LUC MICHEL (ЛЮК МИШЕЛЬ) & EODE/
Luc MICHEL pour EODE/
Quotidien géopolitique – Geopolitical Daily/
2018 04 06/
“What might qualify in Germany or the United States as “political instability” would be seen as business as usual in the Balkans, where insecurity and political violence are all too common”
- George Friedman
(Geopolitical Futures, April 6).
"Being taught by the enemy is an honor and a duty"
- General Karl Hausofer (1869-1946),
the geopolitician of the "Continental Blocks".
I have dealt at length with the destruction of Yugoslavia (that of Tito and that of Milosevic), which led to the destabilization and collapse of the Balkans (1). Transformed into "soft belly" of Europe by American geostrategists. I came back to the worrying situation of this strategic region a few days ago, exposing the potential and real dangers of the Balkans for European security (including the jihadist "Balkans sleeping cells") (2).
Here is Georges Friedman (former boss of ‘Stratfor’ Think Tank) who studies the situation in the Balkans and the geopolitical balance of power for his 'Geopolitical Futures'. Recently I was confronted by an French analyst imbued with this "geopolitics of emotion" (which is anything but Geopolitics!) confused with his ideological reveries, who said "do not read Friedman". A position that is not a fault but a crime! Because it is this geopolitics "seen from the USA" (3), precisely, that dominates the evolution of these "great Balkans" (expanded in the US vision to Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, the Adriatic and the Apennines) …
“What might qualify in Germany or the United States as “political instability” would be seen as business as usual in the Balkans, where insecurity and political violence are all too common,” asks Friedman. But, and this is the view of the US and NATO, it is not the destabilization of the Balkans by the US and NATO that is responsible. But the arrival of new actors, Russia and Turkey (also a member of NATO): “The region’s historical obstacles might have been overcome if the West were still the primary outside power calling the shots. But the leverage the West has in the Balkans is not what it once was. Instead, a three-way competition between the West, Turkey and Russia is emerging.” Let's read Friedman …
* RÉSUMÉ FRANÇAIS :
RETOUR AUX BALKANS. LA SITUATION GEOPOLITIQUE (VUE DES USA)…
J’ai longuement traité la destruction de la Yougoslavie (celle de Tito et celle de Milosevic), qui a conduit à la déstabilisation et à l’éclatement des Balkans (1). Transformés en « ventre mou » de l’Europe par les géostratèges américains. Je suis encore revenu sur la situation inquiétante de cette région stratégique il y a quelques jours, exposant les dangers potentiels et réels des Balkans pour la sécurité européenne (notamment les « cellules dormantes des Balkans » djihadistes) (2).
Voici Georges Friedman (ex patron dThink Tank ‘Stratfor’) qui étudie la situation dans les Balkans et les rapports de force géopolitiques pour son ‘Geopolitical Futures’. Récemment j’étais confronté à un analyste français empreint de cette « géopolitique de l’émotion » (qui est tout sauf de la Géopolitique) confondue avec ses rêveries idéologiques, qui affirmait « qu’il ne faut pas lire Friedman ». Une position qui n’est pas une faute mais un crime ! Car c’est cette géopolitique « vue des USA » (3), précisément, qui domine l’évolution de ces « grands Balkans » (élargis dans la vision US à la Grèce, à la Roumanie, à la Bulgarie, à l’Adriatique et aux Appenins) …
"Ce qui pourrait être qualifié en Allemagne ou aux Etats-Unis d '" instabilité politique "serait considéré comme normal dans les Balkans, où l'insécurité et la violence politique sont trop fréquentes", interroge Friedman. Mais, et c’est le point de vue des USA et de l’OTAN, ce n’est pas la déstabilisation des Balkans par les USA et l’OTAN qui est responsable. Mais l’arrivée de nouveaux acteurs, la Russie et la Turquie (elle aussi membre de l’OTAN) : « Les obstacles historiques de la région auraient pu être surmontés si l'Occident était encore la principale puissance extérieure qui criait ‘halte au feu’. Mais l'influence de l'Occident dans les Balkans n'est pas ce qu'elle était autrefois. Au lieu de cela, une concurrence à trois entre l'Occident, la Turquie et la Russie émerge ». Lisons Friedman …
“MAKING SENSE OF THE BALKANS”
(GEORGE FRIEDMAN, GEOPOLITICAL FUTURES,
APRIL 6, 2018)
“What might qualify in Germany or the United States as “political instability” would be seen as business as usual in the Balkans, where insecurity and political violence are all too common. Consider the following two examples. In Montenegro, NATO’s newest member, two car bombs exploded in the past seven days and a major protest against violence is being planned by a Western-funded nongovernmental organization for the weekend. In Kosovo, just days after Kosovar forces arrested and deported a Serbian government official, the prime minister fired his interior minister and his intelligence chief for deporting six Turks accused of being involved in the Gulenist movement, which Turkey blames for the 2016 attempted coup, without his approval. (The Kosovar president has refused to accept the dismissal of the intelligence chief, and he remains in his post.) In other parts of the world, events like these might attract attention. But in the Balkans, they barely raise eyebrows.
The region’s historical obstacles might have been overcome if the West were still the primary outside power calling the shots. But the leverage the West has in the Balkans is not what it once was. Instead, a three-way competition between the West, Turkey and Russia is emerging.”
“The West realizes this and has tried to respond. NATO has admitted Montenegro as a member and wants to do the same with Macedonia as soon as possible. As part of a Western effort to isolate Russia after the alleged spy poisoning in the U.K., a number of Balkan states chose to expel Russian diplomats. But efforts such as these might well be too little, too late. The EU cannot promise the same kind of prosperity it was offering in the early 2000s, and Russia has already shown what a U.S. security guarantee is worth.
Turkey is also a key NATO country, but it has a different agenda in the region, rooted both in its imperatives and its history as a great power in southern Europe. It is not powerful enough yet to assert itself in the Balkans and has bigger problems right now in Syria. Still, Turkey is slowly building political and economic influence in the region. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan felt sufficiently comfortable with Turkey’s position to condemn Kosovo’s prime minister for firing his interior minister.
Russia’s position in the region is stronger. It maintains a close working relationship with Serbia and with Republika Srpska, a predominantly Serbian enclave in Bosnia that is increasingly acting like an independent entity. Serbia has flirted with the West but cannot tolerate Kosovo’s independence, and Russia’s need to maintain Serbia as an ally has become even more serious as the Intermarium countries become more united against Moscow.”
“The Balkans isn’t on the verge of chaos. But developments in this part of the world have to be understood differently now in the context of a discredited EU, a weak and desperate Russia, and an ambitious but uncertain Turkey. Political violence in Montenegro, the lack of progress in Serbia-Kosovo relations, Serbian riots in Kosovo, name changes and other intrigue in Macedonia, the deterioration of Bosnia’s tenuous political structure and biker gangs running amok are all par for the course in the Balkans. But what is par for the course in the Balkans can have ramifications for the world simply by virtue of the Balkans’ geography and history. World War I started in the Balkans. That is not to say World War III will start there – it is merely to say that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, and as the strategic context around the Balkans changes, so too will the Balkans.”
(The post “Making Sense of the Balkans” appeared first on ‘Geopolitical Futures’)
(1) See (in French) LUC MICHEL’S GEOPOLITICAL DAILY/
ANALYSE COMPLETE DES ‘GUERRES DE YOUGOSLAVIE’ ET DE LA DESTRUCTION DES IIe ET IIIe FEDERATIONS YOUGOSLAVES PAR LE BLOC AMERICANO OCCIDENTAL
And : RETOUR SUR LA DESTRUCTION DE LA YOUGOSLAVIE …
(2) See (in French) LUC MICHEL’S GEOPOLITICAL DAILY/
DES GUERRES DE YOUGOSLAVIE AU BOMBARDEMENT DE BELGRADE PAR L’OTAN : COMMENT LES BALKANS SONT DEVENUS LE VENTRE MOU DE L’EUROPE ET LA PROCHAINE MENACE DJIHADISTE ?
See also : LUC MICHEL’S GEOPOLITICAL DAILY/
‘BALKANS ON THE BRINK’: A CENTURY AFTER AUGUST 1914 THE GREATER BALKANS ARE ALWAYS THE POWDER OF EUROPE
(3) See (in French), Luc MICHEL on EODE THINK TANK /
LA GEOPOLITIQUE VUE DES USA : LES ANALYSES GEOPOLITIQUES ET GEOSTRATEGIQUES DE “STRATFOR INTELLIGENCE” SUR EODE
in English: Luc MICHEL, EODE THINK TANK /
GEOPOLITICS SEEN FROM THE US: THE GEOPOLITICAL AND GEOSTRATEGIC ANALYSES OF « STRATFOR INTELLIGENCE » ON EODE
LUC MICHEL (ЛЮК МИШЕЛЬ) & EODE
* With the Geopolitician of the Eurasia-Africa Axis:
Geopolitics – Geoeconomics – Geoidology – Geohistory –
Geopolitisms - Neoeurasism – Neopanafricanism
(Seen from Moscow and Malabo):
SPECIAL PAGE Luc MICHEL’s Geopolitical Daily
* Luc MICHEL (Люк МИШЕЛЬ) :
PAGE OFFICIELLE III – GEOPOLITIQUE
* EODE :