An inexplicable chain of international incidents, launched after the G20 summit in Osaka and the meetings of the leaders of the Russia-China-US “big triangle”, continues on its fields. As already noted here, as the confrontation with Donald Trump and his dialogue with Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping deepens, the actions of the "deep state" of globalists will become less and less sporadic. And more and more meaningful and therefore dangerous.
The "first swallow" of the second series of events after Osaka was a massive international attack on China over Xinjiang, which organically complemented the undermining of stability in Xianggang (Hong Kong). On the morning of July 23, the trend developed in another geographic point - in the Sea of Japan near the Dokdo (Takeshima) islands, which are disputed between themselves by South Korea, which controls them in fact, and Japan, which considers them its own. F-16 fighters of the South Korean Air Force made an incorrect interception of Russian Tu-95 strategic bombers patrolling the region in international airspace over neutral waters. At the same time, similar actions in the same area were carried out by the aviation of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, but with respect to the Russian A-50 long-range radar detection aircraft.
Both Japan and South Korea accuse Russia of violating airspace and at the same time argue with each other, because each of them considers it their own. The acuteness of the situation is made by the participation in joint patrols with the Russian "strategists" of the Chinese H-6 bombers, and finally confused by a series of mutual protests. South Korea blames Russia, Japan - Russia and South Korea, which "pretends" the warning firing of South Korean pilots near Russian (and therefore Chinese) aircraft.
Moscow denies such shooting and, in fact, points out to Seoul the provocative nature of his actions, warning, apparently for the future, that if the shooting did take place, the Russian response "would not be long in coming." And the main thing is that it sheds light on the plot of what is happening here. South Koreans are trying to present neutral waters and the airspace above them as part of their sovereign space on the dubious grounds that they are part of the "identification zone" of their air defense.
But as the Russian side rightly points out, this approach has nothing to do with international law. "Such" zones "are not provided for by international rules and are not recognized by the Russian Federation, which was repeatedly communicated to the South Korean side through various channels," the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement. That is, in the conditions of territorial disputes with the Japanese, Seoul unlawfully spread its zone of territorial waters and airspace, having done it not according to the law, but "out of bounds", and now demands from those around them that they observe this "lawlessness". And picturesquely indignant that this does not happen.
Are the South Koreans not in themselves if they are throwing down such an inexplicable challenge from the point of view of common sense to everyone around? Are they their own enemies and supporters of their own international isolation? Or is this their forced step, taken under someone else's pressure? And if so, by whose pressure? The Punchinelle Secret, of course.
A special semantic part of this whole intricate plot is an unexpectedly and unusually high degree of claims, accompanied by an emotional escalation from the South of Korea to almost hysteria, which the current, quite satisfactory situation in bilateral relations clearly does not correspond to. It would seem that in the context of the active support of Moscow, Beijing and Seoul for the North Korean-American dialogue, contributing to the rapprochement of the three capitals, such an explosion of passions is simply inappropriate.
There is nothing extraordinary in the situation, it is purely regular. But at the same time, the “conflict speakers” from all sides are far from being the “first persons” who observe from the sidelines: in Russia and South Korea - military departments, in Japan - the government apparatus. That is, the situation does not reach a truly critical acuteness, and the spaces of agreement, including by increasing the levels of dialogue, are preserved by all parties by default. So in China, the incident, which in one way or another affected its own Air Force, was commented on at the level of the Foreign Ministry - by its official representative Hua Chunying, as well as the Ministry of Defense - also by the official representative Wu Qian.
Promotional video:
What's the matter here? The problem seems to have two cuts. The first objective: the memory of last year's provocation with January launches of unidentified missiles from the near-Korean waters to the Hawaiian Islands and Japan. Do not discount it, let alone forget it. If only because the "characters and performers" have not disappeared from the scene. Since then, the concerned regional players have been very much concerned about the actions of these "third parties" with their not quite clear "extraterritorial" status, which strongly resemble a deliberate undermining of peace and stability by pitting everyone against everyone.
Here is part of the explanation for the emotional negativity splashed out on the Russian side by Seoul. Any such parallels act on the nerves, which are already at the limit and therefore periodically give up. So they are trying to ensure their own safety at the expense of others. Not to mention the issue of prestige in a territorial dispute where you cannot yield.
And here is a very subtle point. It should be clearly understood that any alignments, especially international ones, especially in “problem” regions, and even more so with the participation of opposing armed forces, to the creation of which the “extraterritorials” from the “deep state” had a hand in, a priori beat D. Trump. A compromise between them is hardly possible, especially after the visit of the American president to London, where such a compromise could not be organized even by the queen who came out of the shadows, who risked putting the global influence of the British monarchy on the line for it. And she did not achieve anything, although she “exchanged a million for a ruble,” in the words of Vladimir Vysotsky.
Japan and South Korea are allies of Washington. Of course, South Korean President Moon Jae-in, like any Korean, gravitates towards reunification of the homeland and therefore gravitates towards Kim Jong-un; The naked eye can see that gravity is mutual. Of course, Seoul has a big background of mutual claims to Tokyo. At least for the colonial past. This is all true. But both South Korea and Japan are ultimately endowed with security by the United States. And it is unlikely that their mutual claims are stronger than, say, the historical antipathies of the Germans and the French. Nevertheless, the Americans "reconciled" them with the help of the "Marshall Plan" and NATO, turning them into an axis of "united Europe". Why is it the other way around between Seoul and Tokyo?
Moon Jae-in, Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump meet on the demarcation line separating North and South Korea in the Demilitarized Zone. June 30, 2019
Because - and this is the second cut - in addition to the factor of the "deep state" with a threat emanating from it, including the military one, which will "shoot" no one knows where and how, there is also a geopolitical factor of the Western confrontation with Russia and China. Only recently, just a few days ago, the Pentagon returned to this issue, describing our countries as a "threat" to the United States and the West. And when, in front of Washington's eyes, these two threats are carrying out joint long-range aviation flights, this is such a "signal" from which the Americans might panic. Moreover, the comments on joint air patrols with the Chinese from the Russian side mention the "interaction" of the two armies. But such patrolling is a very high level of interaction,and you can talk as much as you like about the absence of a military alliance between Moscow and Beijing and the desire for a "bloc" policy, but this does not change the essence of the matter.
Anyone more or less versed in the military sphere is clear that the parties are increasingly coordinating their policies in the field of security and, therefore, defense.
It is here that one should look for the contours and outlines of interests of the organizers and performers of the incident over the Sea of Japan. Firstly, this is the simplest thing that lies on the surface: with the help of such hysteria, having heated up to its level a generally meaningless passing episode, to draw public attention of the West to the fact of not only political, but also military rapprochement between Russia and China, having frightened and mobilized Western societies, and, most importantly, once again "put into action" the rapidly "untethered" European elites.
We admit that this works, and contrary to its own interests, Europe is gradually being drawn into whipping up anti-Chinese psychosis, and it has never left the anti-Russian one. At the very least, as a result, the western flank of the Belt and Road may "sag". And in our countries themselves, forces are receiving an impulse, pulling us apart and dreaming of creating and exploiting our differences, as they did in the 70s and 80s.
Secondly, if in Osaka, Trump, Putin and Xi really agreed on something important - and this is very similar, then such actions of provocateurs from the "deep state", acting with the help of their "tentacles" in the Pentagon, put them in a difficult position the American president himself. For it is useless to negotiate with a "threat", it must be resisted. At least to avoid the emergence of "new Mullers" and new conversations about impeachment, which at the start of the presidential race is not at all appropriate for the owner of the White House.
Thirdly, those who are "in the subject" are reminded of the power and determination of the "deep state": once the missiles were fired. And they shot them down because there were only two. Next time we launch twenty, and where will “your” missile defense be? This is how the Western elites are “hung on the hook”, first of all that part of the American who are more and more persistently, thinking about their future, furtively glancing towards D. Trump, collecting and storing dirt on the “Clintonites”.
Fourth, no one has canceled the basic Anglo-Saxon principle of “divide and rule”, which is applied not so much by states as by colonial and neo-colonial “conceptual” circles. With regard to the episode over the Sea of Japan, this manifests itself in provoking disagreements between Seoul and Tokyo, but not with our own hands, but with the hands of Moscow and Beijing.
A typical element of the "strategy of chaos": to embroil everyone with everyone, and manage these contradictions. While adding fuel to the fire and throwing money and weapons to the sides. Plus, the "Korean threat" created by the already launched, according to some sources, the process of Korean reunification, is a very effective tool for managing not only foreign but also domestic policy of Tokyo; the politicians there will die to prevent this from happening. And against Moscow and Beijing, by the way, this “threat” also acts, only in a slightly different way: “you don't even imagine what they will allow themselves THEN if they are doing this NOW”
Therefore, immediately "press" on Kim to give up nuclear weapons and disarm, so that a united Korean nuclear "monster" does not arise, and "then you will not be well." And so far it has not turned out that Trump has appropriated the laurels of the "peacemaker": there is no need for him to wander along the 38th parallel, and you, in Moscow and Beijing, with him "hang around behind our back, you will be worse off." It is clear that, at the same time, some previous contradictions between Beijing and Pyongyang, which were removed during the rotation in 2017-2018 of the leadership of the NPC and the formation of the "Far Eastern triangle" of these capitals with Moscow, are revived here.
And fifthly, which, in our opinion, is not only the main, but also the resultant. The Black Cat is allowed between Moscow, on the one hand, and Seoul and Tokyo, on the other. In the "deep state", presumably, they watched for a long time their attempts to find a common language, attributing the failure of the "expropriation" of the Kuril Islands from Russia to the "inadequacy" of the same Trump, who staged a "tariff" scandal with Tokyo. Now they are trying to minimize Moscow's influence on the Korean issue, keeping in mind the established dialogue and contacts between Vladimir Putin and Moon Jae-in and transferring the center of the formation of bilateral relations, more precisely, contradictions, to the much less complimentary military disposed towards each other.
Having thus quarreled everyone with everyone, the forces entering the presidential race in the United States on the side opposite to D. Trump are laying the foundation for the future military-political alliance of the opponents of Russia and China in the Far East, for the very "Far Eastern NATO", about which in The USA and the West speaks a lot, but things are still there. "Trump came - quarreled everyone, Trump left - everyone made up, united against real enemies," - this is apparently the message of the "deep state" "for internal" official "use."
Objectivity of Japan-South Korean Disagreements? Nonsense, now “we” will inflate them, then “snap our fingers” and - we will settle them. Our "peacekeeping" efforts. They coped with the aforementioned German-French. "There will be bread" - the Far Eastern "Marshall plan" or the conditional "Biden", "there will be a song" - an anti-Russian and anti-Chinese alliance of Tokyo and Seoul, whose hands, if necessary, you can shake your arms, and on occasion, fight as you have already today the Balts and Poles are being prepared for war. And how Ukrainians were trained under Poroshenko.
And it is no coincidence that the question of whether the "warning firing" of South Korean F-16s at the rate of Russian (and Chinese) strategic bombers or not was so acute in the center of interpretations of this episode. Its customers need it to be, because the very fact of the use of weapons during an incident is a powerful and "promising" foundation for a future anti-Russian and anti-Chinese military alliance in the Far East, similar to the European NATO.
The usual logic: first, a conflict is created, then "internationalized" - and encouraged, as if "letting go", and this quickly leads to the creation of opposing military alliances around the hotbed of contradictions. Moreover, since the conflict has already been created, there is no need to persuade anyone. And then, in order to set fire to the "fuse-cord", it remains only to find an excuse. For this usually "does not rust". This is how major wars have been unleashed in the past. Including world ones.
Vladimir Pavlenko
