Geopolitics

Illegal stuff has been happening on Telegram since forever.

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that I've discovered the true machinations behind the arrest. Just bouncing my ideas.

(archive link)

Yes they have to some great degree. Russia is not in danger of collapsing or being unable to trade but the difficulties are mounting as the Chinese continue to be averse to directly standing up to US sanctions.

This article is quite good and goes into a bit of the details but I'm not sure how I feel about the conclusion that all is alright and this is doomed not to succeed and that this is a sign of decline which the author hastily inserts at the end without any real supporting evidence compared to the rest of the article. It feels not exactly supported, like putting a rosy spin on bad news.

The resilience of the Russian economy in the face of harsh Western sanctions sent those cheering the rise of multipolarity into victory laps. And it has been a huge embarrassment to the West. But Russia’s burgeoning problem settling payments with China demonstrates that this resilience isn’t without setbacks.

This past June, the US Treasury put the local banks of countries that trade with Russia in the crosshairs for secondary sanctions. The legal foundation for measures against companies or individuals found trading with sanctioned entities was originally implemented back in December, but it was in June that Washington expanded this framework and sent strong signals that this time it was serious. These threats were felt particularly acutely in China, Russia’s largest trade partner.

What happened and when It started with the big state-owned Chinese banks, which began shying away from dealing with Russia at the beginning of the year. But there were always smaller, regional banks, which were seen as less exposed to the Western financial system, which would take their place. For a while, it seemed these banks would carry the day. But now even these institutions have followed suit.

By the summer, Chinese banks were rejecting and returning about 80% of Russian payments made in Chinese yuan, Kommersant reported in late July. An article in Izvestia from mid-August claimed that things were even worse: 98% of Chinese banks were refusing to take direct yuan payments from Russia.

The result has been delayed and disrupted payments for many Russian importers. A Reuters report from last week discusses how transactions with Russia are being shut down “en masse” and billions of yuan worth of payments are being held up, according to a government source.

“At that moment, all cross-border payments to China stopped. We found solutions, but it took about three weeks, which is a very long time, trade volumes fell drastically during that time,” the government source told Reuters.

[...]

Meanwhile, the tighter restrictions have led to a drying up of yuan liquidity in the Russian market. In other words, it has become harder and more expensive for Russian companies needing yuan to get ahold of the currency. Given how much of Russia’s trade now takes place in the Chinese currency, this is certainly an issue.

As a result of the squeeze, more and more firms are having to turn on a regular basis to a channel previously used as a last resort – expensive swaps with the Russian central bank (whereby entities post rubles as collateral in exchange for yuan). At the start of September, Russian banks raised a record 35 billion yuan through this facility, well up from the 20 billion daily average in August and 10 billion average in June. Essentially, the Bank of Russia is being forced to fill the gap left by Chinese private banks operating in Russia.

The Russian central bank will almost certainly have to play a larger role, and exporters will probably also step in to provide liquidity. But there is no quick and easy fix.

In making sense of these issues, first of all, it is important to note that this problem is well understood in Russia and is freely discussed, including at the highest levels of government and in the media. No façade is being erected; there is no attempt to suppress this story. It’s been on the front pages of the Russian financial press.

It also bears keeping in mind that Russia-China trade is not exactly collapsing. In fact, despite the problems, turnover actually grew overall by 1.6% in the first half of this year. More importantly, the experience of the last few years has shown that whatever headwinds emerge end up being a strong driver of change.

Central banks are proposed as a solution including CBDCs (central bank backed digital currencies) but the question then is would the US sanction central banks of partner countries like China and India?

In China's case without knowing more or being an expert in these financial systems I'm tempted to say yes because they have it out for China anyways and really want to create friction between China and Russia by forcing China to choose either the US or Russia and if they choose Russia they use that as evidence and ammo to ramp up decoupling and sanctions on China and if they choose the US then it weakens Russia to encourage a US push to finish them off before taking on China or at least they hope pushes Russia away from helping China when the US takes them on.

A good read on how Canada cultivated its "nice" image at first and how its ghoulishness has now inevitably bared its face.

(archive link)

I have excerpted some of the most interesting parts, to read the full article which is worthwhile please follow the link.

As allies continue to pressure Tehran, the Islamic Republic is wondering who will benefit from a possible war in the region

By Farhad Ibragimov – expert, lecturer at the Faculty of Economics of RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.

The assassination of Ismail Haniyeh [Hamas leadership and chief negotiator] in Tehran at the end of July has dramatically escalated the tension between Iran and Israel, which have been on the brink of a full-scale war for several decades.

In 2024, Iran faced a series of major challenges: a large terrorist attack in Kerman at the grave of General Qasem Soleimani; an attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus which killed 11 diplomats and two high-ranking Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) generals; the tragic deaths of President Ibrahim Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian in a helicopter crash; and finally, the assassination of the leader of the radical Hamas movement Ismail Haniyeh in the center of Tehran.

All of this forces Iran’s political leadership to take tougher and more radical measures in order to prove both to its own people and to the world that this is not the way to “talk” with Iran.

Apparently Iran is delaying taking any action and frustration is growing with its allies such as Hezbollah and other militias.

On the one hand, by its ominous silence, Iran has forced Israel to resort to extreme security measures and close its airspace. Tehran believes that the expectation of a response is also part of the punishment, because tension in Israel continues to rise.

On the other hand, the White House has reassured itself, insisting that through intermediaries, it has convinced Tehran to abandon the idea of attacking Israel. In its usual manner full of pathos, the Biden administration has declared that Iran would face serious consequences if it decided to strike Israel. In fact, Washington does not benefit from the escalation of the conflict – in light of the upcoming US elections, it does not want to give Donald Trump a chance to accuse the Democrats of having failed to prevent an attack on their main ally in the region. Therefore, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan are ready to negotiate with anyone, even Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in order to prevent a scenario that would be unfavorable for them.

But as we know this won't bring an end to the genocide in Gaza, the peace talks are a smoke-screen and short of the US somehow using leverage on isn'treali intelligence to force them to coup Netanyahu there will be no peace this year that involves good terms that Hamas finds acceptable and which give any breathing room to the Palestinian people.

A few days ago, the Kuwaiti edition of Al-Jarida reported that Iran’s relations with its allies have deteriorated because of Israel. The media notes that Tehran has provoked the anger of Hezbollah by saying that it’s necessary to be patient about avenging Israel for the murders of Ismail Haniyeh and Fuad Shukr – one of the senior military officials of Hezbollah. At a meeting of the representatives of pro-Iranian forces in Tehran, representatives of the IRGC demanded their allies demonstrate restraint regarding Israel – at least while negotiations on a ceasefire in Gaza are ongoing.

The disagreement turned into an argument, and some delegates allegedly left the meeting quite angry. The meeting was attended by representatives of Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Yemen’s Houthis (the Ansar Allah movement), and some smaller Iraqi groups.

Hezbollah believes that the only way to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza and peace in the entire region is to use force against Israel. They believe it is time to open all fronts, directly attack Israel and confront anyone who decides to defend it, including US troops and the Arab countries. Tehran’s allies speak in favor of large-scale and long-term military operations aimed at destroying Israeli infrastructure, security systems, military and economic facilities, as well as Israel’s civilian and residential areas. In their opinion, this will force Israelis to live in shelters for a long time, and they will experience the same challenges as the residents of Gaza.

Moreover, representatives of Hezbollah stated that the current situation cannot be ignored, and that they can independently decide to attack Israel without coordinating their actions with Iran. Hezbollah also said that after the Israeli attack on the southern suburbs of Beirut, it should attack Haifa and Tel Aviv. Moreover, Hezbollah is considering expanding the goals of its possible military operation and attacking other Israeli cities, even if this leads to casualties among civilians. Yemen’s Houthis supported Hezbollah’s position.

A source in the IRGC said that the Iranian side made it clear that such a scenario is quite risky and will only serve the interests of Israel.

He noted that the Iranians offered to negotiate with Israel on the principle of “an eye for an eye” – i.e., if one of the leaders of the Axis of Resistance is killed, an Israeli official must be killed in return. To this, Hamas representatives who were at the meeting in Tehran allegedly replied, “If Iran is ready to accept the consequences of the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in exchange for the murder of Haniyeh, then Hamas will support this policy, but if Iran’s goal is to kill lower-level figures, the movement will not agree with this.”

What does everyone think?

Should Iran continue avoiding escalation that may draw in the US?

Is this foolish and likely to embolden Netanyahu who after all is desperately trying to escalate in order to extend his own rule at home and avoid an election or consequences for his failure to get the hostages back that has made him unpopular even within the settler-colonial occupation?

Can a death blow be delivered to the occupation without Iran and other nations suffering serious devastation from US retaliation?

Australia's investment is a clear move to counter chinese influence in the pacific, and the choice to do so with a multinational police force of some sorts is definitely interesting, if nothing else, Remains to be seen if it will bear any fruits.

I’m curious what you all think about this. There are definitely some hot takes from this Chinese prof this guy is translating. The hottest take imo is that multipolarity is a worse system, on the balance. It’s also an interesting take that assassinations and hybrid warfare is more likely than nuclear war is more likely than mechanized war among superpowers.

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_iran_strategy.pdf