Analysis of Strategic Threats
In the Current Decade

By Joel M. Skousen, Editor, World Affairs Brief


Strategic threats are carefully planned threats by predator nations or groups that transcend their own normal sphere of influence and threaten the entire world with conquest and/or control. In this analysis I will discuss three current strategic world powers, which constitute a premeditated threat to world liberty, and the complex tactical maneuvers between them as they position themselves for the coming, inevitable conflict. Two of these world powers are nations--Russia and China--and the third is a transnational conspiracy of power by a combination of individuals in the West attempting to maneuver the world into a New World Order (NWO) of global control, euphemistically masquerading as a "global democracy." I will refer to the latter as Western globalists. All less powerful nations in the world fall under the influence of one of these three powers, either as direct allies, client states for the purchase of arms, and/or diplomatic allies working in collusion to further strategic goals of global hegemony. There is one further complicating factor, however. The Western globalists are divided into two main factions: a US/British faction firmly in control of the financial means of the NWO and the European Union, versus a largefaction of hard-core leftists, secretly aligned with Russia and China, which controls the majority of votes in the General Assembly of the UN. I will attempt to describe each of the three power centers, their allies, and what I believe their individual strategy involves.



Ever since the rise of the Bolsheviks in 1917 all of Russia's resources have been focused on building a world empire under Communism. Despite taking no pains to conceal its ultimate goal of destruction of capitalism, Russia has been curiously assisted by certain Western political and financial powers in its spreading Communism to other nations. Numerous books document damning evidence of US State Department collusion with the US Deep State and key Western journalists to facilitate Communist takeovers of Eastern Europe, China, North Korea, Cuba, Cambodia, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Iran, Angola, Mozambique and numerous other small nations. But the mother of all deceptions was reserved for the carefully planned "fall of the Soviet Union" in 1989 and 1990.


This last great ruse by Russia was a carefully planned gesture, not unlike previous attempts by Lenin and Stalin to put on a more human face in order to secure needed technology transfers and monetary assistance from the West. The latest and most sophisticated version of the masquerade will culminate in Russia's long anticipated attack on the West. Soviet defector Anatoly Golitsyn, in 1984, warned the CIA and the world about this ruse in his book, "New Lies For Old," but it was given little publicity, and the author was roundly discredited by our own government. Golitsyn, not yet savvy about the high level treason that had a grip upon the US government and the establishment media, could not figure out why no one was interested in his warning. Not only were Western intelligence agencies and the press not interested in Golitsyn's warning, they were about to join in the propaganda promoting this deception in order to make sure Western observers would believe it.

The Berlin Wall did, in fact, come down in 1989 and the Soviet armies did leave Europe in 1990, but the freedom movement and the overthrow of Communist regimes by "reformers" were not as spontaneous as they were made to appear. Anyone close to the action could see huge holes in the story--holes that a scrutinizing press corps should easily have perceived, but chose not to.

Uncharacteristically, the freedom movement among university students in Leipzig had suddenly begun to flourish, uninhibited by the Stazi, which had informers among every student group. No Western journalist dared utter the obvious question: why were students who had not dared to demonstrate the week before, suddenly free to do so without reprisal? Orders had obviously been given to the secret police to give the students a free hand. No arrests of dissidents were made. The same anomaly was observed by Russian students as the protested against Communism in favor of Yeltsin (who turned out to be a communist stooge). Where were the KGB who would normally be there taking names and arresting them in the night?

In Germany, assurances were planted among student leaders that demonstrations would be tolerated. At least two heads of Eastern European states (Erik Honeker of the DDR and Nicolai Ceausescu of Romania) said prior to their deaths that the Russians had ordered them to step down (as if in response to public fervor), and to turn over power to specific groups that had quickly put on the mask of "reformers," but that were still Soviet controlled. Honeker obeyed and was allowed to live, while Ceausescu refused and was killed by his own secret police. Romanians weren't fooled by the sudden change in leadership in Romania; most knew the new "anti-Communist" leaders were still part of the old guard.

Subsequent stories have emerged in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland about current leaders who act the part of reformers but hide their past (and presumed current) allegiance with the Communist Secret Police. It is widely known in Poland that Lech Walesa was a secret Communist agent used to control the opposition Solidarity movement. The revelations of the following Eastern European experts are particularly revealing.

Petr Chibulka in the Czech Republic, (

Judit Szakacs in Hungary,13716,339026,00.html

Miroslave Dolejsi on all the former Soviet states (


A close look at the failed "coup" against Russian Premier Mikhail Gorbachev will easily demonstrate that this was an obvious fraud set up for Western consumption. Anyone who believes the KGB was so bungling that it couldn't capture Gorbachev at his unprotected dacha, or so tolerant that it would allow any real democratic opposition to maintain uninhibited access to radio and television during the “fall”, hasn't studied modern Russian police state tactics. In fact, Yeltsin was never anything but a puppet figurehead present to give the illusion of an emerging democracy.

Furthermore, when the supposed heads of the KGB, and GRU, as well as the Defense Minister and other top leaders "fled for their lives" after the "failed coup attempt," the press should have been asking: who were they fleeing from? These men were supposedly in control of all the organs of power in Russia. Either they really were the heads and were faking their own self-imposed exile, or they were not the real leaders and were toppled to further the ruse. Notably, all of these top "leaders," including Gorbachev, had been only mid-level bureaucrats two years before. How do we explain their sudden rise to power, except that others selected them? And if other hidden leaders selected them, those secret leaders held the real power even then. Everything else that gives the appearance of Russian democracy is just window dressing for Western consumption. That isn't to say that the Russians haven't allowed some legitimate opposition to arise, but it is always kept in a minority status and without access to the real reins of power.

It is my contention that the Communist leaders are still in charge behind the scenes today. In fact they never were out of power. I'm not referring to the stodgy old hard liners that are playing the role of open Communist deputies in the Duma (Russian Parliament). The real Russian leaders at the time of the coup, like Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Guzinski, and Mikhail Khodorkovsky bequeathed to themselves all the former state enterprises (under the guise of "privatization") and became oligarchs. Even a cursory look at their backgrounds, shows that virtually every one of these "Mafia" chiefs was a top Communist leader in some part of the former Soviet leadership. The Communist bosses have also maintained tight control over the Russian banking system so as to shuffle Western aid money back and forth between their secret slush funds in Europe and the Middle East. As evidence of the power plays behind the scenes, one astute observer noticed that President Boris Yeltsin, at a high level meeting in the Kremlin, stepped aside and let Boris Berezovsky (newly named head of the Commonwealth of Independent States) enter the room first. This would never be done in Russian protocol unless Berezovsky were Yeltsin's superior. Naturally, these real powers behind the Russian "democracy" generally stay behind the scenes and rarely take key government positions--just as in the West where powerful men direct affairs from behind the scenes.


To further the deception, current Russian president Vladimir Putin railed against Russian Mafia leaders like Berezovsky and Gusinsky, issuing a steady stream of indictments, as if the Russian government is actively pursuing these international criminals. Of course, it's all a ruse. As I have reported in my World Affairs Briefs, Spanish intelligence documented five visits last year that Putin made to Berezovsky's villa in Spain just prior to Yeltsin's downfall and Putin's rise to power. The transcripts of their overheard discussions were apparently centered around the need to dump Yeltsin, install Putin, and begin the process of slowly shedding Russia's feigned image of weakness in order to get the West accustomed to a new, assertive Russia. As if following a script, Putin has suddenly become the new champion of Russian nationalism. He's "tough on crime" and supposedly opposed by liberals and old-line Communists alike. At first it was all a ruse. Even Gusinsky, head of the MOST media group--Putin's supposed arch enemy and media opposition--is playing the role of a persecuted capitalist Jew. In fact, he was a good friend of Berezovsky and has a villa in the same compound in Spain.

But then something changed. Putin began a purge of the old oligarchs like Berezovsky and Gusinsky. The former was killed in London and Gusinsky was exiled. Other younger oligarchs were brought up on corruption charges and had their assets stripped. Some were let off under a secret deal in which Putin would get a cut of all their illicit operations in exchange for immunity Russian/American financier Bill Browder has widely testified.

While Putin began his reign as a puppet of the oligarchs, he appears now to have captured total control of the old communist apparatus, in the style of Joseph Stalin.


Am I saying that everything was faked in the so-called fall of Communism? Not at all. The yearning of Eastern Europeans and Russians to be free was real. That part didn't have to be faked. But virtually all of the former Soviet Eastern European states are still under some Russian influence through controlled politicians.

Even the Russian pull-back of weapons was a partial lie. After negotiating the removal of US missiles and nuclear weapons from Europe (INF treaty) the Soviets allowed US inspectors to witness the destruction of the longer-range SS-20 missiles, which constituted the bulk of their European force. But in 1986 the Russians secretly moved in more modern, shorter-range SS-23s to deep underground bunkers in East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria just prior to signing the treaty, and never declared them or destroyed them. They didn't remove them even after the so-called "fall of the Soviet Union," demonstrating Russia's follow-on role in this fraud, even during Yeltsin's supposed democratic regime. The missiles in Slovakia were discovered and removed during the mid-90s, but neither the US government nor the press has asked about the contents of other secret bunkers--which still exist today.

A portion of the image of economic weakness in Russia is real, however. Even after billions in capitalist aid to the Russian oil sector, the civilian economy is still weak--thanks to Western sabotage of the "free-market" reforms and continued hidden economic control by the Communist-Mafia hierarchy. What else would you expect when the US government pays millions of dollars to a leftist university like Harvard to direct the reforms? Essential elements such as private property rights and transportation were never freed from Soviet-style control. Regulations and bureaucratic red tape still abound, as does official corruption requiring huge pay-offs and bribes. When Russia complained about its dire straits and perennial threat of famine, President Clinton and European leaders shipped them millions of dollars in monetary and food aid. In fact, there was no famine. Russian farmers had plenty of crops to sell, but they were displaced in the markets by the US food aid, which was sold to the people by Russian leaders for a tidy profit.


As for Russian military weakness after the “collapse”, only the manpower side of Russian military was allowed to collapse. The Russians purposely failed to pay troops or to maintain normal living standards within the ranks, leading to bad feelings and discontent. However, Russian production and development of high tech conventional military equipment has been ongoing. Huge stockpiles of tanks and mobile artillery were simply taken out of current inventory and stockpiled. They remain dispersed in depots beyond the Ural Mountains as part of the Conventional Forces Treaty signed with the US and NATO. This neat little treaty allowed the Russians to match US reduction in forces without actually destroying equipment--the Russians only had to put their tanks "out of reach." In fact, the Russians brought back some of that inventory during the Chechen conflict, and the US let them get away with it without so much as an official protest. Additionally, although many of the rank-and-file soldiers have left the military, the Russians did not decommission their huge corps of officers and NCOs. Thus, Russia maintains a suspiciously top-heavy military officer and NCO corps allowing it to refill the ranks of enlisted soldiers in a matter of months should war break out.


What about Russia's highly touted disarmament of nuclear forces? This, too, is a grand deception, aided and abetted by US arms controllers. The older, out-dated aspects of the Russian military complex are on display to give the appearance of disarmament. Much of that has been dismantled at US taxpayer expense. US public television and the Clinton Pentagon joined forces to promote the image of Russian nuclear weakness with a highly doctored presentation entitled Missiliers, about the crumbling Soviet arsenal. A naive US General Habiger of US Strategic Command lent his credentials to the widely publicized TV documentary, which supposedly showed an inside view of the old and decrepit Soviet-era nuclear bunkers. It fact, they were too old and too decrepit to be credible. US missiliers who saw the documentary refused to believe those facilities were operational. With the exception of one limited view of the new SS-27 missile launcher, the US has never been allowed to see Russian's modern arsenal of weapons. Many of the older SS-18 ICBMs were dismantled in the 1990s with US taxpayer funds. The warheads, however, were not dismantled, but were given back to the Russians for recycling into their new missiles. Even the recently signed Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions is a fraud. Less than a year after it was signed, with great fanfare, Russia announced it would not dismantle hundreds of its remaining SS-18s and other missiles until mid next decade. Not only did the US not protest, but our own nation continued its part of the agreement, unilaterally-our most powerful missiles, the MX Peacekeeper, will be completely dismantled by the end of 2004. The Russians are clearly implementing Sun Tzu's classic war doctrine of "feigning weakness" prior to a strike.


The top secret Russian military-industrial complex is in full production, but it is now quite separated from the normal, visible economy. Many suspect that early Western aid and loans were almost exclusively funneled into these hidden portions of the Russian economy, or into the oil sector which funds much of military production. However, despite economic weakness, the Russians are continuing for a decade to build tremendous new nuclear/biological and chemical weapons systems--all with the assistance of US technology transfers---until the rift over Syria stopped all cooperation.

In the late 1980s, the Soviet Union was seen deploying biological warheads for their multiple-warhead SS-18 ICBMs. As late as the early 1990s, after the signing of agreements pledging to destroy all biological and chemical warfare stocks, bona fide defectors from Russia gave testimony of massive cheating on biological and chemical weapons programs. Again, no protest was forthcoming from the US and no sanctions were imposed.

Russia is now manufacturing, on average, one new SS-27 missiles (also called the Topol-M--a 6th generation ballistic missile with active maneuvering capability to evade interception) per month, and hiding them in underground facilities--replacing older SS-19 missiles located at the Sarakov missile based some 450 miles southeast of Moscow. The SS-27 can carry at least 3 medium weight warheads and up to 10 smaller nuclear warheads. They are developing a new even larger version that can carry up to 15 warheads. It can also be armed with a single massive H-bomb developed by the Arzamas-16 site of the Russian Ministry of Atomics (MINATOM). According to Russian weapons engineers, the new Arzamas warhead has an explosive force equal to over half a million tons of TNT.

The Washington Times has reported that, in 1995 and 1996, this weapons developer illegally obtained US-made IBM supercomputers exported with Clinton administration approval. The supercomputers were exported directly to the Russian weapons lab, using false commercial and non-military contracts. This was in direct violation of US law. IBM pled guilty to the illegal export and paid a $8.5 million fine for their illegal sale, but the damage was already done. Later evidence proved that the Clinton administration actually facilitated the sale and gave IBM assurances of protection.

The Russians intend to build a total of 500 of these mobile missiles, each one capable of mounting the full range of nuclear, biological or chemical warheads. This is truly an ominous weapons system, and should be our main concern in terms of designing an Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense. We built our last modern ICBM (the MX "Peacekeeper" missile) over 20 years ago, and we unilaterally dismantled them in 2003, in spite of the fact that the Russians reneged on their part of the Strategic Forces Reduction agreement.

The Russian ABM system is composed of hundreds of SA-5 and SA-10 anti-aircraft/anti-missile missiles.

Moscow not only has its nominal 100 ABM missiles, as permitted by the treaty, but also several thousand other SAM interceptors, many of which have been upgraded with ABM capabilities. In total, Russia has 12,000 SAM/ABM interceptors at 280 sites. The SA-10 is a totally new missile now from what it used to be and continues to be fitted with nuclear warheads (unlike our dumbed-down proposed ABM system that has no warhead at all). Russia has 18 huge battle-management radar installations located around the periphery of the country, as well as in space, to direct their ABM system. Upgrades of these radar sites as new construction of several more were carried out during the ABM treaty negotiations. US and NATO spy satellites detected these violations, but only one radar unit was halted. It was finished two years ago and the US failed to protest this violation of the ABM treaty. Yet Russia still demands that we abide by the treaty.

Further, the Russians are building huge underground nuclear bunkers and weapons production facilities in the Ural Mountains, clearly intended to function during a nuclear war. "Yamantau Mountain is the largest nuclear-secure project in the world," said US Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md). "They have very large train tracks running in and out of it [actually 5 tracks wide], with enormous rooms carved inside the mountain. It has been built to resist a half dozen direct nuclear hits, one after the other in a direct hole. It's very disquieting that the Russians are doing this when they [supposedly] don't have $200 million to build the service module on the international space station and can't pay housing for their own military people." Ken Timmerman, one of the best sources of information on the subject says, "The Russians have constructed two entire cities over the site, known as Beloretsk 15 & 16, which are closed to the public, each with 30,000 workers. No foreigner has ever set foot near the site. A US military attaché stationed in Moscow was turned back when he attempted to visit the region a few years ago..."

In public testimony before a House Armed Services Subcommittee last October, KGB defector Col. Oleg Gordievsky said the KGB had maintained a separate, top-secret organization, known as Directorate 15, to build and maintain a network of underground command bunkers for the Soviet leadership -- including the vast site beneath Yamantau Mountain. When pictures of this complex were published on the front page of the New York Times in 1996, the CIA was asked to respond. Keeping pace with the long standing secret government policy to protect Americans from any information that would point to a Russian threat, the CIA spokesman said the agency wasn't worried--the huge Russian facility was purely "defensive." How do they know that when they admit that no US official has ever visited the site?

In 1998, US Strategic Commander (STRATCOM) General Eugene Habiger, the same naive commander who took part in the NPR propaganda documentary Missiliers, called Yamantau "a very large complex -- we estimate that it has millions of square feet available for underground facilities. We don't have a clue as to what they're doing there." No clue, general? Not even one clue? People this stupid obviously get to be generals because they are predictable yes-men in a military determined to purge out any future George Pattons or Douglas MacArthurs. I noticed in Missiliers that Habiger never mentioned the Russian military's refusal to answer questions about Yamantau Mountain as he waxed eloquent about the deep camaraderie and trust he felt with his Russian military counterparts. If this is the best general we can find to head STRATCOM, the US is in mortal danger.

The Yamantau Mountain complex is not far from Russia's main nuclear weapons lab facility, Chelyabinsk-70. Honest military analysts suspect that Yamantau's huge 400-square-mile underground complex houses nuclear warhead and missile storage sites, launch control, and several full-blown nuclear weapons factories--all designed to continue production after a nuclear war begins. The US has no equivalent to such extensive protected production facilities. According to Ken Timmerman, the Russian government has provided no fewer than 12 separate and contradictory explanations for the site, none of which are believed to be credible.

Russia also has a massive national command and control system dispersed among three different hardened underground locations. Besides Yamantau Mountain, there is the Yavinsky Mountain underground complex and the Sherapovo bunker site, south of Moscow. Sherapovo is the primary command center for Russia's "civilian" leaders. The Kremlin is connected to Sherapovo and other bunkers by a secret subway line. Once at Sherapovo, they can conduct the war effort using a highly redundant communications system "allowing the leadership to send orders and receive reports through the wartime management structure," according to a 1988 Pentagon report.


It is my considered opinion that the Russians do not want to begin their massive attack on the West with a conventional flow of armaments and troop build-up in Europe. These types of precursor movements would be easily detected by US and European reconnaissance satellites. Neither do the Russians want to destroy Europe if they don't have to. I believe that Russia is planning a massive preemptive nuclear strike on US and British military facilities sometime toward the end of this current decade--precisely because such a strike would decapitate Western military power within two days, with little loss to Russia, and instill fear in the rest of the world. By concentrating the initial attack on the US and Britain, the Russians believe they can turn to European leaders and intimidate them into submission without a fight. The Russians are optimistic they can count on Europe's leaders since many European heads of state are now aligned with the Socialist Internationale, a front for international Communism created during WWII by Moscow as a means of controlling Europe. Russian GRU defector Col. Stanislav Lunev's revelations about Russian military strategy and planning, including his claim that every Russian military exercise is based on the premise of a pre-emptive nuclear attack on the US military, tend to corroborate my suspicions.


During the Obama administration, the US removed all triple warheads from the Minuteman III missiles and replaced them with a single warhead. The current stock of Minuteman missiles is now diminishing as several are launched as tests each year and never replace. The US is planning on a new missile to replace the MMIII but it won’t be ready until 2030. A Russian/Chinese attack on the West will surely take place before these are in production.


I do not believe the intended strike is imminent. It is my estimate that the Russians won't be ready to strike until sometime after 2020. Here's why: Their latest and most modern weapon systems are not going into serial production until 2020, 21, 22 and 23. Despite the continual stockpiling of core supplies and other evidence of war preparations referenced in the excellent and ongoing work of J R Nyquist, the Russians lack several elements that would ensure success, and they won't strike until everything is in place.

First, they desire to make sure that the US disarms as many of our nuclear missiles as possible. They have already succeeded in getting US leaders to complete the unilateral disarmament of the feared MX intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). These 50 blockbuster ICBMs were located in hardened silos surrounding the Four Corners area of Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska and South Dakota have now all been dismantled. No comparable disarmament of the Russian Topol-M missiles is being required, despite Russian promises to dismantle all SS-18s.

President Clinton's 1998 orders to the military (PDD-60) ---revamping our nuclear strategy---dictated that we prepare to “absorb a first strike and not launch on warning still stands today, but “prepare to retaliate afterward.” Dumbfounded (but compliant as always) the top military brass wanted to know, "retaliate with WHAT?" Good point! However, the Russians most likely are not counting on PDD-60. They suspect we won't abide by this suicidal order now that Clinton is out of office.

Sadly, I don’t believe President Trump has even been told about PDD-60 and that it is still in force. Even our missile forces still practice launch on warning, but PDD-60 removed the alternate launch codes to do that should communications with the White House be cut off. I think the nuclear launch codes simply won’t ever arrive, forcing our forces to absorb the first strike.

Another timing factor is that Russia will not strike until her people are sufficiently antagonistic to the West to form a wall of public opinion supportive of a nuclear first strike. The constant US media attacks and the fake intelligence blaming Russia for interfering in the US election by hacking the DNC computer (it was an internal leak, not a hack) have all help create a negative feeling in Russia toward the US.

Over the past decades, US and NATO globalist leaders have antagonized Russia and other Slavic peoples by establishing NATO as a force for aggression and intervention rather than defense. That was the real underlying reason why our globalist leaders fomented the war in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, and eventually IRAN. The humanitarian excuse of opening Iraq to democracy was just a cover for other strategic intentions about conflict creation. It is also why the Clinton administration paid Harvard's leftist academics to sabotage "free-market" reforms in Russia. If the US government had been serious about facilitating Russian reforms, they would have hired the libertarian CATO Institute instead. Ten years ago, the Russian people admired America and longed to be like the West. There is now a deep sense of resentment among Russians for repeated humiliation in Europe, coupled with widespread bitterness and cynicism about economic freedom. The reforms are going nowhere and many Russians long for the return of the meager but stable flow of supplies they got under the stifling, but predictable, Soviet system. Russians are tired of seeing fellow Slavs and other allies (such as Iraq) pushed around by NATO in Kosovo, Serbia and Bosnia. America is hated by many and commonly distrusted--for good reason. They long to see Russia return to her pre-Cold War glory as a world power. Putin, instead of being viewed as the ruthless second level Communist hatchet man that he is, is ascending to the status of national hero.

The war in Afghanistan and Iraq has done even more to antagonize the Muslim world, especially in Pakistan. The torture, abuse and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners, which came to light in 2004, has done more to dispel American pretenses of morality and democracy than anything to date. All of this is continuing to build antagonism toward America that will eventually erupt into a violent international backlash--and not by terrorism only.

Another factor in timing is that Russia needs to further secure its back door with China. Russia would not dare attack the West without assurances of Chinese assistance on the Eastern front. A new "non-aggression" pact (reminiscent of the Hitler-Stalin non-aggression pact that helped facilitate WWII) is in force between China and Russia. However, China is not sufficiently strong militarily to handle its side of the bargain. Thus, Russia is busy helping the Chinese to build up sufficient military forces, especially naval and missile forces, to conquer and control all of the Pacific Rim during the opening months of WWIII. But there is a downside to this strategy which Russia cannot dismiss lightly. Russia knows that China is a predator nation like itself, and will ultimately challenge Russian hegemony when strong enough to do so. That is why Russia has stopped selling its most modern weapons to Chin, knowing that China is cloning everything they can get or steal from the West.

The Russians and the Chinese are very concerned about the potential threat a US anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system presents. This is not simply a cover, in my opinion. It is the foremost topic of heated discussions in every political forum the Russians or Chinese engage in, whether in public or in secret, with the US or with its allies. Clearly a viable ABM system threatens Russia's potential to pull off a successful nuclear first strike. Russia suspects that the US ABM system will consist of not a mere 100 interceptors, as claimed, but thousands instead. This ABM issue is a major key to understanding the Russian perception of timing. The US fixed base ABM system is not very effective in tests, mainly because it doesn’t have an explosive warhead. Rather it uses a kinetic “hit vehicle” that must actually contact the incoming warhead to destroy it. Now that Russia and China are developing maneuvering warheads, our ABM systems are obsolete.


The US intelligence community (under both Republican and Democratic administrations) has known all these facts for years and yet continues to actively cover for the Russians, on orders from the White House. At least, it appears that way to me. The US continues to play on the illusion that Russia and China are loyal partners in the "war on terror" despite evidence that Russia and China are still engaged in widespread proliferation of nuclear and other weapons technology via their client states like Pakistan and North Korea. The US uses Israel as a conduit for technology transfers to China as well. Israel is allowed to sell any of its military technology to China, and much of that comes from the US.


China clearly has its sights set on world hegemony. The attitude of oriental superiority over the occidental bourgeoisie has long pervaded China and even predates Russian predatory tendencies. Realistic analysts who have long experience with both Russia and China know that neither will long be subservient to the other. Russia and China may attempt to use each other for short-term gain, but will eventually tangle for ultimate supremacy.

For the present, Russia and China are teaming up against the West in a new unilateral quest for arms. This is no surprise. The Russians have been arming China, off and on, since the Chinese Communists came to power under Chairman Mao. But now, the Chinese are playing both sides of the fence, East and West. Knowing that Russia is willing to supply it with plentiful quantities of second-rate equipment, China is looking toward the West for advanced American technology and funding in order to upgrade its Soviet and home-grown equipment.

No nation on earth is building military power faster than China, but it has further to go, so it is not yet a threat but it will be our biggest threat in the next decade. In the end, the complacency of other nations regarding China will change into outright terror as the world one day wakes up and finds itself facing a military monster of incredible size and ferocity.

The Chinese already have a formidable land based army of men, tanks and artillery. What it lacks is a world class navy, air transport and missile force, coupled with a sophisticated communications and control system sufficient to extend Chinese power worldwide. That's no small task to accomplish, but they are rapidly developing all that capacity. They are even ahead of the US in over-the-horizon anti-ship missiles---a real threat to our carriers.

Naturally, China is harnessing its billions in trade dollars supplied by naive American champions of free trade to build their forces. The Chinese leaders are openly derisive of American Republicans who are convinced that peaceful trade will moderate Communism. For the Chinese, war with the West is inevitable. It's no longer a matter of if, but when!


The movement to establish a global system of control began somewhere back in the murky past of the Illuminati (1776) and has since morphed, grown and expanded till now there are numerous shadowy variants and groups that make it almost impossible to pin down exactly who is running things and where the real motive and power is coming from. Fortunately, it is not necessary to know all of the secrets underlying this movement. It is sufficient to establish that all of the existing globalist organizations--the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Aspen Institute, Bilderburgers, Royal Institute for International Affairs, Committee of 300, Club of Rome, etc., aspire to global control and elimination of national sovereignty. Numerous quotations of their own leaders and members state just that. That they have more sinister long-term motives and intentions concerning the eventual use of global control is not so clear or easy to prove. However, the track record of global intervention does not portend an optimistic outcome.

Those who watch the way global insiders operate and cover up illegal operations of influence and control almost always come away convinced that there is some form of conspiracy involved. This conclusion is really not too difficult to establish if one has access to the details of each case. Look at the specific evidence pointing to government misdeeds and the subsequent cover-ups of economic manipulation, assassinations, terrorist attacks on airlines, illegal weapons trade, government coups, and high level corruption. In each of these cases, there is a common thread: the active involvement of a vast array of high officials, government agencies, the media, law officers, lawyers, judges, and sometimes international corporations and organized crime--coordinated and inter-connected enough to hide the truth, obstruct justice and cover for high level leaders.

That's what a conspiracy is: a coordination between normally separable government officials who have no legal right or lawful need to collude in their official capacities. Sadly, it happens all the time. The excuse given, when discovered, that these unfortunate incidents are merely the workings of the proverbial "rogue agent" is rarely true. Upon close examination, the trail leads always to higher levels where the cover-up and obstruction gets serious. For further evidence, read the accounts of the many government whistle blowers out of the military, CIA, DEA, or FBI, found in Rodney Stich's now dated evidence in Defrauding America


NWO globalists take great care to mask their intentions by appealing to "democracy" and making constant references to free trade and "human rights" and the support of international law. But a close look at their justification for intervention in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Balkans and Syria clearly indicates that tyranny and ethnic cleansing was fostered, then overlooked, or even partially falsified until it festered enough to justify intervention and subsequent control. While most people in the Western world do not view the NWO as a predator movement, the Eastern world certainly is beginning to see it in that light. I will make the case that the changing role of NATO and the UN from a defensive organization to an aggressor in Iraq, Kosovo, Bosnia, East Timor, and Africa was and still is intentional, meant to help stir up hatred and discontent sufficient to justify an eventual Russian and Chinese strike on the West as previously discussed.


The big question is always, why would those who strive for global power and financial control want to engender a nuclear war that would destroy the whole world? In the first place, it is not true that the whole world would be destroyed. Millions would die, and over half the people in any country under attack would get very ill, but probably no more than 20% of the populace of any nation subjected to a military facilities first strike would die. Most countries will not be targeted. Russia, who is planning this war, is sensible enough to be prepared to shelter many of its citizens from nuclear effects. Among Western nations, however, only Switzerland has a comprehensive fallout shelter program for its citizens.

However, US leaders have extensive shelters in place plus multiple contingencies to survive the attack they all know is coming. A few thousand savvy conservatives in America also have provided shelter systems for their families. Nuclear war is quite survivable, outside of the actual blast zones, with adequate preparations in place (see my book, The Secure Home for specific plans for installing a shelter in your home)

The core of the question about the prime motive remains: why destroy the tremendous prosperity that even these conspirators for global power enjoy? Most people do not sufficiently understand real evil. To them, this scenario is simply unimaginable. But the fact remains, powerful men in government and business have knowingly colluded to finance war and destruction. It has happened before and it will happen again. For example, globalists bankers, corporation heads and government officials colluded prior to WWII to finance Hitler and Stalin, and undermine capitalist nations in order to pave the way for Socialism and war. A close look at the conduct of the war relative to aid and concessions to Russia paint a picture of Western complicity to play the Hegelian game-- building up an enemy in order to produce a controlled crisis and a later response in the direction of more globalist and socialist control. The West actively colluded in the betrayal of captive nations and paved the way for Soviet military dominance and conquest around the world in order to set the stage for future conflict.

None of the World Wars in this century were accidents, in my opinion. Conflict was created with the long-term goal to facilitate a consolidation of world power in the hands of the NWO elite. It is true that many of the Wall Street bankers who financed Hitler and the Alfried Krupp-owned German war industries saw those investments destroyed, but they were always taken care of after the war and allowed to make even greater millions in the reconstruction process. That was much of the motive behind the Marshal Plan. German armorer Alfried Krupp, who was convicted at the Nuremberg trials for using slave labor, was pardoned by John J. McCloy, US Military Governor and High Commissioner in Germany. Mcloy was also the globalist insider who eventually became head of the CFR. Clearly there was a system of immunity and protection established for insider participants so that war could be used as an instrument of change, without destroying its own leaders and the power behind them. In each case, there was a common motive--to use the horrors of war to accelerate the demand for international institutions of control that would not otherwise be acceptable to free men and women.

To fully understand the globalist mode of operation, we must address one of the great inconsistencies in US foreign policy: Why have US leaders (especially from Truman onward) actively undermined other pro-Western governments and secretly armed and supported Communist guerrilla operations in such countries as China, Korea, Cuba, Nicaragua, Laos, and Cambodia? Why do globalists attack some Communist regimes and support others? The main reason is that globalists are dedicated socialists, in terms of commitment to control, but want the benefits of a partially free market to finance that control system. They have a code name for this dualism--the Third Way--which is a euphemism for the old Fabian socialism (private ownership but government regulation and control). Naturally, globalists like the trappings of wealth that the capitalist component of a controlled economy provides.

Communism has been a useful tool for the globalists to subvert liberty in the world. Communism takes the rap, while the globalists steadily undermine world independence and national sovereignty by eventually replacing communist nations with their own brand of corporate capitalism---not true free markets. The NWO boys are experts in the use of Hegelian tactics of creating enemies that produce a desired response. For example, Communism is often characterized by certain excesses in tyranny that engender a call for global intervention--very convenient. The Communists come in with their tyranny and the globalists step in to defeat them and yet don’t deliver true liberty, but a controlled variety of debt bondage to international financial organs.


PDD-60 is an important clue to how the globalists intend to force reluctant Americans into a militarized global government. Right now there is a massive movement in opposition to globalism by about half of the people in theWest, as evidenced by the Brexit vote and the rise of many anti-EU parties in Europe. But if the US military is decapitated in a first strike, which the US allows by making use the nuclear codes don’t get to our missile forces in the US and UK, the Western world will be suddenly in a position of helplessness.

After the strike our leaders will emerge from their bunkers and claim total innocence--that the Russians and Chinese deceived them--that they didn't know this was coming. They will be lying, but the surviving public will forget all about national sovereignty and constitutional rights and beg government to save them. To do so, our leaders will say, now that our military is mostly destroyed, that we must join with other nations in a MILITARIZED global government in order to prosecute this new war.

The people will go along and conjure up images of a new patriotic war like WWII. But, this time, after the war, our leaders will cement us into a permanent New World Order and national sovereignty will never be returned. This prediction alone explains the suicidal and unilateral disarmament the US has engaged in for the past 30 years. It explains the rationale for covering up for Russia's constant cheating on arms control agreements and treaties. It explains why Bill Clinton would direct the US military to absorb a nuclear first strike (PDD-60) and NOT launch on warning. It explains why the US would keep stalling year after year to make sure America is undefended against a nuclear strike and that there are no provisions for civil defense shelters. It isn't that US leaders are stupid. They aren't suicidal. They simply can't get the world to take the final plunge into global control without a war.

While the US is slowly being sucked into the NWO through gradualism, I still think war is necessary to get Americans to give up their core liberties. It's one thing to fool the people into thinking we are still sovereign as we slowly entangle ourselves in the United Nations, transnational trade agreements and the EU, but it is another thing entirely to start hauling Americans to courts in The Hague over a wetlands violation in Virginia. When that starts happening, the Powers That Be know that Americans will rebel and start demanding that we extricate ourselves from globalism. War is designed to be so devastating to Americans (a massive nuclear strike is the "mother of all terrorism") that they will easily give up any liberties in order to have someone "save them." The Patriot Act's passage by a compliant Congress showed just how dumbed-down and stupid leaders and people can become after an appropriately motivated terror event such as the 9/11 attacks on the WTC.


Clearly the NWO globalists do not intend to lose a war to the Russians or Chinese, which brings up the next question: how do the globalist plan to win a war with Russia and China when they absorb a first strike that destroys most of the US and British military machine at the very onset of hostilities?

First, I think the use is using a lot of off-budget money to finance secret weapons systems which will not be used to defend us from this first strike, but will be used thereafter to stop any further attacks while the US and UK regroup under a global military banner. Europe, in fact, may not be included in the first strike as Russia wants to preserve the economy of Europe by blackmailing it into submission. Certainly Europe's meager NATO forces would be incapable of taking on the Russians alone. I think perhaps, that ongoing secret plans within the EU to create an EU army separate from NATO is the intended beginning of a globalist military force that will be built up quickly after this war starts.

In the coming war, I also suspect China will play the same role as Russia did in WWII. I think the globalists plan is to induce China to switch sides and attack Russia’s rear, in exchange for more military technology. China knows that it has to eventually go up against Russia, so why not then when Russia would be faced with a two front war. Why would the globalist’s make such a deal with China? -Because it not only facilitates the defeat of Russia, but because China then would become the new cold war enemy after WWIII and justify keeping the new globalist military intact and not returning national sovereignty to each member nation after the war.


There is one major mistake in the assumption that almost all people make who object to conspiracy--they assume that everyone or nearly everyone contributing to the conspirator's agenda must know there is a conspiracy and be privy to the entire plan and all its details. This is not true, but conjuring up this assumption allows people to easily dismiss conspiracy with the understanding that too many knowing people would make it impossible to keep the secret.

I certainly have never made a case for all or even many of the participants knowing the whole plan or even substantial parts of it. Quite the contrary. All my writings have concentrated on explaining how and why top level conspirators use masses of predictable leftists, yes-men, ambitious lackeys and partially knowing ladder-climbers to do their bidding--specifically so as to limit the number who have "need to know" access. They cement together the whole conglomerate with subtle and not so subtle threats--and occasionally carry them out. Many are bought off with regular payments--like journalists and judges. Most know only parts of the puzzle.

However, almost everyone in high places does know there is "power structure" above them they dare not challenge, they also know it isn't good for their job, advancement or health to "ask too many questions." Read any number of the tales by federal whistleblowers to confirm this general fear. Thus, most participants rationalize it all away as some benevolent control system, or believing that "whoever they are" must control the world in order to have stability. Others, especially in the enforcement ranks, are just too corrupt to care. But the bottom line is: very few know that the Powers That Be (PTB) intend to pull the nuclear trigger via Russia and China. All the little steps leading up to weakening the US and building up Russia and China are covered by liberal notions of "détente," "easing tensions," and "peace." The lesser officials who are tasked to defend these lies tend to believe their own propaganda.

However, the ones at the very top, who do know how to use war to create Hegelian responses, are very very evil--something most of the world doesn't really believe in anymore, and that is why many people can't conceive of or believe in this horrible brand of conspiracy. But keep in mind what they did before in building up Hitler, only to set him loose on Europe during WWII. The war created a justification for the UN and facilitated the rise of a new enemy (Russia) in its aftermath. Remember Pearl Harbor--not because of the infamy of Japan, but the infamy of Roosevelt and his leftist crew who induced Japan to attack and hid the information from our own military in Hawaii. We now have proof that Roosevelt knew of the impending attack and refused to warn Pearl.It happened before, so why should it be so hard to believe now? We are reaching the culmination of what George Marshall and his cohorts planned by creating a cold war enemy. Russia was allowed to rise and have hegemony over Europe in order to create the next war. The phony demise of "Communism" is merely the final effort to lull the West into complacency before the strike. We are about to see it descend upon the world.

In all of this, I'm certainly not discounting the military-industrial complex argument, but it doesn't explain why people who are already fabulously wealthy and who control the reins of power are still pushing the world toward greater and greater global control. None of this will give them any more personal power or wealth. How much money and power can any single person use? The military industrial complex argument doesn't explain the rush to suicide and disarmament at an alarming rate. Some participants are blind, but surely some must suspect this is a very dangerous game and are going along in order to please some other very powerful people above them.

But let there be no doubt, the top echelon expects to survive this--why else have they built significant bunkers at US taxpayer expense, and private bunkers in resort homes in Colorado at their own expense. Somebody knows something is coming. Also, war is not as futile a tactic as most conspiracy debunkers assume. At least 2/3 of the world will survive this even without preparations, and virtually all the high level people who know that war is coming have made preparations to survive it.


This strategy is wholly dependent upon shielding Americans and Europeans from Russian and Chinese intentions. Keeping people ignorant and naive also allows these same globalist leaders to claim that they didn't know of Russian and Chinese intentions. We must not let them get away with this, lest they claim the right to lead America into the war for global control. If you trust our government, remember Pearl Harbor. The evidence is now fully proven that Roosevelt induced Japan to attack in much the same way our own government now is helping to induce a Russian attack in the future (see Bob Stinnett's book "Pearl Harbor--Day of Deceit" for evidence of the Pearl Harbor conspiracy). There is also a growing body of evidence that the US government (dark side) was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks and subsequent cover up. See "9/11 Update". There has been a huge cover-up about this false flag terror attack, but the next provoked war (allowing a nuclear attack on America) will be much more deadly to millions of Americans. Every one of you reading this is at risk, so do not take lightly what I say. In any case, the least you can do is prepare to survive the next war. If I'm right on timing we still have a few years to prepare.

Joel Skousen, Editor World Affairs Brief