible as the Assad & Hussein regimes were they did provide some sort of stability in the region. The fall Baghdad was only the beginning soon after you had a bunch of different sectarian nutcase militia factions run around Iraq blowing **** up & mass shootings trying to impose their will on regions were they were strongest. The same happened in Syria when the US decided to back, arm & finance Syrian rebels (terrorists). Instead of arming the sectarian nutters why not try backing the pro-democracy factions instead. Not everybody who is left-wing is going to be a Marxist-leninist.

And the Palestine issue will have to be resolved if there is to be any peace in the Middle East. Either a Palestine state will have to be created which I'm skeptical will resolve the violence. I think a one state solution will be a better solution. Have one democratic state call it Palestine/Israel or Israel/Palestine or whatever were all the Jews, Muslims, Christians & dissenters live under the law as equal citizens, one man, one woman, one vote - it was good enough for South Africa & the North of Ireland why not Palestine?

DarkyHughes

nokia69 wrote: »

and tonight the saudi king has died

Hell is not hot enough, nor eternity long enough for that scumbag

and the great game continues

Greatest thing to happen to Arabia in a long time.

WakeUp

nokia69 wrote: »

and tonight the saudi king has died

Interesting times in the kingdom the only country on the planet named after the family that run the place proper dictators that lot could be a power struggle in the not too distant future. The line of succession isnt clear cut from what Ive read about the Salaman guy he isnt fit for purpose so maybe he will be in charge in title only and the new crown prince Muqrin who ran their intelligence apparatus for years will be calling the shots. when it looked like the Israelis might actually attack Iran the story gos there was a meeting between him and the head of mossad in Jordan were it was agreed in principal that he would push for Saudi airspace to be opened up to the Israelis if they decided to hit Iran not just threaten but do it, well maybe not open up more a case of turning their radar off for a while. A shia near takeover happening in Yemen at the moment and jihadiland being jihadiland the Saudis and whoever takes over have a number of things on their plate for sure.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqrin_bin_Abdulaziz_Al_Saud