Mr. S.D. sent this article, and in the light of what we have been talking about here during the past few weeks, it's an article worth pondering.
Let's recall some basic contexts. First, American bullying and blustering has managed to insert itself most recently into the Ukraine, where this nation backed a coup led by essentially a Neo-Nazi element left over from World War II, but even prior to this, the formation of the BRICSA entente was well underway as a counterpoise to American unipolar hegemonism. The Ukraine has simply functioned as a catalyst to increase the process of geopolitical reaction. While the consequences have not yet hit more long-term and traditional allies in Europe(Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Spain, etc), nor in the Pacific, we have recounted on this site the growing ambiguity of signals coming from Europe and Germany in particular. The discontent with America's bullying unipolarism(and there's no other way to qualify it) has, however, summoned re-evaluations from a former Australian Prime Minister(Rt. Hon Malcolm Fraser), and discontent in growing in the Philippines, an American satrapy for over a century.
Secondly, this attitude has conjured yet another response: it has pushed the BRICSA nations individually and collectively to hasten the process of their bi-lateral currency and trade agreements, by-passing the dollar, but more importantly, it has highlighted the relevance of the control of space hardware assets to the maintenance of reserve currency status in the modern world. Contrary to many financial analysts, I've taken the definite "minority report" position that the dollar's reserve currency status is not under immediate pressure so long as American dominance in space matters continues. The importance of electronic clearing has been brought home to Russia, where moves are already under way to establish a domestic clearing system free of Visa/Mastercard, and hence free of London and New York. This, as readers here will recall, I have maintained is a first step for the BRICSA nations to establish their own mechanisms of independent international clearing, a move related to their establishment of development banks to compete with the World Bank and IMF.
But central to all of this is, of course, space. Regular readers here will also recall that my basic hypothesis of the post-war financial system is that (1) a vast hidden system of finance was established based on Axis loot, which was moved into the western system covertly, and thus (2) the participation of certain large prime banks in the West was required, and (3) that the center of coordination of this system was not the banks or central banks but the intelligence-national security establishments of the West and of the USA in particular. Essentially, a hidden mercantilist-fascist system was established to combat international Communism, and to provide the money needed for the decades' long programs of the development of sophisticated (space) technologies. Within this model, I have argued that the model used to entice the banks into participation in this scheme was an essentially "Venetian" one, where space itself, and whatever might be found in it, was collateralized and securitized long before actual commercial exploitation was technologically viable.
In that context, we have recounted in several blogs on this site the now public discussions of celestial mining, mining of asteroid, mining of the Moon and other bodies, are now being openly discussed and the meme appears to be quietly pushed.
And in that final context, Russia cannot be expected to sit back and not be a part of the competition, and hence, we have this interesting announcement that "unipolarism" may be challenged in space as well:
it is significant that this announcement comes more or less in the same time frame as other recent space news, including the Vatican-ET conferences, the remarks of former President Bill Clinton, and NASA chief Bolden's remarks about a manned mission to Mars by 2030. Of course, as is evident, we are still dealing here with chemical rockets, not with any potential hidden technologies that may exist, and that probably do exist in the inventories of both the USA and of Russia(recall those oft-discussed ion propulsion drives, or the recent stories from Russia about a kind of "gravity pulse" weapon... or NASA/DARPA's announcements and explorations of "warp drive.")
So why the emphasis on chemical rockets and a possible renewed "space race," this time to Mars? One high octane speculative possibility is that a public race may serve, as I and others believe it did in the 1960s, to mask the development and deployment of more hidden technologies, as well as to provide an excuse for more massive public funding of space programs and competition. As competition was the vehicle driving so much back then, perhaps an orchestrated competition is what is needed again, rather than the chaos that has resulted from unipolarism. It's very difficult to ratchet up public support for mass space expenditures (and militarization) if there's no credible space threat, and given all the complications surrounding the issue of ET and disclosure, perhaps the next best thing - Russia - is what is needed.
Time will tell whether we're in the beginnings of another Cold War with its associated space race. This time around, it will be very different if we are, for the competition now includes not only Russia, but China, and "friendly" competitors such as Europe, Japan, India, and Brazil.
See you on the flip side.