"I believe that creating and facilitating a vibrant multipolar world that supports a healthy human freedom is our spiritual duty. Let’s tell that to the politicians, the militarists, and the financiers. And let’s ask them to donate their skills and resources to help bring it about before they destroy us all." A Multipolar World?: “Full Spectrum Superiority”, The Deep State and Global Financial Control, Oct 2017

2 Ways for World Order: Multipolar vs. NATO Hegemony

1. A Multi-Polar World Order

Andrew Korybko: "The world is presently in the midst of an epochal transition from unipolarity to multipolarity that is expected to characterize the foreseeable decades of the 21st century, if not its entirety. There are multiple dimensions to this paradigm-shifting process, which can leave observers completely overwhelmed when trying to make sense of it all, and most analysts tend to focus just on one or a couple factors while leaving out the rest of the bigger picture.(..) The author published multiple works that are relevant to the present research and from which most of the forthcoming analysis will be based, so they’ll all be enumerated below in order to provide the reader with the in-depth reference materials that will aid in understanding everything else that follows ..." 
 
"We are wrong to think that the armed conflicts occurring across the world are disconnected one from the other. The reality is that nearly all of them fall within a broader relationship between “the West’s American Empire” on the one hand and, the Brics, an organization of states seeking to establish a countervailing “alternative international order”, on the other. This power struggle is played out using two power bases that are closely connected: the military and finance." 'Russia and China united against the dollar’s empire', 2017, M Dinucci

2. NATO World Hegemony

The US military project for the world, 2017, Thierry Meyssan: "While all experts agree that the events in Venezuela are following the same model as those in Syria, some writers have contested the article by Thierry Meyssan which highlights their differences from the interpretation in the anti-imperialist camp. Here, our author responds. This is not a quarrel between specialists, but an important debate about the historic change we are experiencing since 11 September 2001, and which is influencing all our lives."
 
'The anti-imperialist camp: splintered in thought', 2017, Thierry Meyssan: "The US is not looking to reverse progressive governments (Libya and Syria), nor to steal the region’s oil and gas. Its intent is to decimate States, to send people of these countries back to a pre-historic time where “man did not love his neighbour as God loved him but would pounce like a wolf upon his neighbour. () Has toppling the Saddam Hussein regime and the regime of Gaddafi brought peace back to these states? No! () It is a basic observation that rocks our understanding of contemporary imperialism. This strategy, radically new, was taught by Thomas P. M. Barnett following 11-Sept. 2001. It was publicly revealed and exposed in March 2003 – that is, just before the war against Iraq— in an article in Esquire, then in the eponym book, The Pentagon’s New Map. However, such a strategy appears so cruel in design, that no one imagined it could be implemented." 
 
'The US Grand Strategy': "Mikhail Leontiev devoted his column on the first Russian television channel to Thomas Barnett’s theory. What appeared to be an intellectual lucubration in 2001 is currently being realized. Everyone must now rethink their vision of the wars of the past sixteen years." September, 2017, by Mikhail Leontyev [first Map below]
 
The Globalization of NATO, 2012, Mahdi D. Nazemroaya: "The Atlantic Alliance’s ultimate aim is to fix and fasten the American Empire. NATO has clearly played an important role in complementing the US strategy for dominating Eurasia. This includes the encirclement of Russia, China, Iran, and their allies with a military ring subservient to Washington. The global missile shield project, the militari-zation of Japan, the insurgencies in Libya and Syria, the threats against Iran, and the formation of a NATO-like military alliance in the Asia-Pacific region are components of this colossal geopolitical project. NATO’s globalization, however, is bringing together a new series of Eurasian counter-alliances with global linkages that stretch as far as Latin America. (...) Yugoslavia was a turning point for the Atlantic Alliance and its mandate. The organization moved from the guise of a defensive posture into an offen-sive pose under the pretext of humanitarianism." - "Nazemroaya’s book is a must-read." From Foreword Denis J. Halliday, UN Assistant Secretary-General (1994-98)
 
Post-Brexit EU: Between Regional Breakdown and Full-Blown Dictatorship, 2016, Korybko: "The Eurocratic elites have already announced a plan to create an “EU Army”, which would serve the effect of fully trampling on the remnants of “national sovereignty” still present in the continental bloc, and it can be expected that any resistance that this plan comes up against from the patriotic citizenry will be confronted by pro-Brussels Colour Revolutions in whatever the given state(s) may be."
 
Pentagon - Barnett - Strategy. Voltaire CopyRights
 
From Korybko's Article

'China's' Eurasia Silkroad

Western Power Strategy

 
 
 

Thierry Meyssan 

 
 
Clash of civilisations 2, Oct 2017, Meyssan: "After the Muslims against the « Judeo-Christians » (sic) [2], we now have the Muslims against the Buddhists."
 
From Syria to Burma?, Oct 17 Meyssan: "If this plan is followed through with, all the forces fighting against Syria will be displaced to South-East Asia. Peace would then be able to move into Syria, these combatants no longer blocking its entry."
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
'British collusion with sectarian violence: Part two': Dan Glazebrook: "What we want is not a united Arabia: but a weak and disunited Arabia split up into little principalities so far as possible under our suzerainty, but incapable of coordinated action against us” - so claimed a memorandum written by the Foreign Department of the British Government of India in 1915. - A more succinct summary of British policy towards the Arab world – both then and now - would be hard to find." [2016]