I found a new job, by the way.
I had my second interview with Mr Wagner, my new boss, in his office this morning. He tested my skills on politics and he mentioned, among other things, China's evergrowing GDP.
I was puzzled with the information that soon enough China's GDP will exceed USA's.
And considering that China will be Russia's straight partner soon, and that Russia has a seemingly alliance with Iran (by means that Russia has apparently been trying to soothe the conflict), what's the feeling to the world to admit that the commercial Cold War happening nowadays IS NOT between USA and Russia, but bewteen USA and China?
I tempted and dared to assume that Donald Trump's continuous connections with Putin was to get unilateral support from Russia, when it comes to Trade (once a considerable amount of money traded by Russia is a result of the war in the Middle East, and if not distributed accordingly between the two countries struggling into Cold War (USA and China, and their Trade partners), there would be a massive demand of weapons to support an unlimited GDP, as China's. Weapons which have been produced and sold by the USA, would feed China's economy through Russia's future alliance with China. https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/future-china-russia-alliance/
As usual, competition is necessary, specially during Cold War. And the mediator is Russia, as we can see.
In this case, if the USA has a fair role in the play, the amount of weapons sent to the Middle East, would be produced only as half, because there is no reason for the U.S. to pay for two sides of a war, getting only oil in retribution. I mean: if the U.S. want to pay for the oil with weapons, those weapons are the ones sold to Russia in China's account. If the U.S. pays for both sides, that's unlimited as oil can't be. And if only China has profit over the weapons Traded in this war, that's unlimited too - for China's command.
If the U.S. has no participation into the demand of weapons, which they won't deliver - whereas signing other Trade Agreements instead - the oil they'll Trade would come from these productive Agreements.
And the ones who believe that the U.S. troops in the Middle East are a proof that they are selling their weapons to Russia, that's the opposite: THEY ARE FIGHTING TO HAVE THEIR PARTICIPATION INTO THE PROFITS OF THE WEAPONS THEY CREATE, WITHOUT HAVING TO SELL THEM (BY HAVING THE RIGHT NOT TO PRODUCE THEM. I am sorry to admit, it is similar to North Korea's argument. The difference is that USA is not demanding the usage of the weapons, and also the U.S. has much more technology and production capacity to embark a replacing Trade Agreement instead.
BRICS - with the help of Brazil (if we were balanced with our politics), could amend with Russia, and tilt the balance in favour of USA. But this is not a subject of U.S.' interest only: this is about the demand of production of weapons of massive destruction, considering that only China depends upon them to grow and grow (through Russia's cooperation due to the conflict in the Middle East)
http://tarafatosefilosofia.blogspot.com/2019/06/a-responsabilidade-brasileira-pelo.html
Att,
Thais Moraes
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário