Trojan Horses: European Vassals Instructed to Join AIIB by US

From de Veer Magazine
Jump to: navigation, search
Courtesy: David Horsey

By Ann-Marie de Veer
Saturday 21 March 2015

On the 4 October 2014 in Beijing, China the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) was formerly recognised in a signing ceremony by 21 countries throughout the region. The initial signatories were: Bangladesh, Brunei, Cambodia, China, India, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Laos, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. Over the next three months a further six regional members joined: Indonesia, Jordan, Maldives, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia and Tajikistan while others, namely Australia, Japan and Korea baulked at the idea on instruction from their masters in the US who continues to maintain its global financial hegemony via the International Monetary Fund (IMF), The World Bank (TWB) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

However, last week, the UK became the first non-Asian applicant to be a founding member of the AIIB closely followed by France, Germany and Italy. The displeasure of the US, who say they question the bank's commitment to international standards on good governance, was duly recorded by the mainstream media as if these few European puppet states of the US Empire had suddenly shaken off the fiscal shackles that have rooted them to the same Empire since the Bretton Woods agreement was brokered in July 1944.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The facts are: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS), plus many other emerging economies in the Asian region have been seeking more representation in the IMF commensurate with their growth in world trade for years. Thus, in 2010, a package of reforms was adopted by the 188 member states of the fund that was supposed to distribute its influence more evenly whilst still being effectively under US control. However, any amendments to the IMF's policies require an 85% majority vote of the board and the US currently hold 16.75% which means they have a de facto veto. Nonetheless, the US Congress has refused to approve the 2010 IMF agreement and the fund has been forced to explore other ways in which they can move forward without their approval.

The irony of this state of gridlock is that in restructuring the IMF the US share of the vote would only be reduced by 0.25% down to 16.50%, thus they would still retain their power of veto, and yet they persist in failing to pass the legislation required. Clearly the US are simply frustrating the will of China, in particular, and many other nation states in general, in empowering an IMF that is more globally representative.

Another key fact is the current state of the US economy: it is, at best, in a parlous condition, and at worst, technically bankrupt. Over the last two years a number of countries have requested the return of their gold that has been stored in the US since the implementation of the Bretton Woods System in July 1944: a system which included a relaxed form of the gold standard. Many have yet to see their gold returned and fear that it is no longer there. Similarly, akin to deficit there is also debt: the current level of official debt is US$ 18.1 trillion (108% of GDP) whilst unfunded liabilities are in excess of US$ 42 trillion (251% of GDP). The notion that the US is even capable of repaying its official debt is frankly laughable while servicing any of their liabilities going forward in patently absurd. Then there is unemployment, now refuted to be just 5.5% from an all time high of 9.6% in 2010. Like most Western nations who have become adept at changing the definition of unemployed to exclude those who are not seeking work because they do not register at unemployment offices, the true scale of unemployment is routinely considered to be somewhere between 150% - 200% of the stated figure. That is, for the US, it is most likely somewhere between 7.75 - 11%. Added to this are those who are underemployed, i.e. on short term contracts of between 12 - 30 hours per week and thus fall outside the criteria for being unemployed.

Clearly the evidence is compelling but is rarely alluded to in the mainstream media whose thirst for funding continually compromises their integrity akin to the US Empires thirst for financial hegemony which corrodes almost every aspect of global trade and commerce.

It is little wonder then that a growing group of Asian countries should seek to create a financial institution that is not only more responsive to their needs but built on a solid foundation rather than on fiat money. That China, a patient nation by almost any measure, waited five years before establishing a bank that intends to serve the needs of the region, and not US foreign policy, demonstrates a degree of tolerance and forbearing that is all too often absent from their Western counterparts.

What then is the purpose of European nations joining the AIIB?

The applications of European countries to become founding members of the AIIB must be viewed in the context of a missed window of opportunity by the US to join the bank back in 2014. They, the US, chose to reject the notion that it would present a serious challenge to their global financial hegemony and focused on denigrating the new bank on the basis of its apparent lack of transparency and policies for good governance. Naturally the US also instructed its vassal states around the globe to boycott the venture. However, as the banks' formation continued to move forward the US, in recognition of having excluded itself from getting involved at the inception stage, needed a plan if it was going to exercise any influence whatsoever over AIIB policies.

Enter the UK, France Germany and Italy as the vanguard of the US Trojan Horse.

The truth is the US underestimated both the capacity and the resolve of the Chinese, and many of the other developing nation states who have signed up to the project, thinking that the AIIB would never come to pass. Then, in desperation, when the new bank became a potential challenge to their financial hegemony, the US instructed their vassal states to join up with all possible haste as founding members so that they can continue to exercise power through their Trojan Horses and thus frustrate the will of the developing nations in Asia.

That there is little merit in any of the European nations joining the AIIB individually is common knowledge but collectively they can become a powerful instrument of the US Empire.

No doubt the Asian founders of the AIIB will find bridles of use for their new team of European Trojan Horses.

The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.