Americans, including many of the intelligent and schooled, have little grasp of geography and, since geopolitics rests heavily on where places are, their understanding of events relies on moral fables of good and evil. They are thus subject to manipulation by the news media and unscrupulous politicians, which is to say almost any politicians.
Consider the war in Ukraine, routinely said to be consequent to Russia’s “unprovoked aggression” and supposed intention to conquer all of Europe. it isn’t.
Since 1991, NATO, which means Washington, has been encroaching on Russia’s borders in an obvious attempt at military encirclement. In that year, there were sixteen countries in NATO, but now there are thirty-two. In the north, lat via, Lithuania, and Estonia border on Russia, So do Norway and Finland, recently added to the alliance, and Sweden, also recently added, almost does. Littoral to the Black Sea, which NATO would like to control, are Romania, Bulgaria,, and turkey, all in NATO. On the eastern end Washington has long been trying to get Georgia, in the Caucasus, into the EU and NATO. This would leave the Ukraine, which borders on Russia, as the only non-NATO country with frontage on the Black Sea. The Crimea is a huge peninsula jutting into the Black Sea.
In 2014 a US-sponsored coup put a government friendly to Washington into power in Kiev with Ukraine’s membership in NATO visibly in the offing. This would shortly have led to American bases in Odessa and Sevastopol, US bases in the Crimea, and American nuclear-tipped missiles on the Russian border, eight minutes from Moscow. This is why Russia grabbed the Crimea. It would have been crazy not to
There are only two reasons for putting military forces on another country’s borders: to intimidate, or to attack.
Since a large majority of the American population probably don’t know where or what the Crimea and Caucus’s are, they can easily be told about Russia’s “unprovoked aggression.” Look at a map.
Now consider China, toward which Washington is engaging in actual unprovoked aggression. Key here is the First Island Chain running along China’s coast like a naval wall: Hokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyushu, Japanese and heavy with American military bases. Further south comes Okinawa in the Ryukyu’s, also Japanese and laden with American bases. Next Taiwan, being armed by the US preparatory, it appears, to being used as a second Ukraine. Then the Philippines,also being armed against China and, finally,Borneo.
A glance at a map makes the purpose clear: to bottle up the Chinese Navy and provide basing and launch sites against Chinese naval forces and the mainland. Again, there are only the two reasons for this, intimidation or war.
Note that the Chinese military, usually described as large and threatening, has very little capacity to project power remotely because it has no system of bases overseas and only one real aircraft carrier. Its submarine forces, heavy on diesel-electrics, are well-designed for local–i.e., anti- American–fighting but are nearly useless for remote patrols. They have many landing craft, but no way to employ them at any distance without air support. Their lack of apparent interest in acquiring geographically remote bases is not consistent with scare stories about dangerous aggressiveness. Again, check the map.
Now, trade routes. These are the new battlegrounds between the West and the rest of the world. Commerce moves largely by sea and must pass through oceanic choke points that the US Navy, the world’s largest blue water maritime force, can block at will: the Panama Canal, Gibraltar, the Suez Canal, Bab al Mandab, Hormuz, Malacca, and the Dardanelles.
For this reason countries of the Global South seek terrestrial replacements for maritime trade routes. china, which gets the bulk of its petroleum from the Persian gulf, has particular reason to worry about the Strait of Malacca.
For example today trade between India and Russia goes from India through Bab al Mandab into the Red Sea, through suez, and then through Gibraltar, all subject to naval blockade. Currently being developed, however, is the International North-South Transport Corridor, INSTC, WHICH runs from Mumbai on the west coast of India to Chabahar on the south coast of Iran and then either westerly to Azerbaijan and up to Russia or, potentially across the Caucasus and on to Europe, or easterly up to the Caspian Sea to Astrakhan in Russia. It will also allow trade between India and Central Asia. It is largely immune to the US fleet.
Another trade route of note is the rail route from China to Europe through Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, and Poland to Germany. Heavy trade and consequent good relations between Russia and Germany have long been a nightmare in Washington as someone might then ask, “Well,what is NATO for?” Answer: The alliance is America’s chief means of controlling Europe. Thus the American push to discourage use of this route, or for that matter any route from Russia to Europe, relying on the Ukrainian war as pretext.
Further, the Global South, meaning in large part China, is building railroads all through Asia. One such is the semi-high speed line from Yunnan IN China to Vientiane in Laos with connection with Nong Kai in Thailand in the expectation of extending down the Southeast Asian peninsula to Singapore. Many other rail lines exist or are being built in Central Asia, facilitating Asian trade and thus diluting American influence.
Yet another trade route independent of the US, under development by Russia and China, is the Northern Sea Route, going up the Pacific coast of Russia, across the Arctic, and down to the Atlantic. The route is within overlapping jurisdictions of many countries, including Russia, but is within range of Russian military forces. Like the INSTC it is shorter, cheaper, and faster than Suez. Washington is alarmed at the thought of trade it can’t control and has embarked on a crash program to get countries to build icebreakers for it. Russia has lots. The NSR is also why Washington wants Greenland, located to make blocking the NSR easy.
A trade route without an obviously happy future runs from Asia to Chancay on the Peruvian coast, where China has built a deep-water container port, highly automated in the usual Chinese manner. If allowed to survive, it will greatly increase Latin American trade with Asia. Washington is not happy with this. Previously much of such trade went across the Pacific to Long Beach or LA and was transferred to other ships to go to Latin America. Chancay cut America out. Washington is desperate to keep South America from becoming too prosperous, especially by trading with China as it would encourage independence.
Geography, geography, geography.
Just discussing NATO in the Ukraine today as usual your observations are spot on thanks for
To save other readers from having to look it up, as I freely admit I had to, Chancay is a northern suburb of Lima.
The problem is, the sheer capacity of a container ship cannot be equalled by the train service. We have looked at moving containers from China to our base in Austria, and it just does not work out by rail.
Good Geography Lesson Fred! Roger, most people in the US don’t know beans about geography and could care less. Our children are even worse in geography, mathematics, science and more. Some of us care. Moreover, you are dead on relative to the US maintaining the ability to block key areas and routes of the world. While we are no longer a country looking to expand our amount of Terra Ferma, other countries actively pursuing additions to their territorial boundaries e.g. Russia, China and probably some countries of the Middle East.
I understand the uncomfortable fencing in of Russia by NATO and I used to have some respect for Putin who would like to rebuild the old Soviet Union. China’s objective of growth escapes me except for Taiwan, perhaps the Philippines, the complete control of the South China Sea, most of the Pacific and probably more.
I was taught the theory of World Balance of Power at the US Navy War College years ago which basically means little to no aggression in the world, no wars and all neighbors live happily and prosperous with one another. War is caused when the Balance of Power is broken by some rogue state seeing an opportunity to aggress relative to weakness of defense of a neighbor. The balance of power is fragile.
Putin saw a chance with Biden to violate the Balance of World Power and seize the Ukraine as a defense against NATO. His thinking had credit, however; he underestimated the resilience of the people of Ukraine with his aggression morphing into the costliest endeavor in the waste of human lives since WW II. Putin is now a monster in my book that probably equals or exceeds that of Joseph Stalin. Yes, I do think he wants to rebuild the old Soviet Union but will be stopped.
Which bring us to the United States and Donald Trump. In my opinion, the US is not an aggressor nation but under Trump we have again assumed the role of “World’s Policeman” to maintain the Balance of Power in the world again to promote non-aggression and peace. We will do what we must to control the major choke points of the world to maintain peace. Thank God there is a World Policeman again.
After Trump….Katie bar the door.
–Jack B
“Putin is now a monster in my book that probably equals or exceeds that of Joseph Stalin.”
Mr. Bowers, certainly you were not serious when you wrote this?
Apparently they didn’t teach much Russian/Soviet history at the NWC years ago. And they might teach even less now.
Well thanks Ed, for reading my comments. I hope you understand the Balance of World Power. –JB
John Collins wrote a great book covering military geography at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. It is still available for purchase:
https://www.nebraskapress.unl.edu/potomac-books/9781574881806/military-geography/
Lots of figures and maps, and not very expensive if you shop around.
Thanks for a few rays of sanity.
Yes of course.
And yes – Ukraine is 3 wars in One.
Civil war: West Ukraine on E Ukraine, No winner feasible there, lose lose with Ukraine as a concept barely existing now.
Military Nato on Russia: Big big win for Russia.
Economic: US vs China/Germany/EU/all 3.
I know how US/UK persuaded the Nazi nationalists to fight the civil war.
I have no idea how US persuaded EU leaders to support the Nato war that could only be a loss.
The Economic war has been a big win for USA, but only in the context of one won battle to set against Thucydidean defeat by China.
map: https://vajiramandravi.com/current-affairs/international-north-south-transport-corridor-instc/
Thank you very much Fred. I knew the US snake was in the grass, but admittedly did not know how criminally and widespread it’s actions were.
Thanks again,
Mike
Fred: Happy to see someone pointing out how the Ukraine mess started with US politicians (McCain & Hillary) “encouraging” a Ukraine Civil War.
Just a bit of politics: the Cold War ended when the USSR collapsed while Bush ’41 was POTUS.
Since then, the three Democratic administrations did everything they could to re-start the Cold War. For example in the former Yugoslavia NATO supported Orthodox Serbia against various Islamic regions while BJ Clinton was POTUS.
Under Hussein Obama the above mention Ukraine Civil War started and Russia seized Crimea. Under Joe Biden, Russia invaded Ukraine. Yet somehow Trump is the bad guy because he dared to have some reasonable discussions with Putin.
A geography lesson for global politics. Fred’s correct, geography does dictate political positions, thus the name geopolitics. But it’s only one element, and if nations only focus on one element, either by necessity, experience or choice, it will be the rationale that drives policy. There are many other elements to consider: demography, resources, food, water, climate, energy, religion, past experience, greed, ideology…
When one nation rationalizes on one policy and other nations prioritize other element, there are natural, unavoidable, irrational conflicts. If one is going to play effectively in the global arena they best understand more than one element. Fred is right, most don’t understand geography, and I’ll add they don’t understand the other elements either. The US is consistent on seeing the world through our priorities. Other nations make the same mistake. So misunderstanding intentions, misjudging intent and actions, interpreting benign actions as malign easily lead to paranoia, tensions, crisis and unnecessary wars. Almost all wars. in fact I’ll leap to say all wars, are unnecessary.
https://fredoneverything.org/geography-and-the-underpinnings-of-confusion/
Fred, you seem to think that China’s incapacity to “project power remotely” the way it was done in WW2 means China has no ability to win a 21st century war.
Damn near everything electronic in the USA was built in China. Do you think they’re such fools that they would decide against putting remote access “back doors” in them?
Chinese are not fools. They’re still stinging from the “Great Humiliation” — in the 15th century they explored the world like everyone else in the 1400s; unlike everyone else, China decided the rest of the world was too barbaric to bother with. They cherished their sense of superiority until the rest of the world taught them otherwise.
We’ll know when China is damn good and ready to make its move: Every electrical substation and transformer in the Continental US will fry simultaneously.
I don’t know what happened to you, Fred. You didn’t use to be such an apologist for the left’s dumbassery.
“there are only the two reasons for this, intimidation or war”?
What about a third possibility: prevent Russian aggression and expansion.
NATO countries don’t threaten Russia.
Dear Mr. Reed:
I want to ask you 2 questions, both related to this article.
1. You once said:
There are 3 levels of military incompetence: Stupid, really stupid, and invading Russia.
I once discussed with a colleague, who has traveled in Europe more than me, how an invasion of Russia would go down. He warned me that Russia is considered neigh invincible in the military sphere and has resisted every invasion from every European power throughout history. I pointed out to him that the Mongolian Horde Empire managed to successfully conquer Russia and Ukraine in the late Middle Ages. He countered by arguing that Russia cannot be invaded from the West.
I thought about that debate in the last few years. I believe the real issue is that any army that desires to successfully conquer Russia must know how to deal with the Russian winter. France under Napoleon and Germany under Hitler didn’t know how to deal with the Russian winter. Neither does any European nation. Scandinavia and Denmark do have similar winters but they are naval powers. They are not equipped to conquer an expansive land mass.
The Mongols grew up in that environment. Whereas Napoleon’s horses froze during the trek to Moscow, the Mongolian steeds were trained to race on frozen lakes. I suspect that the Canadian military would have an easier time than the American Armed Forces in adjusting to the Russian climate.
Is this why Russia is so rightly feared by the other countries of Europe, in addition to their formidable military? What are your thoughts?
2. In the last 3 years, I discussed with family why Russia wants to invade Ukraine. Being the educated know-it-all, I gave the following reasons:
a. As you have just stated, Russia cannot afford to have a hostile government in Kiev. Ukraine is right on Russia’s doorstep. A military basis on it can be used as a launching point for an invasion of Russia that might be more effective than pass attempts.
Here are 3 more points you didn’t mention.
b. The Crimea is a warm water port. All of Russia’s other ports are facing the North Pole and are out of service for at least half of the year, when they are frozen in ice. The Black Sea ports of Ukraine might be difficult to use during one or two months in the winter but they are a life-line for Russia’s naval shipping. Russia needs unfettered access to these ports. This has been part of its foreign policy for at least 3 centuries.
c. Ukraine is the bread-basket of Eastern Europe. Its arable farm-land is needed to feed the Russia population.
d. Ukraine has natural gas.
Am I correct in my reading of military history? Are there any other reasons why Russia thinks it needs to control Ukraine?
Russia has always thought that any bordering nation is a threat. They have to take it over for their own security.
The nations bordering the threat they just took over become the new threat, which, for their own security…
Russia didn’t need to control Ukraine before the US et al stepped in to threaten Russia (from the 1940s too) Russia did not want Donbas etc. and was OK for Ukraine to be in the EU but the US didn’t want to grant that peaceable position.
Anybody silly enough to buy what Otto is selling needs to look up “Holodomor”
Otto knows about it already. Don’t you, comrade.
The US imposed a Naval Blockade on Iran in 1980, a Blockade that lasted 41 years. I used to read every year in the newspaper that the US Navy had stopped, seized, and sold (with all the money going to the US government) an oil tanker trying to buy Iranian oil and take it to the buyer.
Then, the PRC Navy made sure that PRC ships could make it to Iran, fill up with all the Iranian oil available, and sail safely back to the PRC.
WTF is going on with you, Fred? You are spouting Putin’s propaganda almost verbatim. You evidently know a lot about Mexico, but less than zilch about eastern Europe.
Which is where I live.
First up, NATO is a defensive alliance. It is not planning any invasions in Europe. Indeed, given the military state of Europe as a whole, who could it? And given that eastern Europe got really badly messed up around 80 years, it was so bad that nobody wants a repeat.
And that includes the Ukrainians, but they got a repeat, courtesy of the Poison Dwarf in the Kremlin.
“In 2014 a US-sponsored coup put a government friendly to Washington into power in Kiev with Ukraine’s membership in NATO visibly in the offing. ”
Well, fuck me, that is a novel take on the situation. The USA has fuck all to do with the ousting of the pro-Russian oligarch, it was, of all things, a people’s revolution. Just find some proof that the USA was involved. One reason it was not; such interventions usually backfire. badly.
And NATO membership was NOT in the offing. The Ukraine applied in 2007, and was declined on the grounds that it would provoke Russia.
Why did the former Russian satellites join NATO as soon as they could? Because they did not want to be under Russia’s thumb ever again. Look at the history of the occupation period. Ask people who experienced it what it was like. It was not … good.
The Ukraine cannot join NATO now because a war is on. But it will join as soon as it can, to prevent a future repeat of the quaintly named SMO. I seriously question your assumption that NATO membership means US bases on the borders of Russia. Even the countries that have the least love for Russia, such as Poland, do not have US bases. At the moment, they do have visiting US forces. Why? Look at my previous paragraph.
As for the PRC, I dunno, but they seem to be upping their military capabilities remarkably fast. Why do they need to?
David – I am somewhat dismayed at Freds support for these Soviet Nations. Ostensibly, it is because he does not want the USA sticking its nose into other nations business. It seems like these Communist nations seems to have his support.
I don’t like the USA being the Worlds policeman, what I like less is the USA going to war, then screwing it up, then leaving things worse than before.
There are only two reasons for putting military forces on another country’s borders: to intimidate, or to attack.
Or to guard against invasion…
All excellent points, Fred. But, the present administration is rightfully questioning whether we should be part of the NATO alliance. Its 2025 National Security Assessment (NSA) says Europe is undergoing “Civilizational Erasure” because of migration from impoverished nations, falling birthrates, suppression of free speech, censorship, and loss of national identity. Many of us who have traveled to Europe recently (I’ve been to ~10 European nations in the last seven years), have observed and can attest that Europe really isn’t Europe anymore — it is in steep decline. It is largely gritty, overrun with migrants, and poor. Most European nations now have a GDP/capita lower than Mississippi, our most impoverished state. Many of your long-time readers, including me, think the U.S. is undergoing “Civilizational Erasure” as well. When I travel to Asian nations, they seem safe and feel civilized. The NSA report said Europe will be unrecognizable in 20 years. The same is true with the U.S. Those national disputes are mostly irrelevant, when your nation is in steep decline.
I think the current administration is more inclined to say NATO – Europe should pay more of their own costs for defense.
What I see is, the Democratic Republics of the world have common cause to defend each other when threatened. In the Nuclear Age that is meaningful.
Have you considered Asian nations feel safe and civilized due to the presence of the USA armed forces, and the threat of a nuclear response if their enemies get too frisky.
The National Security Assessment and Strategy is much more blunt than that, Jokem. It is saying the U.S. and Europe’s shared interests and shared values are moving apart, so its relations with Europe will become transactional. After WW2, the NATO alliance was formed to create a collective defense based on shared democratic values and human rights, as you correctly observed the past’s “common cause.” That is no longer the case. The U.S. will still support NATO, but only to further American interests, not to provide a collective defense for shared democratic values. As Europe undergoes civilization erasure, there is nothing to defend, so the Alliance will become more transactional.
A few people have commented on Fred’s… apparent drift away from the more sensible positions we long-time readers expect from him.
So, is Fred alright? He announced his retirement; a few months later, somebody is posting again on Fred’s site, with Fredlike prose but unFredlike positions and unFredlike shaky logic.
Fred has earned much internet clout. Has somebody trained an AI on his writing and given it a new editorial slant? It would explain the odd new slant.
I hope you’re OK, Fred.
Me neither. But there’s ALWAYS going to be a top dog. If it isn’t US, China looks to be on track for the job.
Anybody who thinks the US is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad racist greedy bully nation ought to savor these, the Good Old Days. China will show you how Racism is done.
Are you suggesting someone has co-opted Freds site and is posing as Fred?
Does someone know Freds address where he can be reached by mail?
Might want to send him a letter suggesting his drift to the left implies someone posing as him?
“Its 2025 National Security Assessment (NSA) says Europe is undergoing “Civilizational Erasure” because of migration from impoverished nations, falling birthrates, suppression of free speech, censorship, and loss of national identity. Many of us who have traveled to Europe recently (I’ve been to ~10 European nations in the last seven years), have observed and can attest that Europe really isn’t Europe anymore — it is in steep decline. It is largely gritty, overrun with migrants, and poor. Most European nations now have a GDP/capita lower than Mississippi, our most impoverished state”
I see that Spengler is back in vogue.
I live in Europe, in a country that might be one of the next recipients of Putinesque geopolitics, and the assessment is a bit over the top.
Falling birthrates? I have recently read cries of doom and gloom and that Japan, Russia and the Ukraine will die out because their populations are declining. The NSA joins the chorus. I blame it on a very liquid lunch that day. How in tarnation can nations of many millions dwindle to nothing?
Suppression of free speech and censorship? True, but mainly in the USA. Even Orban is not in that league, although I think he would dearly like to relive the glory days of Hungarian fascism.
Loss of national identity? That’s a good one, given that the UK Brexit was all about sovereignty. I have not seen much difference there in that respect. Economically it is another matter.
Immigration? At the risk of being non-PC, I would agree with you on that. Unrestricted immigration has been a curse.
The economy? Mississippi must be well off if many European nations are at that level. Which ones, exactly?
Postscript:
I see that that there are rumblings that Fred has been replaced by an AI bot. Given the number of pithy Fredisms, either that is not the case, and Fred has overdone the Padre Kino, or else AI is now scarily good.
‘or else AI is now scarily good’
I recently got off the phone with the Walmart AI, and it was not much different than talking to a limited capacity person.
The math is rather unforgiving, David. In 2023, about 23% of births in the European Union (EU) were to foreign-born mothers. That shocking statistic is from Eurostat (the EU). In 2023, The birth rate among native Europeans in the EU is 1.38 births per woman – a drop of >31% each generation. If that rate continues, the number of Europeans will drop from 400 million to < 100 Europeans in 12 generations.
Putin is indeed a threat, but talk to someone from the Middle East and Africa about the real threats. If your population becomes foreign, mostly 3rd worldish, impoverished, with much crime, you do have a national identity issue. As Europe becomes more Islamic, it will no longer be European at all. Many Leftists, of course, say population replacement is desirable, but as the Iranians discovered, you really don’t want to be an Islamic nation. If you've travelled to 3rd world nations, you'll know that you do not want to be an impoverished 3rd world nation.
If you're a EU lefty, there is no speech problem. But, Lefties are notorious Stalinists and Stasi agents, wanting us to ignore the people they imprison. 12,000 British are arrested every year for violating speech codes. 10,700 Germans were charged with criminal offenses for violating leftist speech code. Like the Stasi in Communist Germany, they use people to spy on others and report them. In America, there are no statistics, because we have freedom of speech.
The EU economy is not in a crisis, but is slowly degrading. America has 33 of the top 50 global companies, China has 10, .. Europe has 3. Yet, the EU comprises 410 million people. All of the EU nations have GDP/capita ratios that are horrible. They need to stop drinking the Marxist Kool-aid.
The National Security Assessment is correct. Europe is rapidly undergoing Civilizational Erasure. The Europe that I saw 40 years ago, when I backpacked throughout Europe for a summer has NO resemblance to Europe today. Every 5-10 years that I visit, it gets worse.
Pithy Fredisms aren’t hard to generate. AI might not (yet) be up to writing a pseudoFred column all by itself, but could probably do the gruntwork. A human writes the propaganda, the AI Freddifies it, and the human cleans that up for publication.
Fred is a high value target. It would be worth the trouble to make a controllable Fred.
[…] in an attempt to increase agitation based on a read of the situation which was at best asinine, at worst profoundly ignorant. My prediction is also this group will boost its anti-China propaganda to paint the Chinese as […]
Dear Mr. Reed:
If you can answer this posting, I would greatly appreciate. I am writing this belated message in regards to America’s conquest of Venezuela.
How much and what type of blowback can we expect from Trump’s arrest of Maduro? The mainstream media claims that Maduro was a deeply unpopular figure among Venezuelans. Can we expect military payback from Venezuela’s army? Will the United Nations charge us with war crimes? Will Maria Machado be sworn in in a peaceful inauguration?
I am not so sure of the background of the military action. I do not the Trump covets Venezuela’s oil reserves, even if we will have to spend a lot of money to rebuild the wells.
Yours truly,
Gene Su
Dear Mr. Reed:
If you can answer this posting, I would greatly appreciate. I am writing this belated message in regards to America’s recent military action in Venezuela.
How much and what type of blowback can we expect from Trump’s arrest of Maduro? The mainstream media claims that Maduro was a deeply unpopular figure among Venezuelans. Can we expect military payback from Venezuela’s army? Will the United Nations charge us with war crimes? Will Maria Machado be sworn in in a peaceful inauguration?
I am not so sure of the background of the military action. I do know that Trump covets Venezuela’s oil reserves, even if we will have to spend a lot of money to rebuild the wells.
Yours truly,
Gene Su
Gene – You are double posting
Can my first post be deleted? It was a mistake.
Fred oh Fred. When did Ruzzian disinfo get hold of your brain?
Ya still got it! “WOTTHEHELL, WOTTHEHELL . . . ” 😉
Note that most of the antisemitic rhetoric has stopped now that Iran has shut down the internet?
Gracias por el discurso Fred. Cien porciento on the mark. Algunos dias, solo son tu y Brian Berletic, otro ex-Marine que me permiten mantener mi equilibrio. Saludos a ti y la familia desde Aguas.
[…] https://fredoneverything.org/geography-and-the-underpinnings-of-confusion/ […]