Introducing the EU – China 2020 Strategic Agenda for Cooperation
By JC Collins
June 27, 2016 Update: The following idea of a European Superstate is being discussed as a response to BREXIT.
It comes as little surprise that Britain has voted to leave the European Union. The economic and geopolitical shifts taking place throughout the international order are aligned with a resurgence of modern-nationalism. The expansion of powers related to both China and Russia as members of the BRICS group is ensuring a socioeconomic and geopolitical realignment of the Eurasian continent.
We have discussed here before the relationship between Great Britain and North America. The fact that Europe is in reality a peninsula on the Eurasian continent created the need for China and Russia, the two biggest players on the Eurasian continent, to implement a strategy to tear Europe away from its economic and geopolitical alignment with North America.
It was inevitable that Britain would leave the EU at some point. The failed American strategies to overthrow Assad in Syria and gain access to the industrial base in Eastern Ukraine were meant to isolate Russia and China from Europe and allow for a continuation of US dominance on the Eurasian peninsula.
Since both of those strategies have stalled and/or failed the US has been forced into a position where it must accept some of the geopolitical losses and realignments.
“The world of today is experiencing profound and complex changes. As important actors in a multipolar world, the EU and China share responsibility for promoting peace, prosperity and sustainable development for the benefit of all. They agree to continue to consolidate and develop their strategic partnership to the benefit of both sides, based on the principles of equality, respect and trust. The EU reaffirms its respect for China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. China reaffirms its support to EU integration.”
The paper introduces a strategy to consolidate macroeconomic policy and geopolitical mandates across the Eurasian continent. It is segmented into the following categories:
- Peace and Security
- Trade and Investment
- Industry and Information
- Transport and Infrastructure
- Sustainable Development
- Science, Technology and Innovation
- Space and Aerospace
- Climate Change and Environmental Protection
- Regional Policy
- Social Progress
- Public Policy
- Cooperation on Global Development
- People-to-People Exchanges
- Culture, Education and Youth
- Facilitation of People-to-People Exchanges
Most readers will recognize the common language of global governance. The EU and China, along with the United States, are all aligned with the global governance mandates of the United Nations. Inefficiency within the UN and other global institutions has manufactured the pretext to revamp these institutions and repackage the mandates for the international masses.
As we reviewed in the post How Rothschild Inc. Saved Donald Trump – A Multi-Decade Strategy to Transform America, the rising modern-nationalism in America, which is represented by Donald Trump, is in fact creating the environment where the US population will accept global governance mandates under the pretext of a new form of modern-nationalism.
The BREXIT vote is achieving the same function in Great Britain. The forthcoming demand from other EU nations for similar referendums will be addressed by changes to the EU framework which will further align it with the more macro global governance mandates. Such realignment will consist of each of the EU members returning to the domestic use of national currencies.
We have discussed this here before. Each member nation will continue to use the euro to balance trade between one another but domestic use will consist of the national currencies. This will allow for each members sovereign debt to be redenominated in their respective domestic currency and written down with little consequence on the euro itself.
The recent pivot by German politicians to draw attention to the aggressive nature of America towards Russia is scripting which further aligns with the strategy outlined above.
It has always been speculated that nations and their populations would have a difficult time accepting the loss of sovereignty which global governance mandates would entail. It is an act of genius to allow and create an environment which encourages the growth of national movements only to use those movements as a strategy to further consolidate governance frameworks and repackage globalization as a new modern-nationalism.
The goals of the international banking interests, as expressed by Carrol Quigley, should not be considered a failure because of the rise of Trump and BREXIT. The rise of Trump and BREXIT should mark the next major phase in this transformation.
All the major players, including America, Britain, China, Russia, the IMF and UN, along with the Bank for International Settlements, are all aligned on the multilateral monetary mandates as expressed through the broader use of the SDR and the restructuring of the global power grid. – JC
Further to the point I offer the following cover page:
Help support POM and further research by subscribing. Members will receive more detailed analysis on macroeconomic trends, esoteric philosophy, and have access to the Fundamentals of Multilateral Investing Lessons.
Monthly subscription cost of $15.00 or receive a 33% discount with a one year subscription cost of $120.00.