Why is AUKUS a project of the British elites?

МОСКВА, 24 сентября 2021, Институт РУССТРАТ. Like a lightning bolt that tore apart the information, political, and especially diplomatic space, this new military association - AUKUS – appeared before us. At its joint "presentation" and in subsequent press releases, it was stated about the dominant role of America and President Biden personally in its formation. The painstaking work that he personally carried out undoubtedly resulted in a total of many hours of telephone conversations with the leaders of the two other countries. It is clear that it's like that that the main milestones and the design of such a union had to be worked out, which then became overgrown with the intensive work of expert groups. But without personal contacts of the leaders, dense and frequent for such a question and outlining the negotiation channels, within which the advisers then move, nothing will budge anywhere. Oh yes, so "dense and frequent" that the American president congratulated "that fellow down under" (apparently, at the bottom of the map) on what happened, without remembering his name. Such is the "American leadership" and Biden's personal "participation". In addition, if an "exceptional nation" takes on something, then there is no false modesty and other nonsense. They look at the world straightforwardly, through their "number one on the planet" prism. But where is America in the name of this association? Why is it lagging at the end? For English speakers, such an abbreviation still sounds like gibberish, as Biden himself noted at this "presentation". It's all the same for them, be it "AUKUS", "USAUK", or "USUKA" (the latter is somewhat ironic only for the Russian ear). But in the centre of all this construction, we see the "modest" UK as the middle core. Those who created all this carefully gave the first place to Australia, which was already thoroughly cajoled with high-tech buns. Of course, all these moments can be attributed to the category of jokes. But a joke was made and that's enough. While we will continue further to string all sorts of signs and markers, both more remote and more explicit, as well as the involved facts, on the logic of the process which is being analysed. The fact is that by the time of Brexit, Britain was engaged in a serious re-equipping of its fleet. But not only at home. The specifics of such a thing are not very fast, in some segments it is measured by decades. Judging by the fact that we could observe some "shoots" immediately after the break with Europe, and London intends to complete everything in the thirties – both Brexit and the new neo-imperial concept were planned for a very long time. After all, the search for one's own geopolitical project and the creation of one's own planetary pole of power, strictly requires supporting it by the necessary "number of divisions", and for a naval power – the necessary number of "gunboats". “Small Brits" cannot have enough resources to pull such a process alone. Here it is necessary to involve the entire "Commonwealth", the core of which is the British monarchy. Or, rather, not what is on paper, but what really remains from such an association. Because it is no longer possible to fully rely on India or Pakistan. Russia dragged them to another geopolitical project, to continental Eurasia, and consolidated this within the SCO. Of course, the tug-of-war is still going on, and the British elites, among other ones, are doing everything possible to prevent such a vector, especially with regard to India. They do everything to seduce India, either offering it a place in the so-far ephemeral D10 (Democratic Ten), which according to their wishes should appear instead of the G7 (Big Seven), then they drag it along with the United States into a very flimsy QUAD design, a kind of "Asian NATO" - a "Quadrilateral Security Dialogue" in which the United States, Japan, Australia and India participate. But I am sure that all such attempts to tear this civilisation away from the mainland integration project are doomed to failure. It has long been impossible to rely on the ruined South Africa, lost as part of the British-American squabble, when searching for neo-imperial ways and building a fleet. As, indeed, for many other African members of the Commonwealth. The former Dominions remain. In all the main fleets with the prefix Royal, one can notice such a re-equipping and build-up of combat capability. Moreover, for both the Royal Canadian Navy and the Royal Australian Navy, this was clearly excessive. For their geopolitical influence and weight, for the protection of the adjacent sea areas, the former vessels, their number and combat characteristics were enough. But immediately after Brexit, starting from 2017, three Hobart-type attack destroyers that can carry Tomahawk cruise missiles on board were being introduced into the Royal Australian Navy. Australia has never had such powerful attack ships before. If we look at the re-equipping program of the Royal Canadian Navy adopted in 2018, we will generally see the planned commissioning of 15 new frigates, which are approaching the new Australian Hobarts in terms of combat characteristics. Such a number and strike capabilities in this class are already close to the figure that Britain itself plans to re-equip its fleet. This is how the prefix "Royal" promotes actions far from its own shores and puts a certain burden on the pocket of taxpayers, not only in Britain itself. Further. The French submarines, which were supposed to be delivered under the now-disrupted contract with Naval Group, also had a more defensive character in terms of their technical characteristics (tactical-technical characteristics). They were significantly inferior to the speed of travel - a parameter necessary for long-range strike operations, but not playing such a role in patrolling their own waters. Due to a different principle of operation of the power plant, they were characterised by greater secrecy, that is, less possibility of detection, so necessary for a covert patrol. On the proposed newly created apparatus, this parameter is somewhat sacrificed for the sake of speed and autonomy, that is, for greater territorial coverage. Britain has been preparing for the neo-imperial project for a long time, it has been focusing for a long time – and now an opportunity has turned up to make such a distribution. All the media and visible fuss here is mainly around these boats, and replacing them with more powerful ones to solve the tasks of the entire "united royal navy" is another of the central markers – who started all this hidden underhand fuss. In general, only these old "grifters" with centuries of experience could so cunningly and competently "hand out an earring" to everyone and take the former, but still strong hegemon against China as "special" military allies. This is not an American handwriting. The French boats were to be delivered under a contract signed in 2016. Some five years ago, Uncle Sam was still outwardly strong and drove at full speed inside NATO. Exactly a year before, in 2015, the Americans pushed the French to refuse to supply Russia with Mistrals, even despite the reputational and financial losses that they had to suffer. But what did they offer in return? I am convinced that in return, the same contract for several tens of billions was immediately drawn up, ready to load their military shipbuilding for decades to come. Otherwise, it's impossible to explain the French screaming and wailing "about a stab in the back" in another way. Yes, they lost a contract that was already in their hands, moreover - it was a huge contract. But with a simple loss, even a multibillion-dollar one, generally people don't yell like that. Here came an avalanche of reputational losses and failures, Switzerland immediately announced the termination of the contract for the supply of Rafale fighters from France in favour of the American F-35, there are figures up to ten billion – and what? No one really wrings their hands and groans. Yes, there is a certain cooling in the relationship, but no more. And no one is accusing the Americans of anything here, although the contract has gone to them. It is clearly something else, something more – a violation of certain deep agreements. That's why one should recall the ambassador from a country that does not owe one anything under the terminated contract? Has nothing to do with it? But, apparently, it does. And it is unlikely that America itself initiated this, but clearly followed the lead of the iron-built arguments and thin web of intrigues of the British. In general, it remains to sincerely admire the British as rivals! To shake everyone down in a hidden way and to stay away from it - that's huge. Even the French recalled the ambassadors only from the United States and Australia, limiting themselves to the "old opportunists" on duty in the direction of Britain. However, in Western diplomatic slang, this has a much more abusive meaning than in Russian, and means "old girls of questionable behaviour". All countries in the new configuration are satisfied. Australia, which receives new technologies and other buns, as it stands "at the head" (in the title) of the newly formed union, is happy. Here it’s possible to also go for billion-dollar penalties. Of course, in the economic sphere, due to getting involved in the logic of confrontation with the Middle Kingdom, there are certain losses. But the economy, and the military and neo-imperial component for the former Dominion, as it turns out, is sacred. The British are able to convince and draw projects for a bright future. The Australians themselves would not have gone for such a thing, the former government especially resisted, but the British elites pushed this state of affairs and now the Royal prefix obliges them to do more and more. Among the former Dominions, although going in the general wake of a single military re-equipping, there are still "free-thinking" governments. An indirect sign is the rejection of the Chinese 5G, which neither New Zealand nor Canada and Trudeau went to. So they are not in the newly appeared AUKUS. But we have not the slightest doubt that as soon as the temperature rises somewhere and everything reaches a real military intensity, then these people will be involved anyway. America is also happy with the new union. Of course, such a contract of the century was redirected to them! True, "it didn't work out well with France”, but only a lazy person doesn't ditch and kick it in all parts of the world now. And one never knows what Obama promised one there, already two political cycles ago – now times are different. Now, in the rolling "Great Depression 2.0" somewhere here and there, in other places, not much, but surely, life will glow. The scanty chances of somehow overwintering, locally, increase slightly. Plus, in the rapidly developing confrontation with China, new real allies are emerging. Plus, they were given to try on the worn and leaky hegemon's outfit again, which is increasingly beginning to resemble a buffoon's one. But how much political pathos, how many virtual points: we initiated, we united, we still rule. And Biden is like this in the middle: "And who is this guy with whom I have been tirelessly negotiating for the last few months?". Only France will be hysterical, but Europe will think about it. Well, Macron stated "brain death in NATO", so he observes it firsthand, having fallen under the category of a defibrillator. As RUSSTRAT recently warned in its studies (1, 2) on the British neo-imperial line, the contradictions between the European axis and London will only grow. Obviously, this is all to our advantage. What was it like in the famous dialogue between Vladimir Vladimirovich and Macron at the SPIEF in 18? "Emmanuel said that Europe and the United States have mutual obligations: Europe depends on the United States for security. But do not worry about this - we will help you. We will ensure security, " Vladimir Putin assured. "And, in any case, we will do everything that depends on us to ensure that there are no new threats." "I am absolutely not afraid: France has an army that can defend the country," Macron said proudly. "But we will not turn our backs anywhere," he also said. "Of course, there is no need to be afraid, but the practice is already accumulating," the Russian leader commented. European thoughtfulness does not extend much to Germany. For Uncle Sam’s "new best friend and ally", no one canceled the results of Mutter Merkel's shuttle diplomacy, no one took away the donated allotments. It was all more "about money", and the new alliances are about war and weapons. For Britain, with its search for a new place under the sun, the manoeuvres it has carried out are a set of priceless points. Its efforts aimed at both Eastern Europe and Turkey are being strengthened and made more significant. Its geopolitical weight is increasing everywhere. And China, which is at the forefront of this newly created military alliance, is, from the point of view of Britain, an enemy, especially for all its banking and financial elites. The Celestial Empire is creating its own economy, creating its own credit system, creating its own national and international banks that lend to Africa and then everywhere around the world. In coordination with Russia, payment systems are maturing, ready for articulation and a qualitative leap. China is a competitor of Britain as a financial centre. China's reaction to everything that is happening is curious. Look, exactly one day before the "presentation" of AUKUS, an interesting article was published in the international mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party - "Global Times". Such courage and self-confidence in the Chinese can rarely be observed, only if the battle bear is at the ready with allies behind him. It is openly stated there that China does not recognise any air borders for Taiwan, and therefore it can confidently dissect in its own airspace. And if an attack is carried out in the "sky of China" on its combat aircraft barraging over Taiwan, then the attackers will be scolded to the fullest extent! What to say here? First of all, the "Five Eyes" intelligence is, of course, good, but somehow we are doing a wonderful job with two. They knew about all these newfound unions, up to the exact date of the announcement, and went ahead of the curve, sending a sign that those to whom it is intended will understand. And secondly, the likelihood that RUSSTRAT predicted with a high degree of confidence, namely, the Chinese Crimea in the near historical perspective, is getting closer and closer, which will only strengthen our strategic interaction. We will root for our people, bring them cartridges and oil and gas. We have a large work front, we have it in the West, and our Chinese partners have it in the East and South.