Comments by "" (@craigkdillon) on "CaspianReport"
channel.
-
126
-
118
-
63
-
50
-
Some good points...BUT...
1. Oil & gas are of NO importance. In 20 years, the world will have a renewable energy infrastructure, or be well on the way. Oil & gas will be obsolete. Also, oil and gas are everywhere. ALL continental shelves have reserves (laid down during Global Anoxic Events in the Mesozoic).
2. Russia still has shown no interest or ability to partake in the global economic community (unlike China). This will hold Russia back for a long time.
3. Resources??? That is 19th century thinking. Wealth comes from value adding, finance, and intellectual property. Look at how wealthy Holland, Switzerland, and Israel are. Few resources and almost no land. Yet they do very well.
4. St. Petersburg will be flooded.
5. China, US, and Europe are going to benefit greatly in financing, enabling, and implementing the move to renewable energy. Russia will be shut out of that.
6. Russia COULD benefit from a huge influx of climate refugees --- IF they were welcoming and geared to do that. But, Russia is nativistic, looking down on those not slavic or even Rus. Russia has no means to encourage or even allow immigrants to start businesses.
Immigrant founded and owned businesses is one of the great sources of wealth for the United States.
7. Canada is the North American equivalent of Russia's Siberia. It will get more temperate, and become more livable. Americans will move there. Agriculture will increase there. When looking at North America as a whole, we are not as bad off as you might think. Florida and Gulf Coast will be flooded. But, the US has the flexibility to deal with the huge internal movements of people.
18
-
18
-
18
-
15
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
Besides renewable energy, the rising seas will have PROFOUND impact.
1. River deltas like the Nile, Mekong, Ganges, Mississippi, Po, Rhine, Danube, and many others will be submerged. Huge amounts of producing agricultural land will be lost. How will those countries cope with that?
2. Huge populations will be displaced - Shanghai region (50-200 million people) Bangladesh (100 million), the US coasts (50 million), Vietnam (25 million), and so many others.
3. On the other hand, oil will no longer be important, and energy will be available in all countries. Energy will no longer be the cudgel that wealthy countries hold over poor countries without oil.
4. A huge problem will be the collapse of fisheries in the oceans due to ocean warming and over fishing. With the loss of that food source - how will dependent populations cope?
5. Agricultural production will likely decline. How much is the question. It is possible that it crashed, causing mass starvation the world over. Will a future world be able to support 9 billion people? Or, will several billions have to die, so the rest can live??? If so, which ones will be forced to die?
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
I am surprised by your sloppy and inaccurate representation of what is going on there.
You use the word "claims" very loosely, inferring that that claims of all the nations are similar.
In fact, you said that the other nations "mirror" China's claims.
They do not mirror China's claims. Let me explain.
Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei
make ONLY the EEZ claims as defined and allowed by the UN.
China makes the UNIQUE claim of SOVEREIGNTY.
"Sovereignty" means that China wants to treat the SCS as if it was an internal waterway,
a river or estuary.
If allowed, China would control all sea and air traffic.
China could legally blockade the countries of the region, without it being an act of war.
China challenges ships, but also challenges all planes flying over the SCS, forcing them to identify themselves and get China's "permission" to fly over.
7
-
6
-
6
-
I am disappointed in you, Caspian Report.
IMO, resources is the cover, not the reason for China's claims to the SCS.
By controlling the SCS, China can effectively blockade Taiwan, Japan, and SK, thus reducing them to dependent states. China forces ships to stop in the SCS, thus reinforcing China's claims of sovereignty.
Morover, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, and Cambodia would also be diminished to dependent states with full China sovereignty over the SCS.
The issue is geo-political, not resources.
Surprised you didn't see that. You are usually so good at geopolitics.
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
I am more optimistic.
Peak Oil Demand is expected to happen by 2025, some think sooner. When global oil demand shrinks, the value of Arctic oil will plummet. In fact, oil+gas should cease to be strategic resources by 2040.
As nations around the world implement renewable energy infrastructures. the need for oil+gas will no longer determine global politics and international relations.
Why does everyone care who rules in the Middle East and what they do there??
Why does no one care about who rules in Central Africa or what they do there??
Yep, you guessed it - one has oil+gas, and the other does not (except for Nigeria, and still no one cares, LOL).
When Arabia's oil is no longer desired, who will protect the Saudi monarchy?
Same about the other oil based nations.
Oil prices will plummet, and will stay down.
So, who will spend extra $$ to extract Arctic oil? Who will buy it??
4
-
Another problem - China's foreign policy seems to get its inspiration of the attitudes of imperial China, where it viewed China as the center of the world, and ALL other countries were inferior, where laws and regulations apply to others but NOT to China.
China regularly break contracts, agreements, and international law. It has no respect for the laws of other nations, the UN, or the World Court. China's disregard for laws and treaties is creating a wall in its relations with other countries. China is making itself into an "other", apart from the normal "world of nations". For China, everything becomes a "special case".
For that to endure, then China must dominate militarily, as well as economically. I do not think that is possible in the long run.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
Ukraine & Poland will be the largest non-Russian militaries in Europe.
Germany does not count -- nice equipment, but no ammo. Less than a week's worth.
Poland, Ukraine, the Baltic States, Finland, Norway, and UK are the only countries in Europe
that US could rely on in a war with Russia.
The rest of NATO are doubtful, IMO.
France?? You never know what they will do or support. So we cannot rely on them.
Germany?? Their anti-military attitudes has castrated their military -- no ammo.
Italy? They have no idea what they want or what they believe in. The ultimate confused country.
Spain & Portugal? They don't see themselves as party to any conflict with Russia.
Greece? They are busy dealing with Turkey.
Turkey? They would rather take over Greece and Syria. Plus, they will sell weapons to Russia. An ally in any form? Not at all.
But, Poland, Ukraine, Baltic States, Finland, Sweden, and Norway would be wonderful allies.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The idea that the Muslim empires were singular with strong central authority is a myth.
One reason the crusades were successful was that Islamic rule was highly fractured.
The rulers of cities like Aleppo, Damascus, and Antioch might or might not help each other.
They were really separate independent entities.
During Ottoman Rule, Egypt was independent, even though it was supposedly "Ottoman".
IMO, the main reason there is no Muslim "super state", is that the governing philosophies, institutions, and beliefs in the Muslim world are primitive. Saudi Arabia is a medieval monarchy, for instance.
Muslim countries devolve into single man rule, like the rule of princes in the Middle Ages.
There is no tradition of Parliaments, Assemblies, or other institutions based on voting.
Democracy is alien to Muslims.
Egypt and Pakistan have democratic institutions because of their brief rule by Britain.
But, they are weak. The people, having no tradition of democracy, are comfortable with one man rule, and strive for that.
What makes it worse is that the Koran endorses autocracy, not democracy. To many Muslims, democracy is alien and unacceptable. I doubt the Muslim world will change much in the next 100 years. In 2122, people will still be writing articles, asking "Why is the Muslim world poor?", "Why is the Muslim world undemocratic?", "Why can't modern high tech businesses succeed in Muslim countries?"
The same questions that are asked now.
3
-
Keeping the wealth, and not sharing the wealth is not a good long term strategy. Sure, repressive measures work for awhile. But, eventually, cracks occur, and there is an uprising.
It is impossible to predict what event will galvanize the protests, or know the resulting dynamic.
Look at how the Arab Spring started in Tunisia with a street vendor being mishandled by a cop.
When that happens, this event will give Ethiopia the right, the duty, to step in and restore order.
Djibouti should be part of Ethiopia. One needs a port, and the other needs a country.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The problem with war is that you never know what will happen. for example, Hitler had no idea that Britain would go to war over Poland. What's more he could not imagine that they would not welcome peace negotiations.
Similarly, how would EU, UK, and US react if Russia invaded the Baltic states. No one lifted a finger when Putin took Crimea. No one did directly oppose Russia's war in Ukraine. Sure, some weapons, and verbal support, but not much else.
Kind of like the time Hitler took the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia with little opposition.
Would the Balkan States be "Poland" for the EU and US??? Would that be the tripwire??
No one can tell.
Putin cannot tell.
I think it is fairly likely that Putin will miscalculate one of these days, and the western powers will respond in force.
3
-
3
-
2
-
Also, China's claims to the SCS have f**k all to do with resources.
If that was the case, it would claim EEZ rights.
BUT -- China claims FULL SOVEREIGNTY.
Why???
Simple. if recognized, then most trade in the area would be controlled by China.
Japan, Taiwan, ROK, PH, VT, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia would
become vassal states to China.
When it comes to China --- it is NOT about resources and money ---
It is about POWER and CONTROL.
In your analyses of China, keep that in mind.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
There were several causes. Like always, reality is more complicated.
First, trade with the orient moved to Portuguese, Dutch, and English ships, thus starving the silk road. The once trading monopoly that the Ottoman's enjoyed ended.
Second, the western European development of the corporation enabled western Europe to manage capital and investment better. Western Europe slowly became wealthier and more powerful than Eastern Europe and the Ottoman Empire.
Third, the development of the policy of "separation of Church and State" that occurred after the Thirty Year's War freed Western Europe from the issues of religion, bringing on the Enlightenment.
Fourth, the overseas colonies and trading empires of Spain, England, France, and Holland increased their wealth and power immensely.
Fifth, the maturity of the modern nation state made the empire model of governing obsolete. The Ottoman Empire could not manage its resources as efficiently, and it was in constant struggles for succession and political power. The palace intrigues of Topkapi may make for great reading, but it makes for lousy governing.
BTW..Putin's apparent attempt to impose an "empire model" to Russia will also end in failure, I predict. He will seem to succeed for a while due to the strength of his personality. Eventually, he will age or die. When he goes, Russia will have the eternal succession problem of empires. Succession struggles weakened Rome, Turkey, and China. They will weaken Russia, too. One day there will be a Democratic Revolution in Russia. I just wonder how long it will take.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Once, the nations on the periphery suffered from isolation, and so could be intimidated and coerced.
China could deal with Korea, Vietnam, Mongolia, and the others on a one-by-one basis.
China was a natural hegemon.
The modern world is entirely different. Maritime trade dominates, not overland trade.
All, except Mongolia, are well connected to the world. None are dependent on China.
They desire trade, but they are not wholly dependent upon it.
Oddly, China's recent rise as a manufacturing behemoth created a temporary situation
that mimicked the old situation where China was a natural hegemon.
Xi and the CCP think that China is such a hegemon again.
They are wrong.
Already, manufacturing is moving to other countries. The temporary situation is now changing.
The regional countries are now rising (which was inevitable).
So, China is overplaying its hand, because it has misinterpreted its situation.
Its power position is not what it thinks it is.
China's actions have the most important effect of coalescing its enemies.
Actually creating enemies.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Unfortunately, in South America, they have an ignorant understanding of economics, business, and how to fund social services. IMO, this comes from European socialism.
Although Progressivism appears similar to Socialism, it differs in one very crucial area --
===> Progressivism was started by small businessmen in the Republican Party. Therefore, Progressives tend to be fiscally conservative. That is why in the US, Social Security and Medicare have been so financially successful.
Currently, growth of Progressivism (which I am, btw) has brought the debate of how expanded health care will be paid for. I am for it, but it must be done in a way that is affordable AND sustainable.
In the long run, nations, like families, can only buy what they can afford.
First, a country should strengthen and expand its economy, expanding its middle class.
Then, and only then, can significant monies be spent on social services.
A big mistake is made, I think, when poor countries try to behave like a European country with a mature economy, and then overspend on social services. Even in Europe, they seem to be having that problem in Greece and maybe Spain. That needs to be avoided. It could lead to a collapse of the economy, and the collapse of governing institutions.
2
-
WOW...this video needs updating.
Since 2019, Xi has done his very best to piss everyone off.
He has made territorial claims on India, Japan, Philippines, Vietnam, and RUSSIA! ! !
That's right -- Russia. China wants Siberia back.
How can China hope to make the transition to a consumption based economy by destroying its trade and diplomatic relations??
The making of arms and munitions is inefficient, and does not support economic expansion.
IMO, Xi and China are dissipating the resources and wealth that was accumulated since 1980.
Australia is turning against China -- cancelling its Darwin port deal.
China has destroyed India as a huge future growth market for China.
Even Duterte of Philippines has turned against China.
Meanwhile, US and other nations are selling arms to Taiwan.
It is now impossible for China to invade Taiwan.
I think China has peaked, and has started its decline.
This will end badly for China.
Personally, I don't think China will survive as a united country.
I expect it to fall apart into several countries.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The profound observation of Lambert seems to be the connection between representative government, and being a Sea State.
Athens, Venice, Netherlands, England, and the US I posit are too many to dismiss this proposition as coincidence.
There is something about ocean borne trade that compels representative government.
While, continental trade compels centralized authoritarian government.
All the states involved in the Silk Road, and other trans-continental trade, were all imperial governments, or were trending that way.
China, Russia, Persia, Sassanid, Byzantine, Ottoman, and so many others, all followed the same pattern.
Even the states of Africa involved in the trans-Saharan caravans, all were centralized with dynastic rule.
Of course, things are more complicated than that. Switzerland has representative government, and it is definitely NOT a sea power.
The other observation is the ALL the examples of representative government are all in Europe. Asia and Africa had no representative governments, until UK and Netherlands brought them. Now, some Native American tribes had representative government - namely the Iroquois and Illinois Confederacies. In fact, the concept of the Eternal Flame that burns in Arlington Cemetery came from the Iroquois. The Iroquois Confederacy inspired Benjamin Franklin to propose the United States in 1756.
Those Native America tribes were not sea powers in any way, yet they had a representative form of government, with no kings or inherited dynastic rule.
Like I said -- history, societies, and cultures are always more complicated than they may seem at first.
2
-
Actually, I see more opportunity for the US & Europe to benefit from helping countries around the world cope with climate change. When has Russia helped others?? Russia has no tradition of foreign aid and assistance, except as a dominating power with its satellites.
When people from South East Asia, China, Africa, and South America emigrate??? Where will they go? Russia? That's laughable.
In the short run, refugees may be problem, causing strains and dislocations. BUT, in the long run, they create a bond between the nations.
The US has bonds with Germany, Ireland, Philippines, Greece, Italy, and so many other countries because of the immigrants from those countries whose descendants now live here.
Will Russia ever have that?? Will they welcome or allow that?? Never.
Global Warming COULD be a game changer for Russia -- but it won't be.
Putin is too wedded to reviving the Tsarist past. Russia is too myopic, and inflexible.
If an opportunity, it will be an opportunity lost.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The US is not nearly as distracted as it may seem.
Remember, the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl did NOT distract us from the coming of WW2.
The US has had recent supply deals with Taiwan to supply Harpoon missiles, F-16 jets, AGM-88 missiles, radars, reconnaissance planes, training, and more.
PLUS, Taiwan has some excellent domestically developed missiles, including long range cruise missiles.
China's chance of successfully invading Taiwan is about as close to zero as it can be.
Would Xi survive a failed invasion where 30+ ships are sunk, and 50,000 PLA troops lie at the bottom of the sea???
I doubt it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Now compound China's demographic problem with decoupling and the loss of its export markets.
Xi's antagonistic and bullying foreign policy will make China's problem much worse.
As western manufacturing moves its factories and suppliers to India, Vietnam, and other countries, China's economy is going to suffer greatly. It is already losing its foreign currency reserves.
Its military challenges, and fishing fleet aggression is causing Japan, SK, PH, VT, India, and other countries to increase their defense spending. China's expansion of its military will not result in such a huge military that its neighbors will be over awed.
Their military expansion, and likely coalescence into an anti-China alliance, like NATO, will actually over-awe China.
IMO - China is heading for disaster.
A disaster so large, that the CCP will likely not survive.
A disaster so large, that the center may not hold, and China will fall apart, like it has many times in its history.
I think the people of China would be better served by multiple states.
Southern China, Central China, Manchuria, Xinjiang, and Tibet all deserve separate governments.
Even more states may develop, if such a collapse occurs.
1
-
1
-
Sorry, I don't understand.
WHY, oh WHY, would a company send product by rail across Africa by land, when they can put it on a boat in Lagos or another port and send it up to Spain, France, Italy, UK, or Germany directly???
Also, getting product overland to Algiers or Tunis, still means product has to be put on ships to get to Europe.
I don't see how much is gained.
For import/export, the sea lanes should maintain their predominance, IMO.
For people transport, airliners is the best way to go, IMO.
Shervan, I think you got this one wrong.
To convince me otherwise, you need to show how and why ocean transport doesn't work as well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In the next few decades, sea level rise will being changing geopolitics and strategy.
1. Sea level has already started, although very slightly. This rise will accelerate, and then accelerate more. Later this century, it may be rising by several inches per year. After 2100, the annual rise will be be even greater.
2. Moving our cities and populations from the coasts will be a challenge for many countries. I suspect that many will have difficulty affording it.
3. Meanwhile, global food production will begin to plummet, I think. If so, that will cause famine, death, and forced migrations. How will governments react? With compassion? Or, with bullets???
4. Will countries go to war to seize land as their land shrinks by submersion into the sea?
5. Meanwhile, heat waves will begin to make the tropics uninhabitable (see Paul Beckwith's videos). What will happen to those nations? What will they do? Will there be wars??
1
-
1
-
What are the biggest obstacles to China's growth in power. There are several.
1. Leadership. Xi is destroying China's reputation. The CCP disavowal of treaties, laws, and agreements, make it very difficult for other nations and companies to trust agreements.
2. Geography. China is hemmed in by the inner ring of islands - Taiwan & Philippines. Of course, this is only a problem if China goes to war. In peacetime, they are no barrier to trade, commerce, and finance.
3. Economy - once a strength, now a weakness. China's export led economy is now vulnerable to other nations reducing their imports. China is already suffering. It's foreign currency reserves are tumbling. Its banks are already collapsing. This will get worse. Much worse.
4. Institutions - China has turned its back on international institutions - the UN, the World Court. By defying UNCLOS, China has set itself apart from the world community. By invading EEZ's around the world in its insatiable appetite for fish, China is creating ill will globally.
Now, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, and others have to spend more on their Coast Guards to protect their own EEZ.
This violation of international law puts China outside of the world club of nations.
5. Poor regional relations. One of the long term strengths of the US has been the good relations it has had with its neighbors - Canada, Mexico, Latin America, Caribbean. As China's relations with its neighbors decline, its influence, and thus its power declines. This happens even though China's military grows in strength. Soon, the Quad will grow into an anti-China military alliance. Its power will decline further.
In the end, the ability of China to control the waters of the rivers of Asia will be a minor plus, not a decisive factor at all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I understand your assertion. However, power poorly used, can backfire.
Of late, China has shown to be diplomatically very clumsy.
China has created a backlash of resentment, fear, and even hate.
The bullying and threats has stimulated the creation of an anti-China coalition called the Quad.
Soon, an anti-China alliance, similar to NATO, will likely be created.
India and the ASEAN nations that are downstream of China's rivers, are not powerless.
They, too, have the collective ability to make or break China.
If China uses the rivers to directly extort concessions, then those countries will see even more the need for collective action.
Seeing China as the main regional threat will compel them to put aside minor differences and squabbles,
so they can unite against China.
This is what I fell will happen.
I feel so strongly, that I see it as a very certain inevitability.
It WILL happen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Shervan, I would like to hear your analysis of what the geopolitical arrangement of the world will be
after the age of oil.
Peak Oil Demand will happen in the next few years. After that, oil demand will decrease until it becomes inconsequential.
Solid State batteries, which can be charged in 15 minutes, will be a game changer -- propelling the acceptance of electric cars to the mass public.
When access to oil is no longer relevant to economies and to militaries, how will that change national politics? National rivalries?
The Middle East has been the focus of geopolitics since WW2 because of oil. Will our concern for the Middle East decline to the level of concern felt for Central Africa or South America?
I think so. Why would anyone care about Saudi Arabia anymore???
Why would US or Europe defend the oil states??
Being less wealthy, the Muslim states may not have the money to fund the terror groups like Boko Harram, Al Shabbab, and so many others. So, will there be a change in world terrorism??
Won't non-oil countries benefit? Could the non-oil desert states of Africa, with their constant sunshine, enable them to become rich in energy?? Could they become the next centers of manufacturing??
BTW -- IMO, manufacturing will be more dependent on access to cheap energy, than it will be to cheap labor. So, could Mauritania, Niger, Chad, Morocco, and Algeria become manufacturing behemoths?
The assumptions we have operated with for so long will no longer be valid.
How will this change the world?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Shervan, I recommend you read Russia Under the Old Regime, and Russia Under the New Regime.
Pipes makes a good case that Communism, especially Stalinism, is really a repackaging of Tsarism.
Similarly, Maoism is a repackaging of the Chinese Imperial system.
We are really seeing that with Xi, who behaves as if China is the Middle Kingdom, and the world should kowtow.
China MUST give up this system.
Taiwan did, and look how prosperous it is.
South Korea gave up the Chosun system, and look how prosperous it is.
Japan gave up Bushido and Emperor worship, and look how prosperous it is.
The nations of Asia prosper when they give up the imperial forms of governments
that were used across Asia for centuries.
Similarly, in Europe, as the states of western Europe evolved away from monarchical government,
they became more prosperous.
That is why the Netherlands became wealthy, while Spain, despite its Empire, became poor.
As that spread in Europe, the wealth spread with it.
The system of trade, corporations, banking, universities, freedom of movement,
and the elimination of aristocracies is at its root.
China has a new aristocracy in the CCP, denies freedom of movement, and cripples its corporations.
The CCP is the garrote around China's neck.
China MUST destroy the CCP, if it ever hopes to achieve sustainable prosperity.
IMHO, of course.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I do not accept that the frequent incursions of Taiwan's ADIZ is a problem for Taiwan, but not for China.
First, China's jet aircraft require more maintenance, and have shorter lives than Taiwan's American jets.
Second, China's aircraft have to fly longer on a mission than Taiwan's jets have to fly responding. So, there will be more wear and tear on China's jets than Taiwan's.
Third, Taiwan is a developed wealthy country, and can easily afford the fuel. In fact, China's continued incursions will train and motivate Taiwan's pilots and planners.
Fourth, China's frequent incursions and threats are driving Taiwan's citizens to be against China, and against re-unification.
All in all, China's tactics are counter-productive, and actually stupid, IMO.
1
-
BTW - If China is allowed make the SCS sovereign territory - then the following countries will become dependent on China since China will control their maritime trade ----
Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, India, and Australia.
All those countries (if they are smart) should join an alliance with the US and UK to oppose China's SCS claims.
China's bullying tactics should not be tolerated.
1. Sanctions should be imposed to punish bullying
2. Western corporations should be dissuaded, even penalized, from having manufacturing operations in China.
3. Member navies should maintain 24/7/365 presence in the South China Sea.
4. Any shipping vessel that replies to China's requests for identity and permission should be penalized by their flag country. China should not be allowed to behave like they have authority over the SCS.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dumertone Thank you very much for the info. Try as I might, I only know what I read. You live there. You know so much more on a deeper level. But, much of what you said validated much of what I already thought. Putin fears and hates democracy more than anything.
However, Turkey & Russia are traditional enemies - for centuries. Pissing on your allies is not usually a good idea, IMO. At some point, Turkey may have to face Russia on his own. If you don't act like an ally, you may not be treated as an ally.
Much more divergence from NATO, and the US could move its Incerlik base to Greek Cyprus (UK has base there). Then Turkey could be kicked out of NATO.
From commenters from Turkey, it seems a lot of Turks are not happy with Erdogan's shift away from Europe. If so, than he may have to be harsher to keep his power. Erdogan is not in the same unassailable position Putin is in, I think.
I don't see a Putin/Erdogan alliance, either.
So, does Erdogan have a plan? Has he thought his policies through? I doubt it.
1
-
Shervan, the flaw in your analysis is that you assume no response by other nations.
Do you really think the other nations of the region will allow themselves to become vassals of China without resistance??? Do you really think that??
Already, Japan, India, US, and Australia are strengthening the Quad -- soon, I expect a NATO-like alliance to be created (Indo-Pacific Alliance?).
China will have to face and intimidate an alliance.
China's navy will NOT be as big as US/Japan/India/Australia/UK/Vietnam/Philippines/Singapore, and probably a few more.
China's attempt to dictate to others with no allies, and no one liking them is doomed to failure.
PLUS -- the demographic collapse, and the coming economic collapse of China will prevent China from achieving that goal.
In this case, Shervan, I think you fell into the "extrapolation trap". Many analysts who try to predict the future fall into it. Extrapolations of recent trends into the future using extrapolations have the inherent flaw of assuming the future won't change course.
It always does.
Already, the conditions that enabled China to build and expand its navy is coming to an end.
China just cancelled a large carrier, for instance.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Have to disagree, at least a bit.
True, geography will impact mindset and world view.
However, so does culture and history.
The mindset and world view of Pakistan is far different than India, and that has nothing to do with geography.
For me, the biggest influence on the Russian mindset are two things --
1) the horror of the 150 years under the Tatar yoke. They were merciless, and they Russia to a bestial existence.
2) the heavy yoke of Tsarist rule, with imposed serfdom for 350 years.
Russia has only begun to experience normality only in the last few decades.
Russia has no experience or understanding of democracy. Do they even understand charity, or forgiveness? I wonder.
The paranoia of Putin and Russia's acceptance of his paranoia is amazing.
Europe and US were slowly demobilizing, until Putin resurrected Russian 18th Century foreign policy ideas.
But, the key thing was that Russia accepted this paranoia because, to them, it seems reasonable.
Therefore, they are as deluded, and ultimately as stupid as he is.
Putin is destroying Russia, with the cooperation of the Russians.
What idiots. Prisoners of their own misconception and misunderstanding of the world.
1
-
1
-
I don't think China's navy is tipping any balance.
If anything, China's navy is losing relative.
US, Japan, Australia, Philippines and India are growing closer together.
When conflict comes, it seems highly unlikely that China will have
only one opponent of its choosing.
If China takes on Taiwan, thinking that Taiwan will fight alone,
I think China will be surprised.
Japan cannot afford to let Taiwan fall to China.
So, Japan will definitely help. Japan has satellites that can help Taiwan target Chinese assets.
The US and Japan will keep the East Coast of Taiwan open, so arms and other aid can be supplied.
If Taiwan runs out of missiles, US will resupply her.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
China is already hated and opposed by everyone. If China does this (which it might already be doing on the Mekong.) I think it will pay a big price.
Seeing this, Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia who rely on the Mekong will institute their won water management programs.
They will build their own reservoirs, to hold water for use when China holds back water.
Also, China cannot hold water forever. Its reservoirs fill up, and then they have to release it, whether they like it or not.
Countries downstream can have water management facilities to ease either China holding water, or releasing it in flood quantities.
And then, those countries will hate China forever.
Not good, if China wants to have productive trade relationships.
1
-
1
-
You focus on geography & military is imbalanced, IMO. First, true power, today, is determined by economic power. China's power was growing well, and power was accruing to it, as it grew. However, Xi's policies have put a nice end to that.
I agree with your analysis that China is heavily dependent on its exports to US & EU. It's exports to India were growing nicely, too.
The idiot, Xi, is putting an end to that. The South China Sea grab is causing the US and others to rethink their policies, including trade polices, towards China.
Trump's trade war would have happened anyway, no matter who is president. Notice how the Democrats don't criticize Trump on his China policy, even though they deeply disagree with everything else he does. (You won't find any Democrats wearing long red ties, that's for sure, LOL)
If China had stayed with Deng's policies, and furthered their cooperation with and integration into the international trade system, their future growth and power would have been assured.
1
-
1
-
1
-
After 9/11, the US should have just done a punitive attack to tell the Taliban Afghani government not to do that again. Something serious, like carpet bomb their training facilities.
I do mean "carpet bomb" with dumb bombs that are not very accurate.
Many collateral deaths. Maybe, 100,000 or so.
We lost about 3,000 in their attack.
We should pay back in much higher numbers.
It would be crude and cruel.
But I don't see any other alternative.
What we did made no sense.
Committing our military to try to nation build,
in a country that does not want to change.
Japan and Germany were already modern countries after WW2.
Changing them was rather simple, by comparison.
We really had no long term interests in Afghanistan, so
committing our military for a generation was idiotic.
Not, just merely wrong --- IDIOTIC.
Both D's and R's were responsible for the lunacy.
Thank you Biden, for getting us out of there.
1
-
1
-
Let's get this straight -- China is NOT becoming a world naval power. It takes more than ships to do that.
What made England a world naval power was it global base structure, not merely its ships.
Same with America today. Sure we have a lot of great ships.
But, without Subic Bay, Diego Garcia, Okinawa, Diego Garcia, Naples, ROK, and so many others scattered around the world, the US Navy would have a hard time projecting power.
To have bases around the world requires one very essential asset, which China does not have ----
FRIENDS.
We are welcome in places like UK, Italy, Japan, Philippines, Singapore, and so many others because we have friends. The US does its best to keep its friends. We treat them with respect. We help them after a hurricane or some other disaster.
Xi, though, has been following a different path -- making as many enemies as he can.
How many friends does China have?? I bet you won't need more than one hand to count them all.
No friends -- no global naval power.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I hate it when people make assertions that are unsubstantiated and WRONG.
The coast of China was NEVER the wealthy area, until recently.
Why do you think all the capitals are inland??
Beijing, the latest, is the closest to the sea -- 90 miles away.
Chang'an was deep inland.
WHY??
Simple, trade until the Europeans, was over the Silk Road.
Wealth came overland, from the west.
When Europeans came, they reversed that.
So, Hong Kong, Macao, Shanghai, and other coastal cities
became the centers of wealth.
That has only been in the last 200 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
OK, lets forget the politics, and focus purely on the military.
Can China even hope to prevail?
Well, to do so, it must be able to function economically WHILE being at war.
The first that will happen, IMO, is the cessation of maritime imports & exports to/from China.
Shipping companies won't risk their ships, and ship insurance will probably be too expensive or non-existent.
PLUS, US and other countries will implement a naval blockade.
India will likely stop all China trade through the Malacca Strait.
US will stop it across the Pacific.
Question: How long will China's economy and people be able to withstand a blockade??
Germany lost WW1 because of its blockade.
China, I think, is more dependent on overseas trade than WW1 Germany was.
Will China last 6 months? 12 months? longer?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@edenli9208 just noticed your reply. I am impressed. You countered me, point by point.
I think you are very wrong in most of them, but you state your position clearly, without being insulting or abusive. I appreciate that.
You are first pro-China person I have met on-line, where I feel, despite our very profound differences, would be able to have a long conversation into the night, drinking beer or wine -- and have a very good time.
BTW - US won't fall apart. We almost did during our Civil War, but that ended that idea. The political differences in the US are not of a nature to coalesce around rebellion. The US is very complex, and different from all other countries. Americans have a hard time understanding it. To foreigners, it is a mystery. Personally, I think it is the most complex nation in the world. Full of contradictions. It was created on a contradiction -- "All Men Are Created Equal" & Slavery. Can't get more contradictory than that.
In the name of "Peace", we start wars (see Vietnam). We can be very greedy, yet also very generous -- see Marshall Plan, and opening our markets to Japan, SK, and Germany - enabling them to become wealthy. If you try to find consistency in our behavior, you will fail.
Scotland will likely leave the UK at some point. For some reason, any vote to stay in the union is open for another vote. A vote to leave is permanent. So, eventually a vote to leave will happen. I think that is sad, but inevitable.
1
-
@edenli9208 In the American colonies at the time, "men" would have referred any homo sapiens. Europe had gone through the Enlightenment, and had moved away from classic monotheistic theology which put people into orthodox, heretic, and non-believer categories.
But, in Christianity, even non-believers were considered human. So, "men" would have included the people we call "men" today".
I don't know about Muslims, they don't seem to like anyone, even themselves.
You are cynical. You interpret everything negatively, even the Marshall Plan.
Did the Marshall Plan help the United States? Sure it did. But, it did so by helping others, who were in dire need. People were starving in Europe.
Did it have the effect of freezing Russia out of Western Europe? Yes. It was a reason we did it. But, we DID do it.
Russia could have done the same for Eastern Europe. But did not.
In fact, no nation in history was as generous as the US at that time.
The US did not act as a conquering nation, subjugating everyone. The US favored letting businesses in those countries start, and start building wealth.
You see, what differentiates the US from Russia & China, is that we don't see the world as a zero-sum game. We believe that as other countries get rich, they will buy more from us, and we both get richer.
We don't resent other countries getting rich.
The US did not resent China getting rich --- until it started using its wealth to bully others, threaten war, and claim rights and privileges not allowed by the UN.
When China started directly threatening the US and our friends, we knew we had to change policies.
Now the US is ending its trade relationship with China. Imports from China will shrink until they are are a tiny fraction of what they were. Other countries are following our lead.
China's power will fade as quickly as it rose.
1
-
1
-
What do you mean "the downfall of the US military"???
Our military is a reflection of our country and society.
It is created and sustained by our institutions, which includes the will of its citizens.
For the military to collapse or have a downfall, that would mean a collapse of our government.
Of all the countries in the world, the US is best situated geographically and politically.
For instance, lets assume that the oceans rise 50 feet (much higher than predicted).
Florida and other coastal areas would be submerged. The people of those areas will be welcome to relocate.
Many coastal countries do not have that ability for their citizens. Bangladesh, for instance, is surrounded by India which would not welcome its refugees.
China would be hard hit, as the Yellow and Pearl river deltas are low, and would cause the dislocation of about 200,000,000 people. China is not set up culturally or legally to allow for that much internal immigration. The US, on the other hand, allows and supports internal immigration.
The US will need to abandon many bases, like Diego Garcia, which are barely above sea level. Our naval bases will likely have to be relocated. But, that is merely an inconvenience.
There will be conflicts around the world. The US does not need to get involved in any of them.
BTW -- by 2040 or 2050, our economy will have moved to renewable energy, and away from oil. We won't need to care what happens in the Middle East or other areas, to ensure our energy supply. Oil resources has been a main driver of wars for 100 years now. That is coming to an end.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Current CO2 levels have already exceeded the CO2 levels of the Pliocene, 2.5mya, when seas were 25 meters deeper.
So, sea level rise will continue to at least that level.
Moreover, according to CO2.earth, CO2 was at 415.72 ppm 4/6/20, an increase over 411.33 ppm on 4/6/19. An increase of 4.39 ppm in just one year!!! That's incredible.
Can anyone really think we won't see 500 ppm by 2050, and 600 ppm by 2100???
Those levels of CO2 have not existed since the Cretaceous, when NO ICE existed on Earth.
Can anyone doubt that oceans won't continue to rise over the next few centuries??
And, that the rise will keep accelerating??
These massive dams would be obsolete and overwhelmed by further sea rise within 50 years, 100 years viability is probably too optimistic, IMO. But, even then, is it practical for Europe to rebuild them? or, to eventually abandon coastal Europe in the long run anyway??
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
China will not have it easy.
1. India's navy now has porting rights at Cam Rahn Bay.
2. India is selling Brahmos & Akash missiles to Vietnam.
3. India is training Vietnam's navy on using its Russian made subs. India is selling naval ships to V.
4. Vietnam, India, US, Japan, and Australia hold joint naval exercises regularly.
5. Xi's military bullying is causing regional countries to lower their trading relationship with China. China's export economy will be hurt by this, especially long term, IMO.
China will find that bullying and threatening is not a way to establish healthy relationships in the region.
Xi seems to be operating as if China is the Middle Kingdom, and all countries are supposed to allow hegemony and dominion to China. Well, all those countries are proud too, and there will be push back.
Japan, India, and Vietnam are already increasing their military budgets. So, China's new military assets will bring the advantage it seeks. Remember, it takes a lot more money and assets to project power, especially over the sea.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Excellent analysis, as usual.
However, it must be kept in mind the declining geoeconomic influence of oil
Renewable energy and electric vehicles are just beginning to ramp up. Their increase will NOT be linear, but exponential or even logarithmic.
The ONLY reason the world cares about the wars, rivalries and conflicts of the Middle East is oil. Notice - no one cares about conflicts in Africa. No troops went on the ground to rescue Sudan. No one cares about Yemen, since it has no oil. Same with South America.
As oil declines in significance, at some point Saudi regime may not be rescued if it comes under threat. The US quickly came to Saudi's defense when Hussein threatened. In 5, 10, or 15 years, the Suadi regime may be overthrown because no one lands an army to prevent it.
Also, Saudi Arabia's medieval government will become increasingly incapable of governing a nation of over 40 million. The strains of the modern world will be too much for the family monarchy. Plus, the average Arab will likely become resentful of the lazy Saudi family that suck up the money, while contributing little.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Excellent analysis. However, all the issues you mentioned will be affected by continuing trends. For instance....
1) Russia's financial power is decreasing compared to Europe and US. Russia's economy is not innovative, nor supporting of trade. IMO, Russia will have less and less to offer Belarus in loans, and other supports.
2) The reverberation of the Soviet bell will diminish over time, both in Belarus and in Russia itself. As both nations become more open and aware of the outside world through trade and travel, their cultures will change. This process has been happening around the world, and it will happen there as well.
3) As the world shifts to renewable energy, the geostrategic power of oil will shrink, and eventually disappear. Russia's reliance on the power of oil will cause Russia to lose almost all power. The only power Russia will have is military, and even that will decline as Russia's economy declines and cannot support a robust military industrial complex.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You throw around numbers as if they mean the same thing.
Chinese numbers, IMO, are not the same as US numbers.
For instance, you mentioned a factory being built by China as "infrastructure". Huh??
A factory is NOT infrastructure. From US, such a thing would be built by a company for itself or a partner, and would NOT be deemed infrastructure.
You also mention China is better at building than US. WTF??
Yes, our infrastructure needs help -- but that is by OUR standards, which are very high.
In China, bridges and dams fail all the time. It is SOP for them.
Considering that Bechtel & Halliburton are two of the biggest and most respected building firms in the world, and based in the US, what you said is both insulting and extremely incorrect.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Again, the elephant is the room is ignored. --- Siberia.
China has been challenging the borders of its neighbors - India, Japan, Vietnam.
But, not Russia --- yet.
In fact, China has more real claim to Siberia than its spurious claims to the SCS, Japan's islands, Kashmir, etc. Also, Siberia is empty. More people could be used to exploit its resources, which are great. Moreover, Siberia borders the Arctic and could be a way for China to become an Arctic country.
Will China begin pressuring Russia to return Siberia to it??
I wonder.....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I am sick and tired of supposed super powers, Russia & China, saying they have to threaten military action
because we are insecure. We might be attacked, and then, oh what should we do??
YET - both Russia and China create the problem they say they don't want.
China has created enemies. 10 years ago, no one was thinking of interfering with China's maritime trade through the Mallaccas.
Now, however, India, Vietnam, and others are making sure they can, just in case China attacks them.
The EU thought it had a deal with Russia, to keep Ukraine as a neutral buffer.
No one was thinking of attacking Russia.
But, now, Russia is threatening Europe and the Middle East, so everyone has to prepare for ways to attack Russia, if they end up having to do that.,
Russia & China create the problem they say they don't want.
If they don't want to be attacked, why don't they just STOP threatening others??
Why don't they stop making everyone nervous??
1
-
Whoa, wait a minute. You have Portugal claiming the depths of the Atlantic Ocean --- beyond the extent of the Eurasian continent.
For instance, look at the North Sea -- it is all continental shelf. Britain, Norway, and the Netherlands would have claims to all of it.
Or look at Iceland. It gets the 200 mi EEZ, but nothing beyond that because there is little continental shelf for it, as I see it.
So, I doubt very much that Portugal will get the "abyssal plains" of the Atlantic Ocean.
It that happens, then the US will also greatly increase in size as we would do the same thing to Hawaiian Islannds, Wake, Guam, Aleutians, and Marshall Islands. Imagine how much ocean territory we would get.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fasoooli2751 Correct. Democracy is merely a process of counting votes. The majority can often be wrong. Very wrong.
BUT -- the other option is to have a person who decides what is right and wrong for everyone.
That is ALWAYS subject to abuse.
If you don't have democracy, then you will have some kind of autocracy.
Sure, you can have wise kings.
But, you can also have crazy cruel ones -- see Caligula, Hitler, Ottoman Sultans, Stalin, etc.
A democracy will reflect the people that have it. That i why Vermont is a very different place from Mississippi. The people are different, so the democratic results are different.
A democracy in a Muslim country will be different from US or Denmark.
HOWEVER, if a democracy oppresses selected people within the society, then injustice is created. See American slavery, or South African Apartheid.
Such a democracy will eventually have a crisis.
A democracy that is not fair and just to all its people violates the basic principles of democracy.
Unlike a monarchy, which assumes an aristocracy, that are privileged and special under the law. See Saudi Arabia.
Or a Theocracy, where clerics are privileged and special under the law. See Iran.
Anytime some people are privileged, you will have abuse and injustice.
Such a system is doomed to unrest and collapse, though it could exist for many years or decades.
1
-
1
-
1
-
BTW, I do not accept the common assertion that China's South China Sea grab is to ensure its trade routes. No one threatens its trade routes.
IMO, the grab of the South China Sea is an attempt to control trade in the region and to intimidate everyone who uses it. China wants to use South China Sea trade access as a means of leverage and control over Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Philippines, and Vietnam.
I think Xi and his backers dream of re-establishing China's middle kingdom relationships with its neighbors, and even the world.
This will fail of course. The world has moved on from the days when Empires dominated the world. All power comes from economic power ultimately - after all, it takes a lot of money to sustain a military. Note how economic power also creates social power. Look at how American rap has gone global. As India develops, Bollywood is a growing cultural influence. The world knows Korean K-Pop. So, power has many facets. Xi's focus on confrontation and bullying will have severe blowback, I expect.
Also, China's debt colonization of countries will also fail miserably. England took over Egypt that way. It didn't last. The world community will not allow China to put colonizing troops into Africa or India Ocean countries. Without occupying troops, nothing prevents those countries from merely defaulting on their debts to China. Remember how the US ended Britain's influence in Egypt in the 1950's by stopping its military???
What do you think will happen when China tries to enforce its domination with military force??? It will be stopped, I believe.
China is at the apex of its power, IMO. Xi's policies have started a process that will degrade China's economy and power. Once its veneer of power is stripped away, its decline will be swift.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Shervan, may I suggest that you select some important videos to do regular periodic updates.
I think annual reviews of China's economy, China's military issues, Middle East, UK, EU, Russia, Ukraine, and India should all be considered. Maybe Ethiopia and Nigeria should be looked at regularly. Issues might need periodic updating -- global warming, world economy, world trade + tariffs, world military spending.
I find that you will have done a great analysis, but its several years old, and I want to know your take on developments since your analysis was done.
Thanks.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The QUAD is a nice start. BUT, the QUAD is NOT a military alliance.
A NATO-like military alliance is needed -- an Indo-Pacific Treaty Organization, modeled on NATO.
Moreover, members should include Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and other ASEAN countries. The broader the membership, the stronger will be the alliance.
NATO is strong, not merely because it has the US, UK, France and Germany, but also because it has Canada, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Greece, etc. The breadth of the alliance is what truly makes NATO strong.
A new IPTO should also be as broad as possible.
1
-
Again, the South China Sea dispute is wrongly described.
1. China claims SOVEREIGNTY over the SCS. That means it wants to treat the SCS just like an internal waterway. It wants to treat the SCS just like other countries treat their territorial waters out to 25 miles.
2. All the other countries claims are ONLY for their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) usage.
EEZ rights are defined by the UN. EEZ rights go out to 200 miles. EEZ areas are still the high seas.
Ships can traverse them at will. Cargo ships, private boats, and naval warships can traverse them at will.
International laws apply, not the laws of the EEZ owning country.
EEZ only refers to a country's ability to profit from that ocean area.
That is why Russia can put its ships 26 miles off the coast of the US, and we cannot do a thing about it.
3. IF China gets Sovereignty over the SCS it can control, regulate, or even stop other nations using it for maritime trade.
That would give China control over the maritime trade of Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Philippines, and Taiwan.
Even Malaysia, Indonesia, South Korea, India, Japan and other nations would be affected.
1
-
Great video. However, I think China will fail. There governmental structure will prevent this.
The nations China is trying to catch do not threaten their neighbors militarily. Also, China's effort is too centrally driven and controlled.
The biggest problem is their government. Being run by the Chinese Communist Party, their is no organized trustworthy succession of power. As inefficient as democracies can be, they have a peaceful transfer of leadership. Not having this, China will likely undergo periods of profound internal turmoil from time to time.
Xi's military ambitions will likely become permanent, just as Putin has resurrected Russia's military ambitions. This attitude creates their border tension policies, with crises in SCS, Japan's islands, Indian border, Taiwan, Vietnam, etc. The continuing SCS incidents with Philippines, Brunei, Indonesia, and others will poison China's trade in the region.
If you notice, UK, US, Germany, and other western nations take great pains now to have peace locally. Only the Middle East absorbs their military attention, and that is because of the strategic value of oil.
{This value is decreasing. As the world moves to renewable energy, the Middle East will lose its importance.}
SO, I think it will fail.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This new effort can be easily interpreted as an effort to create self-sufficiency. Communism started with that idea. The USSR tried it. Cuba tried it. It does not work.
Modern economies require peace. Look at how oil prices and stock markets react to even the threat of conflict.
Yet, Xi keeps kicking the apple cart, even overtly threatening war against India, Japan, and Vietnam.
The economies of SE Asia are developing during an era of Chinese threats and intimidation. This will prevent those nations from linking their economies too closely with China. As such, China will lack the foundation of being locally dominant in trade.
I think you will see India grow to be in that position. India does not throw its weight around. It does no bully.
The de facto military alliance between India, Japan, Taiwan, SK, Indonesia, and (eventually) the Philippines will create an economic bloc as well. These nations will improve their trade relations to mirror their military relations.
The US, UK, and EU will support and participate with this bloc economically and militarily, too.
The joint naval exercises of the recent years between these nations point to this development.
Bottom line -- China is in deep trouble if it continues with its present policies and attitudes.
I do not expect them to change. And, Xi is an idiot.
1
-
Putin is a real idiot.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, it looked like Russia was going to become a normal state, focused on trade and economic development.
The NATO countries relaxed, and reduced military spending.
NATO was on the path towards irrelevance.
If Putin had just relaxed, and waited patiently, NATO might have fallen apart.
The US was getting tired of lifting the military burden alone.
In time, NATO would have wasted away.
BUT -- for that to happen, the NATO countries had to feel safe and unthreatened
Well, Putin changed all that.
He threatens everyone.
SO, now the NATO countries are increasing spending, and reviewing their energy deals with Russia.
The trends now are not in Russia's favor.
NATO has more money.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@user-up1ny If India is not a country because it is a "British Colonial Invention",
then by similar argument,
USA, Nigeria, Australia, Canada, Malta, also are not countries.
Nations that were also "Colonial Inventions" that must NOT be countries by your argument include - Mexico, All countries in Latin & South America, All countries in Africa, except Ethiopia,
There are other countries, but I hope you get my drift ---
Your argument of why India is not a country is totally asinine, and wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1