THAT CHINESE DEVELOPMENT BANK THINGApril 11, 2015
On last Thursday's News and View from the Nefarium I talked about JP Morgan's electronic software surveillance scheme. But that's not the only thing the Nefarium is up to these days. The other thing, as many of you have pointed out in your emails, is that Chinese Asia development bank. And this time, the news is is so bad for Washington - at least in terms of its "traditional allies" - that one is almost inclined to disbelieve it. Indeed, it's so unusually bad that it was reported, with just the right amount of hidden current of gloating, by Russia's Sputnik magazine:
If this goes through, then Israel would joina growing list of US allies that appear to be jumping ship to join the AIIB:
As the second article points out, Washington exerted pressure - to no avail - on powerful European allies Britain and Germany not to join the bank:
"Australia, UK, Germany and other countries which stayed away after US expressed concerns over its transparency signed up to the Bank much to the chagrin of Washington."
Washington's concern over the AIIB's "transparency" seem oddly placed, given the situation at Washington-approved international development banks like the BIS, IMF, or World Bank, and given the New York Federal Reserve's reticence to repatriate the German gold (which, incidentally, you'll recall Germany now wants all of its gold back). Japan appears to be the shill of choice to express concerns of the AIIB, as the second article also points out:
"While Japan today declined to join the new Bank citing concerns over debt sustainability, environmental safeguards, US kept China guessing as Treasury Secretary Jack Lew who held talks with Chinese officials here yesterday promised American cooperation for the new Bank but no announcement has been made so far.
"Japan Finance Minister Taro Aso said that his country has concerns about governance at the AIIB, specially its debt sustainability, environmental and social safeguards.
"'Unless these conditions are secured, Japan has no choice but to be very cautious about joining,' Aso said.
"Japan, a dominant member of the Asia Development Bank, (ADB) sees AIIB as a competitor." (Emphasis added)
Japan citing concerns about "debt sustainability" while it has ratcheted up its own sovereign debt into the stratosphere is, again, of a piece with Washington's own concerns over its "transparency." Even more oddly, having failed to prevent the major European powers from joining the bank, it now appears to be ready to "cooperate" with it.
So what's going on? My high octane speculative intuition tells me that this is a multi-levelled game. At one level I strongly suspect that, at least for the European powers and particularly for Germany, the move to join the bank is a genuine reaction against growing US unipolarism, manifest most recently in the Ukrainian fiasco and the sanctions against Russia. Germany's difficulties repatriating its gold can only have added fuel to the fire, at least, behind closed doors. At another level I have also stated that I suspect that the European powers have suspected for some time that there is a hidden financial structure within the western system, designed to fund both covert operations and American secret black projects research and development. Germany in particular would have some historical knowledge of this since, as I have argued elsewhere, it was established in part with Axis loot kept off the books after the war. Thus, at this level, having one foot in the system that China is trying to build would be a means to leverage greater influence within the Western system and perhaps even to expose this system. The fact that Japan is not joining this effort may also have historical roots in the notorious Tanaka "57 bonds" affair, when the Japanese government itself issued fraudulent bonds on a hidden bonnd market(See my book Covert Wars and Breakaway Civilizations). At yet another level, however, that influence can work both ways, and countries like the United Kingdom (itself a thermonuclear power) and Germany (a de facto one) could connceivably be agents of influence for Washington in the Chinese bank. Washington appears to have accepted the inevitable, as the above quotation indicates, and is now seeking to "cooperate" with the Chinese, leaving the question open as to what the Chinese may have said privately to Washington to convince it to cooperate. Finally, at yet another level, one has the possibility that what is being erected is systemic redundancy, as suggested by former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Catherine Austin Fitts. And of course, this would also mean that these developments are yet other incremental steps toward the introduction of a global currency.
Time alone, of course, will give an indicator which of these scenarios, if any, are true. But the bottom line is that, for the moment, it is another blow to American economic and geopolitical unipolarism.
See you on the flip side...
(My thanks to Ms. M.W. for these articles and to all others who sent related stories)