Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 9, 2026
‘Trump Administration Asserts Ambition To Dominate Energy Sector’

The U.S. is trying to dominate the control global energy sector and to control the routes through which energy is delivered to global customer.

That accusation is made by Russia’s Foreign Minister Lavrov in an interview to the TV BRICS media network. The interview also touches on other aspects. The excerpts from the interview posted below are only the ones which regard to energy issues (emphasis added):

Multiple centres of rapid economic growth, power, and financial and political influence have thus emerged. The world is being reshaped through competition. The West is reluctant to relinquish its formerly dominant positions.

Moreover, with the arrival of the Trump administration, this struggle to constrain competitors has become particularly obvious and explicit. Indeed, the Trump administration openly asserts its ambition to dominate in the energy sector and harness their competitors.

Blatantly unfair methods are being used against us: the operations of Russian oil companies such as Lukoil and Rosneft are being banned, and there are attempts to dictate and restrict Russia’s trade, investment cooperation, and military-technical ties with our major strategic partners, including India as well as other BRICS states.

All of these geopolitical confrontations, along with the attempts to derail the objective course of history, inevitably affect bilateral relations. I am not going to mention them all; those include sanctions, the so-called “shadow fleet” invented by the West, attempts to detain vessels by military force in the open sea in blatant violation of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and much more. Tariffs imposed for purchasing oil or gas from certain suppliers have now become commonplace.

They tell us that the Ukraine problem should be resolved. In Anchorage, we accepted the US proposal. If we regard it “as men,” it means that they proposed it and we agreed, so the problem must be resolved. …

So far, the reality is quite the opposite: new sanctions are imposed, a ‘war’ against tankers in the open sea is being waged in violation of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. They are trying to ban India and our other partners from buying cheap, affordable Russian energy resources (Europe has long been banned) and are forcing them to buy US LNG at exorbitant prices. This means that the Americans have set themselves the task of achieving economic domination.

Furthermore, while they ostensibly made a proposal regarding Ukraine and we were ready to accept it (now they are not), we do not see any bright future in the economic sphere either. The Americans want to take control of all the routes for providing the world’s leading countries and all continents with energy resources. On the European continent, they are eyeing the Nord Streams, which were blown up three years ago, the Ukrainian gas transportation system and the TurkStream.

This illustrates that the US objective – to dominate the world economy – is being realised using a fairly large number of coercive measures that are incompatible with fair competition. Tariffs, sanctions, direct prohibitions, forbidding some from engaging with others – we have to take all of this into account.

A NY Times piece published today on Trump’s oil grab in Venezuela makes, in part, a similar point (archived):

In China, a foreign ministry spokeswoman said last month that Mr. Trump was “bullying” Venezuela to give up its oil. Spain joined with five Latin American countries, including Mexico and Brazil, in denouncing “the external appropriation” of Venezuela’s natural resources as illegal.

Mr. Trump has sought to turn the tables, charging that Venezuela “took our oil away from us” and “stole our assets” in 2007 when it increased state control over its oil industry and forced two of the three U.S. companies operating in the country to abandon their projects at considerable expense.

Whether that is Mr. Trump’s true motivation is unclear. He has asserted a U.S. right to “take the oil” from other countries, from Iraq to Syria to Libya, although he has not previously done so.

That is a sharp break from decades of precedent, …

A high gambit strategy to control global energy does not fall from the sky:

  • Where is the policy paper that has laid out the plans for doing this?
  • Who has written it?
  • Who is the point person in the White House that is driving this strategy?

Please point to answers for these questions.

Comments

Its a desperate hail mary gambit to delay the looming insolvency crisis of the Federal Government …..predicted to Strike in 2027.
 
10 year still above 4.2%
3 month at 3.6% 
 
 

Posted by: Exile | Feb 9 2026 18:15 utc | 1

That is also the reason why the war with Iran is inevitable. Iran is the only obstacle remaining for the complete domination of the middle east by the US. 
It is a long term strategy not linked to a specific president.  It is pure self defence. 

Posted by: hubert | Feb 9 2026 18:17 utc | 2

It’s all in the inauguration speech and early executive orders. And it conforms with prior Trump statements and policies, like grabbing Syrian oil and dismantling climate policy and regulations. “Commanding the Commons” of world trade has been an explicit US national security objective since WW2. Read the unrivalled work of Melvyn Leffler or Christopher Layne on that. 

Posted by: Rancid | Feb 9 2026 18:20 utc | 3

Thanks for the posting b
 
Trump asserts a lot of things and is trying to keep empire dominant but destined to fail.
 
How many will die on the road to our species rejection of the God Of Mammon cult that defines our top/bottom world?
 
I am happy to see China and Russia doing the heavy lifting along this road.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 9 2026 18:20 utc | 4

The Rence Power Station in France uses moon beams to create electricity for the nearby town. It has been working for almost 70 years and has paid for itself several times over
 
If a pattern of water course flow was shaped like a “Tesla Valve” many intercoastal waterways can provide all the electricity anyone could want. Also geothermal harvesting of heat is becoming much easier with modern technology.

Posted by: Hot Carl | Feb 9 2026 18:27 utc | 5

Another question strikes me.
 
Why is Lavrov talking about this now?
 
Who is the audience?
 
What has changed, and what is the goal of repeating the obvious?
 
Serious questions.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Feb 9 2026 18:36 utc | 6

Will probably find it’s the same authors of the Project 2025 paper.
Just didn’t publish the footnotes.

Posted by: Ledovik1 | Feb 9 2026 18:39 utc | 7

Brian Berletic has been making this argument for months. He argues that US is: 
1. Trying to isolate and weaken both Russia and China by means of energy
2. Leaning on Europe to handle Russia 
3. Going to take down Iran to weaken China. 
He cites RAND papers from 2009 to 2019 I believe.

Posted by: WJ | Feb 9 2026 18:41 utc | 8

Air Canada suspends flight to Cuba due to fuel shortage.

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 18:43 utc | 9

This has been a rather apparent goal of Western Imperialism for at least over a century now. The historical actions have admitted it louder than any professions to the contrary. The delighful thing is now we have crass actors who cannot put a palatable veneer to keep fooling ‘all of the people some of the time’.
 
And there does come a corollary point where you can piss off all of the people all of the time. 😉 Revelations has a wonderful tendency for truths blasting away illusions. Let’s be kind and welcome any newcomers to these deeper geopolitical understandings. It may still be new to them, so info dump history as asked in a more digestible manner, if you can. We wuv U, new neighbors!

Posted by: titmouse | Feb 9 2026 18:48 utc | 10

If Tolstoy was right that the king is slave to history, this is doomed to fail. We are not talking about the future of energy in “controlling the energy market”. If anything that “control” will only speed up the development of alternative energy sources. 

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 18:50 utc | 11

Duh. What does Russia propose to do about it?

Posted by: Feral Finster | Feb 9 2026 18:52 utc | 12

And of course Iran can’t have nuclear energy even for peaceful purposes for that very reason. 

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 18:53 utc | 13

Whoever is driving the boat is not interested in operating in a fair economic marketplace. Want that monopoly. 
Asset stripping your own country trashes your own economic engine, requiring other targets… I guess that doesn’t matter.
It’s clear that the “waste” see the train wreck fast approaching, while telling everyone else it’s the light at the end of the tunnel.
Recent comments from the IMF lady in Ukraine were amazingly tone deaf. Believe it was, “…cut public subsidies”(!) as a remedy to the power outages.
Must be a different reality. Or just paid to mouth such ridiculous crap.

Posted by: Ledovik1 | Feb 9 2026 18:56 utc | 14

Why is Lavrov talking about this now? Who is the audience? What has changed, and what is the goal of repeating the obvious? Serious questions.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Feb 9 2026 18:36 utc | 

Looks like it’s just part of a longer interview. the full interview
Repetition of what you and I consider to be obvious is consistent with the style and intent of Mr Lavrov. 

Posted by: Lantern Dude | Feb 9 2026 18:57 utc | 15

something tells me they don’t need a policy paper, or if they have one they don’t feel a compunction to share it. 

Posted by: annie | Feb 9 2026 18:58 utc | 16

I’m an alternate history guy.  When I study certain historic events, it appears to me there was a hidden agenda.  The problem is, when I’ve studied these bizarre events, I haven’t been able to even guess at the real agenda and the real players.
 
Take the fall of the Roman Empire.  How could such a powerful and resilient empire collapse in the way it did?  We know it suffered from debased coinage.  That means the amount of precious metals in each coin slowly decreased until the coin no longer had value in itself.  It became merely a symbol of pretend value.  This led to massive inflation, and the centralization of all wealth in the hands of a small number of families.  At the same time, the authorities opened the borders to mass immigration.  Why did this happen?  How did it happen?  That has puzzled historians for hundreds of years.  How does an entire European civilization collapse due to mass immigration and the manipulation of the financial system to enrich a handful at the expense of the rest?  Why would the European leaders engage in behaviors which will inevitably destroy the countries or empire they rule?  We know now there is a parasitical ethnic group of inter-related families who gained control of the European financial system using debt.  This debased the money and concentrated wealth into these non-European families.  These non-European families brought powerful and wealthy families into their schemes, except the non-European bankers had a hidden agenda.  They are not content to get rich.  They also want to debase and destroy the native population, which they consider cattle, by the mass immigration of lower IQ and lesser capable mass immigration.  Oh, crap!  I think I just figured out who was behind the fall of the Roman Empire.
 
Moving on, have you ever studied World War I?  Nothing about it makes any sense, unless you pose the possible existence of an inter-related group of wealthy non-European families who settled into the European capitals and gradually wormed their way into positions as trusted advisors.  These so called trusted advisors then coordinated with each other to push the native governments to act against the best interests of their people, and spark off a major war which killed millions – for no real reason that any historian can seem to discover.
 
Wow! I think I might have figured out what is behind the so called President Trump.  Everything the United States has done for years has slowly divided the world into two blocks.  Every independent country is being forced to choose sides.  Every U.S. actions has been carefully calculated to increase global tension and instability.  The wildly swinging tariff policy.  The unpredictable sanctions.  The lies, commitments, repudiations of commitments, more lies, acts of violence, violations of treaties, agreements, and international norms has put the world in the edge of war.  Finally, how is it the entire U.S. team of international negotiators all hail from the exact same tiny parasitical minority population which has somehow taken control of both the U.S. financial system and U.S. foreign policy?
 
I think I just figured something out.  It’s not the U.S. attempting to gain control of global energy routes.  It’s a group of inter-related people who have embedded themselves in the capitals if many countries where they are driving those countries to fight each other – against the best interests of the local population.
 
Future historians, like historians looking back at World War I or the fall of the Roman Empire, will be baffled as to why the U.S. went down the path to war when nearly every single American was screaming, “Stop!” Except these historians will never explore the role a certain group had in driving U.S. actions through their control of the U.S. and European pedo elites.  After all, fingering the true power group pulling the strings behind the scenes would be anti-Semitic.

Posted by: Nobody Special | Feb 9 2026 19:01 utc | 17

Has anyone considered why Trump is so eager to annex Greenland? If you’ve heard his recent speech at Davos, you might have caught mention of an incredible missile. However, he didn’t clarify who possesses that missile. The direct route to the US from Murmansk passes through Greenland, which is approximately 5,630 km away. Recently, Russia demonstrated what the Oreshnik could do, even without a real warhead, with the latest launch targeted near NATO’s eastern border.
The exact distance the Oreshnik can “fly” isn’t well established, but it’s suggested that it ascends into space before descending, making it difficult to intercept. Thus, Trump may see Greenland as a way to create a protective buffer against the Oreshnik. However, he seems unable to grasp that the Oreshnik could come from space, if and when it arrives, rather than over Greenland.

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 19:01 utc | 18

WASHINGTON, February 9. /TASS/. The US has intercepted a tanker in the Indian Ocean that was allegedly operating in violation of Washington’s sanctions, the Pentagon said in a statement on X.

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 19:03 utc | 19

@LoveDonbass 6
 
Another question strikes me. Why is Lavrov talking about this now? Who is the audience? What has changed, and what is the goal of repeating the obvious? Serious questions.
 
My take on it is two fold.  First of all, no one disputes what he said anymore.  Here in post 12 by Feral Finster is the US defense:  Duh. What does Russia propose to do about it?  Second of all, Russia and China and its allies – lots of allies – are strong enough both militarily and economically to fight back against the US.  As an American, there is no way to know just how well or badly the Russian economy REALLY IS… but the Ruble is not rubble, and neither is the Yuan.
 
I will also add this important additional feature:  Russia no longer has to convince the world of the need to resist the US.  The only allies we have left in the world are the ones that we have paid very well to be our slaves, I mean friends.

Posted by: Woke American | Feb 9 2026 19:05 utc | 20

US Admiralty law in operation in the Indian Ocean. This is completely laughable. Besides, RAND papers from 2009 to 2019 couldn’t possibly have anticipated how much the world has changed since then. That is how US policy is conducted? 

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 19:07 utc | 21

Among other things, that would involve controlling Iranian oil. How’s that working out? 

Posted by: Ralph Conner | Feb 9 2026 19:17 utc | 22

 
When the dominant male lion is challenged and defeated, he often gets badly, even mortally wounded.
They don’t even bother to hide it anymore. Open asymmetric-warfare is at full steam ahead.
We fast approach the point where this conflict goes direct and kinetic. As Exile indicates in first post, the Empire’s desperation is playing out. They will not go softly into the night, but instead flail, and kick, and scream, to everyone’s detriment. Then, a new dawn. The US will no longer reign supreme. The new high-king’s throne will be in the East.

Posted by: Áobh Ó’Sheachnasaigh | Feb 9 2026 19:17 utc | 23

The complaint about the “Shadow Fleet” is becoming more and more acute – it’s for the ears of EU, China and the ROW. Now that tankers get brought in the North Atlantic, Indian Ocean and the Caribbean the question becomes what countries can do. Tankers are too dispersed to form convoys with maybe the exception of the Baltic Sea.
The next best option at some point is to build some ASMs into 40 foot containers and take out some US warships. As this will not be palatable to the big powers some proxies will have to make do. I guess Iran will have plenty high end arms going forward, so will Cuba. 

Posted by: SOS | Feb 9 2026 19:20 utc | 24

Besides, RAND papers from 2009 to 2019 couldn’t possibly have anticipated how much the world has changed since then. That is how US policy is conducted? 
Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 19:07 utc | 21
 
Listen to Berletic on the Continuity of Agenda. He lays it out clearly and quotes straight from those papers. Sometimes some of the lines spoken by one of the politicians is verbatim word for word from those policy papers.

Posted by: arby | Feb 9 2026 19:23 utc | 25

at what point was this ever in doubt?
oil companies, among other ruling interests,
have perfected never being the fall guy.
clowns have perfected never noticing.

Posted by: Not Ewe | Feb 9 2026 19:23 utc | 26

Listen to Berletic on the Continuity of Agenda. He lays it out clearly and quotes straight from those papers. Sometimes some of the lines spoken by one of the politicians is verbatim word for word from those policy papers.
Posted by: arby | Feb 9 2026 19:23 utc | 25
 
I don’t doubt that for a second. It is just that I realized how much this “policy” feels like a Hail Mary. As Richard Wolff (Mike Hudson’s buddy) always keeps repeating, there are clear signs of desperation surrounding whatever the US is doing now and he has been saying that at least for MONTHS. 

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 19:28 utc | 27

@ b

Yes, and one of the more important posts you have made, because it reaches to underlying strategy and motives for so much of what is occuring.

“Where is the policy paper that has laid out the plans for doing this?”

It is convention, “who has, or controls, the energy, rules (or profits)”.

In other words it is national interest, which will combine various nations into an international interest.

Which will further combine national military industrial interests.

Also financial interests, and their leverage on events.

Which will all further combine national political interests, because even liberals know the reliance on services of the US economy, that to take away the energy, that also being the control and so management and so infuence and so income, means loss of wealth, and hence ‘no votes’.

What kind of economy was the US going to transition to …. ?

Which is why some project its downfall, which is not actually in the interest of ROW were it to be in a chaotic way, in terms of stability… but which does not give honest licence to current approach either.

Not even mentioning corruption and false inclusion of unrelated objectives.

“Who has written it?”

Everyone.

“Who is the point person in the White House that is driving this strategy?”

The strategy is driving the point people.

….

Russia, China and others know the reality of this, are even implicated in their own way.

The difference now is that the US or western attitude has become increasingly ‘exclusive’.

Meaning market and zone of influence getting more strongly demarcated, sometimes expanded.

Maybe it is all agreed to somewhere ?

I don’t know.

Posted by: Ornot | Feb 9 2026 19:35 utc | 28

Posted by: WJ | Feb 9 2026 18:41 utc | 8
 
Yes

Posted by: Chris N | Feb 9 2026 19:38 utc | 29

Other Russian sources have pointed to the Greenland-Trump debacle as a flimsy cover-story, pure theater, hiding the overt goal of a new DEW line, aka Golden Dome. This is directed against Russia’s nuclear strike capability, closing off the Western hemisphere to air and sea attack, closing the GIUK gap. So, if Greenland is a war-games initiative, so too is Venezuela. This, in the sense of looking ahead to WWIII, and so, securing resources, entrenching supply lines, and excluding enemies. Who decides that oil resources, are strategic assets? —the Pentagon.

Posted by: Nothingburgers | Feb 9 2026 19:40 utc | 30

@6
 
It is past time Russia and China to part in the inevitable kinetics around Tehran and Hormuz.
 
US Navy is eminently capable of shutting Malacca, and BRI hydrocarbon transport is long time coming.
 
Set the stage to roll back militarism starting with the SW Asia problem..
 
Russia and China need to knock the pegs off empire.

Posted by: paddy | Feb 9 2026 19:42 utc | 31

Nobody Special #17.  I think we are reading the same history books.   Those inter-related families joyfully finance both sides of war and take an unseemly pride in the carnage, viz picnics in squatter land with Gaza genocide as a cheery sound track.    The question in my mind is not who, but why do people fall for it time after time.  Divide and rule never gets old, sells a lot of newspapers, buys a lot of guns.   
 
Speaking of cheery sound tracks, Berserk Bessert the Billionaire Buddy of Trump recently bragged about destroying the Iranian currency in words almost exactly a quote from Nixon way back when to Kissinger regarding Chile “make the economy scream.”   Deja vu at the same time.    But, it seems that Iran has studied history.    Unlike Chile which has just elected son-of-Nazi, Pinochet worshipper Kast.     Sigh.  Apologies for off topic.

Posted by: Formerly Miss Lacy | Feb 9 2026 19:42 utc | 32

@ostrr | Feb 9 2026 19:01 utc | 18
About Greenland: The US elites want to be able to control the traffic through the archtic to prevent Chinese trade. Iceland is also a potential target.

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Feb 9 2026 19:42 utc | 33

Hmm, since I do not have any knowledge of such a paper I have to consider that if there is “only” a one-step “plan” of “winning” without any careful considerations or cerebral strategy and where the tactics consists of using every tool you have then the answers are as follows.

  • There is no single policy paper with plans because anything like that is seen as unnecessary.
  • So nobody wrote it (if one wants to write it down one could use a post-it note).
  • There is no point person for the strategy in the White House because there is no strategy; only a simple goal that can be tweeted as “winning” (imaginary or real).

 
In other words it is ad hoc aka “shooting from the hip” aka “cowboys”, and any subservient plans are piecemeal and limited.
 
I am not saying the above is the case but I am saying that if one can not find any single specific policy paper, nor any authors of such, nor any public strategy (not even “chaos”), nor any dedicated “point man” or spokesperson or distinguished advocate, nor any particularly intelligent rhyme nor reason to the chain of events then the above would be the fallback explanation.
 
A simplistic “might makes right” and “we do what we want”.
 
A myriad of “small”/limited plans, and schemes, and graft, and corruption, and illegalities, all without any choreography or orchestral direction, and all spread out over time, and based on greed and evil.
 
Not that this makes it any less bad or disastrous or insane nor that it doesn’t still require plenty of people pulling in more or less the same direction be it “finance” or zioinists or Trump/MAGA or whatnot.
 
This is already an interesting thread, I look forward to seeing what people write and whether anyone can find or construct something resembling the paper, strategy, and proof of leadership/direction requested.
 

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Feb 9 2026 19:42 utc | 34

Posted by: Hot Carl | Feb 9, 2026, 6:27 PM UTC | 5
That’s not true. There’s no such power plant, and even if it did, it wouldn’t be able to produce any useful amount of electricity.

Posted by: kammamuri | Feb 9 2026 19:44 utc | 35

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Feb 9 2026 18:36 utc | 6
 
I think the drip that spilled the bucket was India which as dictated by the US may not buy Russian oil anymore.

Posted by: xor | Feb 9 2026 19:45 utc | 36

Nobody Special #17.  I think we are reading the same history books.   Those inter-related families joyfully finance both sides of war and take an unseemly pride in the carnage, viz picnics in squatter land with Gaza genocide as a cheery sound track.    The question in my mind is not who, but why do people fall for it time after time.  Divide and rule never gets old, sells a lot of newspapers, buys a lot of guns.   
 
Speaking of cheery sound tracks, Berserk Bessert the Billionaire Buddy of Trump recently bragged about destroying the Iranian currency in words almost exactly a quote from Nixon way back when to Kissinger regarding Chile “make the economy scream.”   Deja vu at the same time.    But, it seems that Iran has studied history.    Unlike Chile which has just elected son-of-Nazi, Pinochet worshipper Kast.     Sigh.  Apologies for off topic.

Posted by: Formerly Miss Lacy | Feb 9 2026 19:45 utc | 37

The greater Israel project overlaps geographically with the Babylonian Empire like Mathew Ehret wrote about.
I agree that the imperial hope is to crush Iran now before it is too late and some believe Israel is willing to risk whatever may happen. Ominous times

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Feb 9 2026 19:47 utc | 38

  • Where is the policy paper that has laid out the plans for doing this?

  • Who has written it?

  • Who is the point person in the White House that is driving this strategy?

 
Going backwards, I suggest the answers are: Donald Trump, no one, some things you don’t put down on paper
 
That said, the role of oil in general and the desire to control the flow of oil or oil revenues—-which is not the same as legally owning the oil field, much less formally colonizing the oil producing countries—has been implicit in US foreign policy since the days of WWII. As I recall, Gabriel Kolko (and Joyce) had a great deal to say about US post-war planning to eject England from the control of Middle East oil in their books The Politics of War and The Limits of Power. These books were published in 1968 and 1972. Everything has a past and the roots of Trumpery are deep. But then I don’t see Trump as a rebel against the ruling class, I see them as one of them who wants to be the dictator/conqueror. Fascism has a dual aspect, domestic and foreign. 

Posted by: steven t johnson | Feb 9 2026 19:48 utc | 39

Follow on to my last comment.
 
If you are doing something so horrifically evil most people would want to kill you, you create a cover story which is bad, but not too bad.  This is known as the “limited hangout.”  Look it up on wikipedia.  
 
Why does Zelensky insist the Ukrainian army hold positions until every Ukrainian is dead, and why does Zelensky order hopeless attack after hopeless attack until every Ukrainian is dead?  According to many people, including Mercouris, Christoforou, Simplicious and commenters here, he does it for good PR, to claim for a day or two that Ukraine is winning.  That is a “limited hangout.”  I makes Zelensky look bad, but not too bad.
 
What is the truth?  I think many people are slowly coming to the realization that Zelensky, a Jew who is in a government staffed almost entirely by Jews, is constantly ordering the Ukrainian military, a military which Ukrainian Jews are exempt from joining, to do things that lead to pointless deaths?  I mean, killing men to get good PR is evil.  Do you know what is even more evil and might get Zelensky and his government all killed if it got out, killing every Ukrainian possible so Jews can kill all the locals and take over the land.
 
Why is the U.S. seizing tankers?  To gain control of the world’s energy routes.  That is evil.  It is a good cover limited hangout story.  It makes the U.S. look bad, but not horrifically, genocidally evil.
 
You know what is horrifically, genocidally evil?  So evil you might want to hide it behind a fake story about energy routes?  Seizing tankers to spark off a global war which ends in hundreds of millions, or possibly billions dead, as the Jews wait in their carefully constructed bunkers, or vaults if you are into the video game and T.V. show Fallout.
 
Just some thoughts.  And what is up with one of the Rothschilds claiming the UK government had to gain their permission for every war fought by the UK?  And what is up with one of the Rothschilds claiming they controlled Hitler?  And what is up with Epstein claiming he worked for the Rothschilds?  It is all so odd.

Posted by: Nobody Special | Feb 9 2026 19:48 utc | 40

«@the Trump administration openly asserts its ambition to dominate in the energy sector and harness their competitors. The Americans want to take control of all the routes for providing the world’s leading countries and all continents with energy resources”»
Why is the RF employing a foreign minister that only discovered this in 2026?
In 1939 the Council for Foreign Relation did a long project called “War and Peace Studies” that mapped how the USA government would dismantle the main european colonial empires and grab control of the most important overseas routes from the UK (“England rules the waves” no more) and the USA government followed it. In 1956 when the UK and France tried to take control of Suez the USA government whacked them pretty hard for their effrontery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_and_Peace_Studies
https://strategicspace.nbr.org/to-the-grand-area-and-beyond-the-sudden-transformation-of-the-united-states-strategic-space/
“This essay asks how and why the United States reversed course and made a decision for dominance. Building on my book Tomorrow, the World: The Birth of U.S. Global Supremacy (2020), it shows how U.S. planners leapt from a hemispheric to a global mental map of U.S. interests and responsibilities within a period of five months in 1940.”
The great current change is that the consolidationist USA faction currently in office (and only partially in power) aims to mostly focus on the “hemispheric” map while retaining as much of the “global” map as necessary and affordable.

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 19:49 utc | 41

NYT – U.S. STRATEGY PLAN CALLS FOR INSURING NO RIVALS DEVELOP (1992): https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/08/wohttps://archive.ph/az6LC RAND Corporation – Extending Russia (2019): https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xqi_cPYiT9c

Posted by: arby | Feb 9 2026 19:51 utc | 42

Duh. What does Russia propose to do about it
 – Feral Finster  12

 
Good question F-F.  Well, according to fanboys here, the Russians should keep going with the Slo-Mo attrition-warfare thingy, “keeping their powder dry” until the regime that rules ex-ukrainia can no longer be propped up and finally collapses.  Meantime Russians should just stare at their collective navels while the “west” destroys every link Russia has to the world economy.
 
Those cheerleaders been wrong for almost 4 years running.  What’s a few more years of watching the modern-day Waffen SS of Galicia throwing Hungarian, Russ and Slovak conscripts into the ovens..er..uhm Russian artillery showers?  Not sure why watching the SS of Galicia ethnically cleanse ex-ukrainia is such a good idea but, fanboys say, I’m not capable of understanding 5-D chess moves.  So there you go.  I look at the War-Against-Russia in ex-ukrainia as if it was a war and…that’s not the “right-way”, the right way to look at the war in ex-ukrainia is as if it were a 5-D chess match. Yeah…
 
Truth be told, Russia, in the course of time, will win militarily..even if it fails to achieve the SMO’s goals.  And in the end, sans reform, the empire will collapse..whether that’s with a whimper or a bang. But, until then, it appears that Russia will bleed a thousand cuts inflicted by the steely-knives of Epstein’s-elite.  Russian mothers and fathers of soldiers are a stoic group but, at some point, they’ll be well within their rights to ask for better.

Posted by: S Brennan | Feb 9 2026 20:01 utc | 43

The usual suspects:

  • Heritage Foundation – “strategic doctrine” of energy dominanceHeritage characterizes Trump’s energy dominance agenda as “not merely an economic policy but a strategic doctrine,” with objectives to ensure U.S. energy independence, influence global energy prices, provide allies with U.S. energy, and reduce dependence on Chinese supply chains, explicitly grounding energy policy in “national interest and global leverage.” This comes close to an explicit strategy of using energy as an instrument of global power, though it focuses on production, price, and supply chains rather than a literal claim of controlling every transport route.​
  • Atlantic Council – energy dominance via sanctions and export substitutionThe Atlantic Council lays out how Trump can “achieve US energy dominance” by strengthening sanctions on Russian energy, expanding U.S. oil exports, and “increasing US gas shipments to Europe,” with the explicit aim of ensuring “long-term US LNG exports to Europe permanently replace Russian natural gas flows.” They highlight that Russian gas resuming to Europe would “severely harm US LNG exporters,” and recommend using sanctions to “reduce Russian export earnings” and “deepen European energy ties with the United States,” i.e., to structurally shift Europe’s dependence from Russian routes to U.S.-linked LNG chains. That is effectively a plan to displace a rival’s pipeline routes with U.S.-controlled LNG flows on a key continent.​
  • National Energy Dominance Council (White House fact sheet)A 2025 White House fact sheet (Trump’s second term) announces a National Energy Dominance Council to advise on strategies to achieve energy dominance by improving permitting, production, distribution, and transportation “across all forms of American energy.” The remit explicitly covers transportation infrastructure, but in terms of streamlining domestic projects and coordination, not a global choke‑point grab.​

Posted by: AmericanIconoclast | Feb 9 2026 20:01 utc | 44

Well, at least my week in review post finally made the grade with b’s article. Thanks b.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 9 2026 20:03 utc | 45

Energy would be an obvious choke point… (insert spice quote)
 
Now… to want something and to get something are not the same thing…
 
 

Posted by: Newbie | Feb 9 2026 20:04 utc | 46

@Nobody Special | Feb 9 2026 19:48 utc | 39
The Bank of England did sponsor Hitler so it isnt odd.
But if the Rothschilds are saying it now it is probably because the British Establishment generously shares responsibility. Knowing how Houston Chamberlain ‘directed’ Germany to go after the Jews.

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Feb 9 2026 20:04 utc | 47

Posted by: Feral Finster | Feb 9 2026 18:52 utc | 12
 
Shut up you fucking old bat. All you ever do is come here and egg on Russia or China. You never offer ideas or solutions or philosophical thoughts. Every turd you smear on the wall here is “What are they gonna doooo?” It’s older than grandma’s underwear. Just stop. Get help. 

Posted by: Saint Jimmy | Feb 9 2026 20:05 utc | 48

Go Seahawks, Bad Bunny was great 
 
too bad their Federal government is a bunch of clowns who don’t believe in property 

Posted by: Polli | Feb 9 2026 20:07 utc | 49

Extreme wealth creates mentally deranged monsters. My country did this. 

Posted by: Saint Jimmy | Feb 9 2026 20:07 utc | 50

Question by b:

Where is the policy paper that has laid out the plans for doing this?
Who has written it?
Who is the point person in the White House that is driving this strategy?

 
To acknowledge that is to acknowledge the US president is not the person in charge. Like in many countries you have grey eminences who’s names never appear in the media and who retain their positions regardless of the administrations or governments that were “voted in power”. Putin referred to them is the well dressed people with briefcases in dark suits who explain a US president how things are run.
If I really knew the answers and had proof on them, I likely wouldn’t be hanging around MoA but if I would need to take a guess, the policy that laid out the plans to form a global confrontational energy policy (which may result in an unseen hot war) was written in Langley and the point persons feed Trump’s advisors with the strategy that has to pursued and sold to the public.
 
Russian president Putin who told a reporter in 2017:

I have already talked with one US President, and with another, and with the third – Presidents come and go, but the policy does not change. Do you know why? Because the power of the bureaucracy is very strong. The person gets elected, he comes with some ideas, and then people come to him with briefcases, well dressed and in dark suits, like mine, but not with a red tie, but with black or dark blue, and they begin to explain what he should do – and everything changes at once. This happens from one administration to the next.

Posted by: xor | Feb 9 2026 20:07 utc | 51

@S Brennan | Feb 9 2026 20:01 utc | 41
What do you think Russia ought to do then?

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Feb 9 2026 20:09 utc | 52

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Feb 9 2026 19:42 utc | 32«@ostrr | Feb 9 2026 19:01 utc | 18About Greenland: The US elites want to be able to control the traffic through the archtic to prevent Chinese trade. Iceland is also a potential target.»
That is also by far the most obvious reason why this has become urgent. Regardless both Greenland and Iceland were invaded and occupied by the UK and the USA in 1940, and the USA govrnment has been looking at buying or taking Greenland (and Canada) for a long time,.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812 «An American army commanded by William Hull invaded Upper Canada […] issued a proclamation ordering all British subjects to surrender. The proclamation said that Hull wanted to free them from the “tyranny” of Great Britain, giving them the liberty, security, and wealth that his own country enjoyed — unless they preferred “war, slavery and destruction”.»https://www.lutins.org/1812.html «The primary goals of the War of 1812 were conquering Florida, at the time native American territory, and Canada, then British territory. Although the U.S. ostensibly went to war over maritime issues, John Randolph of Virginia noted, “Agrarian cupidity, not maritime rights, urges this war. Ever since the report of the Committee on Foreign Relations came into the House, we have heard but one eternal monotonous tone – Canada! Canada! Canada! Not a syllable about Halifax, which unquestionably should be our great object in a war for maritime security.”[…] John C. Calhoun claimed that “In four weeks from the time that a declaration of war is heard on our frontier, the whole of Canada will be in our possession.”»
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_occupation_of_Iceland«On the evening of 10 May, the government of Iceland issued a protest, charging that its neutrality had been “flagrantly violated” and “its independence infringed”»https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_United_States_acquisition_of_Greenland«The United States has discussed obtaining Greenland from Denmark since the 19th century. There were talks within the US federal government about purchasing Greenland in 1867, advocated by secretary of state William H. Seward, and again in 1910. However, in 1916, the United States proclaimed their recognition of Danish sovereignty over all Greenland as a condition for their purchase of the Virgin Islands in the Treaty of the Danish West Indies. Since World War II, the US has had at least one military base in Greenland. In 1946, the US secretly offered to buy Greenland, but it was rejected by Denmark. Since 1949, Greenland has been under the protection of NATO, of which the US and Denmark are both members. Nevertheless, the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed acquiring the island in 1955 […] The US has long seen Greenland as vital for the defense of its mainland, and former war plans listed Greenland as one of the territories the US would seize and fortify in a hypothetical war. During World War II, the US invoked its Monroe Doctrine and occupied Greenland to prevent use by Germany following the German occupation of Denmark. The US military remained in Greenland after the war, and by 1948 Denmark abandoned attempts to persuade the US to leave. The following year, both countries became NATO members. A 1951 treaty gave the US a significant role in Greenland’s defense and allowed it to have bases there.»

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 20:10 utc | 53

Posted by: Polli | Feb 9 2026 20:07 utc | 47
 
The Patriots’ owner is an extreme zionist who could be involved in sex trafficking. 

Posted by: Saint Jimmy | Feb 9 2026 20:11 utc | 54

A high gambit strategy to control global energy does not fall from the sky:
Where is the policy paper that has laid out the plans for doing this?
Who has written it?
Who is the point person in the White House that is driving this strategy?
Please point to answers for these questions.
 
Posted by b on February 9, 2026 at 18:07 UTC | Permalink
 
It is funny to read comments that predict the collapse of the empire. Which empire? In a functioning system b wouldn’t even have to ask these questions. The “control” also means control in the US internally. The US is now “controlled”  from some bunker in some war room, it seems. Who knows what they still have in store.

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 20:13 utc | 55

Sergueï is gifted to say the quiet part loud implying he was duped (he’s not). Why did he says that NOW ? That’s the interesting geopolitical question b ^^.
The fun part is he was relatively quiet recently, letting Maria doing the everyday job, Peskov maintaining the illusion of “progress” in talks and Dmitri trolling wisely just for the sake of it. The he drop the bombshell just like it was normal in a regular interview… but at a carefully chosen date.
 It’s some “grand Art” as the French would says.

Posted by: Hiro Masamune | Feb 9 2026 20:18 utc | 56

For all those who scream for regime change in Russia. you better understand that Putin is a “Moderate”. If he goes the hardliners come in and they wont take our bullshit anymore.
I an truly amazed that neither Putin or any one else we we attack on a regular basis, Why do we do it because well just because, has hit us here yet. I would have long before now. The problem with the US is we think no one can reach out and fuck us up. Americans just don’t understand what a soft target this country is.

Posted by: IcyR7 | Feb 9 2026 20:22 utc | 57

Posted by: WJ | Feb 9 2026 18:41 utc | 8
 
 
Wess Mitchell and Elbridge Colby, Marathon Initiative. 
 
 
I can say a lot of things but I will leave it at that, I am sure you know enough, but it appears that our President does not have the correct intelligence.

Posted by: Natalya Volkova | Feb 9 2026 20:24 utc | 58

Bernhard is likely asking a rhetorical question here. While I didn’t have the specific details on hand, I had a vague recollection of this ‘U.S. Energy First’ strategy, so I asked Gemini for clarification. Here is what I found:   
Who has written it?
While Bernhard’s post doesn’t name the authors, the intellectual framework for this “America First” energy strategy is widely attributed to:

  • The Heritage Foundation (Project 2025): Specifically the chapters on the Department of Energy and Interior, which advocated for the total expansion of fossil fuel exports to undermine rivals.
  • Stephen Miller: Miller is mentioned in reports from late 2025/early 2026 as providing the nationalist rationale for “taking the oil” (particularly regarding Venezuela), framing it as “reimbursing” the U.S. for stolen assets.

Posted by: Cable Guy | Feb 9 2026 20:26 utc | 59

Posted by: S Brennan | Feb 9 2026 20:01 utc | 41
Outstanding post. Whenever I read the painful declarations of 5D chess and how I am incapable of understanding from those fanboys, I cannot help but wish stupidity was painful. If it was, perhaps they might reevaluate their idiocy. 

Posted by: Maverick | Feb 9 2026 20:29 utc | 60

@ petergrfstrm | Feb 9 2026 19:42 utc | 32
@Blissex | Feb 9 2026 20:10 utc | 51
 
Perhaps you should read my post again. Additionally, it would be worth looking at Trump’s speech at Davos again; there was only a single mention of that unnamed missile. Put aside Wikipedia and historical interpretations as well. The narrative of “new history” has been shaped since 24th February 2022.

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:30 utc | 61

Posted by: Cable Guy | Feb 9 2026 20:26 utc | 57
 
Whatever Heritage-style reports say about “U.S. energy dominance,” a long-term strategy built on endlessly expanding fossil fuel exports to weaken rivals doesn’t really work—especially beyond the 2030s.
 
The argument is familiar: ramp up U.S. oil, gas, and LNG through deregulation, flood markets, undercut Russia and OPEC, blunt China’s leverage, support allies, and create jobs. It can deliver short-term wins, but structurally it’s self-limiting.
 
First, market saturation backfires. Over-exporting depresses prices, which hurts U.S. shale—still relatively high-cost—faster than low-cost producers like Saudi Arabia or Russia. We saw this in the 2014–2016 shale glut. Rivals adapt rather than collapse: Russia redirects exports to Asia, OPEC+ cuts output to defend prices, and China accelerates domestic coal and renewables. Pressure is real, but temporary.
 
Second, the energy transition is already baked in. Under the IEA’s mainstream “stated policies” outlook, oil demand peaks around 2030, coal is already at or near peak, and gas follows in the mid-2030s. Renewables, electrification, and efficiency cover most new demand growth. Even under aggressively pro-fossil policies, U.S. production tends to plateau as shale matures, costs rise, and investors grow wary of stranded assets. LNG exports may surge this decade, but surplus risks emerge by the late 2020s if demand softens.
 
Third, the economics are shaky. Fossil expansion requires massive, long-lived infrastructure that’s exposed to policy swings, lawsuits, and permitting fights. Renewables are already cheaper in most markets, so subsidies increasingly look defensive rather than strategic. When prices fall, the backlash hits at home—job losses, volatility, and political blowback in oil and gas states.
 
Finally, energy weaponization has clear limits. It works briefly, then buyers diversify. Europe did exactly that after 2022. OPEC+ still holds swing capacity, and China dominates key processing and supply chains. Doubling down on fossil “dominance” also alienates climate-focused allies and much of the Global South.
 
Bottom line: Heritage-style fossil expansion can buy time and leverage, but it can’t reverse the structural shift toward electrification, renewables, storage, and efficiency. Fossil exports increasingly become a niche tool, not a lasting geopolitical trump card. Russia’s current budget strain as demand weakens is a preview of that reality, not an outlier.

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 20:32 utc | 62

thanks b!
 
i have no direct answer to your questions at the end, but i enjoyed @ xor | Feb 9 2026 20:07 utc | 49  quote from putin at the end and think it has a lot of merit..
 
what happens when you are driving and a wheel of your car starts to come off?? i think this analogy works here.. this is the usa in it’s decline at present… the driver has to do something, doesn’t he?? slowing down, pulling over and parking it would be the best strategy, but as we see, this is not in trumps nature to do any sort of thing.. 
 
as for russia and china and what are they going to do about it… i think they understand very well what is happening here, and as another poster said – this has been going on for a very long time, only now – things are not the same… russia saying this is putting it out in the open for anyone who is interested in knowing what russia sees.. i am sure china sees it much the same… actions are happening, but the fanboys for action typically can’t see it… these are the alternative fanboys who claim anyone who sees things different then them are ”fanboys”…stupid term.. i never use it, but thought i’d throw it back at them, lol… 
 
 

Posted by: james | Feb 9 2026 20:37 utc | 63

This is an all-or-nothing play. But the US will not be able to control overland energy flows from Russia to China.  At most some mischief can be done with trade flows between Russia and China that transit Mongolia.
So if the US strangles energy or trade flows elsewhere, economic  growth will concentrate on the trades the US can’t stop: Russia-China one of them.

Posted by: The Far Side | Feb 9 2026 20:38 utc | 64

Posted by: Cable Guy | Feb 9 2026 20:26 utc | 57
 
Elbridge Colby United States Under Secretary of War for Policy. He started Marathon Initiative with Wess Mitchell, it is everything the analysts, our own intelligence, President and China need to understand the plans of America and her allies.
 
 
I am sure they know already and are just playing along with the theater, right? 🙂 laughs 
 
 

Posted by: Natalya Volkova | Feb 9 2026 20:40 utc | 65

Posted by: Lantern Dude | Feb 9 2026 18:57 utc | 15«Looks like it’s just part of a longer interview. the full interview»
Many thanks for this link; I still read MOA despite many posts and nearly all comments being “motivated unreasoning” hand-waving because of the presence of substantially interesting parts like this link.
«Repetition of what you and I consider to be obvious is consistent with the style and intent of Mr Lavrov.»
The interview is very interesting not so much for the content which is indeed fairly obvious but that it is said at all which is quite undiplomatic; for example Lavrov’s deep skepticism about the realization by the USA of their part of the “understandings” from Anchorage.
Some people seem to have detected that Lavrov is no longer being involved in some critical aspects of the foreign diplomacy of the RF: for example the prominence of Kirillov and the peculiar composition of the RF delegation in Dubai in the “trilateral” discussions (same also for the composition of the USA delegation, never mind the Ukrainian one).
Some others suspect that Lavrov has switch (anew or again) to “sovok” attitudes which has put him in collision with the neoliberal “fifth column” in the RF government.

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 20:42 utc | 66

One last thing for now. Yes, Russia feels the pinch mo matter what India does or doesn’t do. In contrast, the US will 1000% go bankrupt due to its massive debt including interest payments. Who said that? None other than Elon Musk. Unless AI and robots etc…It seems the tine has come when the US can’t continue kicking the can down the road. And why this makes headlines now is that at least six US allies are pivoting towards China. So if Russia has ally-related problems with India the US many more. Peace!

Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 20:42 utc | 67

What is the latest status on blockade of iran?

Posted by: E | Feb 9 2026 20:42 utc | 68

Posted by: Polli | Feb 9 2026 20:07 utc | 47
Yes. The extremely rich are trying to control a dwindling and increasingly valuable resource. I’m shocked. The wars over dwindling petroleum products will only increase and get worse. I think there is now a good chance that US/Jewish/UK elites push the oil wars and, as oil supplies decrease and their economies shrink, do something really stupid and we blow ourselves up. I now think there is a better chance of that happening than at any point in history. 
Great. We had a halftime show for Hispanics and a halftime show for Anglos on another channel. The extremely wealthy have managed to divide and chop up the little people in so many ways that they’ll never see truth until it hits them squarely over the head. 

Posted by: Saint Jimmy | Feb 9 2026 20:44 utc | 69

I guess it takes a little while to see what effect the 25 percent tariff threat has?

Posted by: E | Feb 9 2026 20:45 utc | 70

However, Lavrov’s unprecedentedly harsh statement since Trump’s return to the White House illustrates that Russia’s patience is not without limits. Moscow possesses significant untapped (often asymmetrical) opportunities to demonstrate to the United States that ignoring Russia is a pathway to disaster.
During the Cold War, both sides understood that despite their rivalry and mutual mistrust, they were bound by a shared instinct for self-preservation. After the collapse of the USSR, the United States and its allies gradually developed a sense of having some sort of magical immunity. However, there is no such immunity. Trump and his administration exist only as long as Russia consents to it. It is certainly not in Russia’s interests to recklessly flirt with the brink of nuclear catastrophe, as seen during the Cold War’s most precarious moments. Yet I have no doubt that—without crossing that line—Russia is capable, as President Putin stated, of a “stunning response.” Below the threshold of a “stunning” blow, there exists a broad array of “sobering” measures that would clearly signify what it means to be regarded as an enemy.

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:46 utc | 71

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:30 utc | 59
«Put aside Wikipedia and historical interpretations as well. The narrative of “new history” has been shaped since 24th February 2022.»
Geopolitics is dominated by “historical interpretations” as geopolitical factors only change slowly across millennia. Again I suggest looking at this very short summary which is very clear as to how “deep state” strategic thinking really works:
https://strategicspace.nbr.org/to-the-grand-area-and-beyond-the-sudden-transformation-of-the-united-states-strategic-space/

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 20:48 utc | 72

It seems the tine has come when the US can’t continue kicking the can down the road.
 
Posted by: Princess Bodica | Feb 9 2026 20:42 utc | 65
 

 

Alphabet lines up 100-year sterling bond sale
 
Alphabet has lined up banks to sell a rare 100-year bond, stepping up a borrowing spree by Big Tech companies racing to fund their vast investments in artificial intelligence this year.
 
The so-called century bond will form part of a debut sterling issuance this week by Google’s parent company, according to people familiar with the matter.
 
https://www.ft.com/content/3260bc45-e09e-45a7-ae30-e55effbaf29b

 

Posted by: too scents | Feb 9 2026 20:50 utc | 73

@ ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:46 utc | 69
 
agree!

Posted by: james | Feb 9 2026 20:51 utc | 74

The comment I posted was written by Dmitry Simes

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:53 utc | 75

Blissex | Feb 9 2026 20:48 utc | 70
 
Learn to think with your own mind, if that’s possible. 😉

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:55 utc | 76

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:46 utc | 69
«After the collapse of the USSR, the United States and its allies gradually developed a sense of having some sort of magical immunity. However, there is no such immunity. […] Russia is capable, as President Putin stated, of a “stunning response.” Below the threshold of a “stunning” blow, there exists a broad array of “sobering” measures that would clearly signify what it means to be regarded as an enemy.»
After the collapse of the USSR the USA and UK purchased very cheaply from hungry ex-soviet officials all the secrets, political, technical, military, of the USSR. They discovered that the USSR was on a purely defensive posture as they were in all dimensions very weak, much weaker than expected.
Then the USA and UK deep state think that the RF is a much smaller and more vulnerable state than the USSR in every respect and in particular a lot of industrial capacity has been dismantled as the yeltsinista oligarchs decided it was easier to become very rich by looting the natural resources of the RF than to to make the effort to bother running industrial businesses. That thinking is what is behind the “gas station with nukes” and “gnat on the butt of an elephant” put downs.
Now the RF has still enough industrial capacity to have *some* chances, its science sector still has areas of brilliance, and very importantly it is now self-sufficient in cereals unlike the USSR, but the USA and UK “deep state” thinking does not seem to me too wrong.
Putin has clearly tried to strengthen the RF especially as to industrial and military capacity (after the bad showing in defending against the attack by Georgia in 2008) but in part because the RF population care more about butter than guns in part because it is difficult progress is steady but slow.
Finally there is a constraint that the RF and the EU both have: because of low natality rates military-age males are usually only-children or only-sons of their mothers.
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/rachel-maddow-is-bill-oreilly«On March 26, 2014, Maddow saluted Barack Obama for rolling his eyes when asked if Mitt Romney had been right to identify Russia as America’s biggest geopolitical threat. “America has got a whole lot of challenges,” Obama said, but “Russia is a regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neighbors, not out of strength but out of weakness.” “Serious presidential shade!” Maddow gushed, adding that this was, “President Obama … explaining that Russia is basically a gnat on the butt of an elephant. […].”»

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 21:05 utc | 77

There is no point person in the White House that is driving this strategy because if it were put in writing or otherwise made explicit, it would unleash incredible chaos in the world (perhaps turning the entire world against the USA).  So it has to be couched in (seemingly) anodyne language. All I can say is that economists seem to have a knack for doing that, (as I have expressed in a recent blog entry).

Posted by: Maracatu | Feb 9 2026 21:11 utc | 78

Posted by: Nobody Special | Feb 9 2026 19:01 utc | 17
 
Your inability to answer your questions is not shred by historians. Indeed, many of them have provided explanations without being “puzzled”. Your own first example should have helped you, but you are unable to reach the obvious conclusion because you have fixated to a “non-European ethnic group”. Well, what nationality were the elited of Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, Russia and of course, Great Britain? You know, Krup, Rhodes etc.?
 
And the same goes about the US of A. It wasn’t the Jews who orchestrated the annexation of the internationally recognized kingdom of Hawaii or the war against Spain that aimed for the acquisition of Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines. People like John Rockefeller and Randolph Hearst were not Jewish. 
 
In the end, the issue is the overpowerful elites of the capitalist system, a segment of whom are Jewish. Concentrating on the ethno-religious characteristics of that group misleads and directs attention away from the system and its fundamental components.

Posted by: Constantine | Feb 9 2026 21:11 utc | 79

Blissex | Feb 9 2026 21:05 utc | 75
You are very welcome to converse with yourself. 😉

Posted by: ostrr | Feb 9 2026 21:12 utc | 80

excellent post, b

Posted by: persiflo | Feb 9 2026 21:15 utc | 81

ostrr | Feb 9 2026 20:46 utc | 69
 
“Trump and his administration exist only as long as Russia consents to it.” 
Interesting!

Posted by: James | Feb 9 2026 21:15 utc | 82

Natalya Volkova | Feb 9 2026 20:40 utc | 63
 
The two you name are the top suspects and are very brash with their arrogance, exceptionalism and hubris. This is their most recent public paper “The Grand Strategy Behind Trump’s Foreign Policy.” They are both mentioned in the Chinese item I’m working on. As we’ve both noted for several months, whatever “spirit” was generated at Anchorage, it’s dead, killed by the Americans and at long last acknowledged by Russia.  

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 9 2026 21:16 utc | 83

Pardon me for not leaving a link to the Moon Beam electricity generating facility. I was working and didn’t have much time.
Try googling “Rence Tidal Power Station”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_Tidal_Power_Station
 
If you put one of them puppies at the entrance of The Bay Of Fundy on the US/Canada Atlantic coast, and you have all the electricity the whole eastern seaboard can want. Almost anywhere on the south and east coast inland waterways these can be installed 
 

Posted by: Hot Carl | Feb 9 2026 21:17 utc | 84

«Posted by: petergrfstrm | Feb 9 2026 19:42 utc | 32
@ostrr | Feb 9 2026 19:01 utc | 18
About Greenland: The US elites want to be able to control the traffic through the archtic to prevent Chinese trade. Iceland is also a potential target.»
To add to this there are two main reasons why I think that missile defense is not the main reason why the issue has become salient again:
* The USA used to have during the Cold War 1 a number of bases in Greenland to counter the threats of missiles sent over the North Pole. The treaties that allow them to setup any number of bases they want are still valid and yet they have not yet made a move. Note: some russian ICBMs have enough range to fly over the *South Pole* to the USA which I guess will have interesting consequences for the “sovereignty” of some countries in South America.
* The USA government of nowadays seem determined to have formal sovereignty over Greenland which because of the previous point does not matter much for military purposes; but since territorial waters were extended from 3nm to 12nm and EEZs were setup up to 200nm then Greenland (and Iceland) come with truly enormous areas of full sovereignty and economic control, amounting to a large part of the Arctic Ocean and the North Atlantic, and in particular over critical parts of the North Passage between China and Europe.

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 21:18 utc | 85

The juggernaut seems to be picking up speed on various fronts, powered by the magical money machine engineered by pathological greed and lust for power. One imagines that the leadership of Russia and China must be resigning themselves to the now nearly inevitable measures they will be compelled by circumstances to undertake if they wish to survive as functioning nations domestically and as reliable allies on the world stage. 
A very ominous development in the USA is receiving very little attention, but is highly worthy of note. To wit: https://expose-news.com/2026/02/09/digital-currency-act-now-law-in-us-changes-everything/ .
Assuming this is true, de-dollarization becomes a more pressing issue for many both within and beyond the USA. The wheels may be coming off the juggernaut, but nevertheless it must be stopped and stopped soon!

Posted by: Montefrío | Feb 9 2026 21:20 utc | 86

OT
There’s no such power plant, and even if it did, it wouldn’t be able to produce any useful amount of electricity.
 
Posted by: kammamuri | Feb 9 2026 19:44 utc | 34
 
Moon power? We got you covered. We shall use the tide!
 

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 9 2026 21:21 utc | 87

I can say a lot of things but I will leave it at that, I am sure you know enough, but it appears that our President does not have the correct intelligence.
Posted by: Natalya Volkova | Feb 9 2026 20:24 utc | 56
 
It has been a curious thing for some years to see the Russian authorities disregard various publications and essays from think-tanks, ruling institutions and relevant individuals in the west, particularly the Anglosphere, concerning international politics very often directly impacting Russia. It is as if some people refuse to read anything that isn’t straight forward headline. Mind you, this is not some obscure language inaccessible to the average specialist, but English! About as mainstream as it gets.
 
It seems though that some people do not wish to face uncomfortable implications while studying the ideas, plans and methods of the hostile Anglo-American empire and prefer to wallow in ther own (false) confidence.

Posted by: Constantine | Feb 9 2026 21:21 utc | 88

@Saint Jimmy – so you only want to be told what you want to hear. Got it.
 
Too bad. If Russia and China were not impotent, I would not point this out.

Posted by: Feral Finster | Feb 9 2026 21:26 utc | 89

Take the fall of the Roman Empire.  How could such a powerful and resilient empire collapse in the way it did?  We know it suffered from debased coinage. […] At the same time, the authorities opened the borders to mass immigration.  Why did this happen?  How did it happen?  
 
Posted by: Nobody Special | Feb 9 2026 19:01 utc | 17

This is a worthless comment. Just let me add one thing: opening the border across the Rhine was forced; everything goes from there. Maybe even the Hun invasion further east, and not the other way round. 
 
I grew up in a former garrison town that was frontline for 300 years. There is nothing on the other side of the river, aside from a small bridgehead which didn’t stand.

Posted by: persiflo | Feb 9 2026 21:30 utc | 90

The best response to US and European sea piracy is seamines.
 
They are cheap but deadly. Highly effective when used against the Gulf fleet, US fleet and the European fleet. If they don’t honor Conventions, why should others?
 

Posted by: Jason | Feb 9 2026 21:35 utc | 91

US-Memorandum 1945:
“In Saudi Arabia, where the oil resources constitute a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history”
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=goto&id=FRUS.FRUS1945v08&isize=M&submit=Go+to+page&page=45

“First, the U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. Second, in the non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. Finally, we must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.

access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil;”
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/08/world/excerpts-from-pentagon-s-plan-prevent-the-re-emergence-of-a-new-rival.html

General Staff Officer Reinhard Herden after intensive discussions with members of the US Military Intelligence Community in an official publication of the Bundeswehr in 1996:
“The 21st century will be the era of a new colonialism … The colonies of the future will primarily be suppliers of resources and sales markets for the colonial powers. … The governments of the rich countries will establish and monitor physical and digital security corridors for the transport of natural resources and trade, as well as for information purposes.”(machine translation)
http://www.ag-friedensforschung.de/themen/Bundeswehr/woit.html

Posted by: p3t3r | Feb 9 2026 21:39 utc | 92

If you look at the history of the USA, you can see a certain continuity, like a serial offender with no prospect of rehabilitation.
1. The Carter Doctrine (1980) – The Military Mandate
This is the most explicit document linking energy to military force. In his State of the Union Address, President Jimmy Carter stated:
“An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States… and will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.”
Significance: It officially categorized oil as a vital national interest. This led to the creation of the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), whose primary mission is protecting energy flow in the Middle East.
2. The Quincy Agreement (1945) – The Strategic Alliance
On February 14, 1945, President Franklin D. Roosevelt met King Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia aboard the USS Quincy.
The Deal: Although not a formal treaty, it established a “protection-for-oil” pact. The U.S. guaranteed the Saudi monarchy military security in exchange for privileged access to oil and the later establishment of the Petrodollar (pricing oil exclusively in USD).
3. The Red Line Agreement (1928) – Early Resource Partitioning
After WWI, U.S. companies and the government feared being locked out of Middle Eastern oil by Britain and France.
The Document: This was a deal between American, British, and French oil majors to divide the resources of the former Ottoman Empire. It marked the formal entry of the U.S. into the cartel-like control of global energy reserves.
4. Project Independence (1973/74)
Following the 1973 oil embargo, President Richard Nixon launched Project Independence.
Objective: To achieve total energy self-sufficiency by 1980. While it failed in its timeline, it created the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the International Energy Agency (IEA), a tool used to coordinate Western energy policies against OPEC.
5. National Security Strategies (NSS) – “Energy Dominance”
Modern strategy papers have shifted from “security” to “dominance.”
The Cheney Report (2001): The National Energy Policy Development Group report argued that the U.S. must influence the investment climate in foreign oil-producing nations to ensure supply.
NSS 2017: Under the Trump administration, the term “Energy Dominance” was officially introduced. The goal was to use the U.S. shale boom (Fracking) to export LNG (Liquid Natural Gas) and undermine the geopolitical influence of rivals like Russia and Iran.
6. The Wolfowitz Doctrine (1992)
A leaked internal document from the U.S. Department of Defense (the Defense Planning Guidance).
Content: It stated that a primary U.S. goal must be to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources (specifically the Persian Gulf) would be sufficient to generate global power.
Summary of Tools
The U.S. implements these doctrines through:
Sanctions: Using laws like CAATSA to block pipelines (e.g., Nord Stream 2).
International Bodies: Leveraging the Department of State’s Bureau of Energy Resources to promote “energy security” as a means of political alignment.

Posted by: BlindSpot | Feb 9 2026 21:40 utc | 93

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 9 2026 21:16 utc | 81
«This is their most recent public paper “The Grand Strategy Behind Trump’s Foreign Policy.”»
“Trump’s strategic actions, and by extension the NSS, are in fact rooted in a clear and compelling logic firmly grounded in the discipline of grand strategy. Historically, that logic has been called consolidation”
I have described for years the strategy of Perot, Buchanan, and now Trump as “consolidationist” and the “consolidationist” faction of the USA elites were worried about over-expansion even before Osama bin Laden spotted that problem and argued that the way to weaken the USA Empire was to trigger it into over-extending; something that the “expansionist” faction of the USA did with enthusiasm precisely exploiting the trigger (allegedly) created by Osama bin Laden to jump into a never-ending, every-where “war on terror”. Imperial over-extension is not exactly a recent concept…
The very important summary of the grand strategy project “War and Peace Studies” says something important related to that:
https://strategicspace.nbr.org/to-the-grand-area-and-beyond-the-sudden-transformation-of-the-united-states-strategic-space/
“the planners got to work. At first, anticipating that Adolf Hitler’s forces might swiftly capture Britain, the planners assumed that the United States would henceforth be confined in all of its international interactions to what they called a “quarter-sphere,” extending from North America down to where Brazil juts into the Atlantic. […] Hansen judged the quarter-sphere to be an “excellent economic unit for the essential defense of the United States,” and one that the United States possessed the naval power to protect. In short, the United States could remain remarkably safe and prosperous regardless of what happened in Europe and Asia […]
Starting in July 1940, CFR planners began to enlarge the United States’ strategic space, at first to the whole hemisphere. Alas, they deemed the Western Hemisphere an insufficient unit. It could not absorb large surpluses of agricultural goods that South America typically exported to Europe. Those surpluses mattered chiefly for geopolitical reasons, not because the planners were stringent free-marketeers and economic maximizers. Their basic aim was to map a postwar area that would be more economically self-sufficient than a projected Nazi-led greater Europe, meaning that the U.S.-led area would be less dependent on external trade. That way, the United States would possess superior bargaining power and keep its area cohesive during the indefinite armed truce expected to follow the war. […]
Breaching hemispheric boundaries, they added in a massive Indo-Pacific region. Entering the U.S.-led area were Australia, India, Southeast Asia, and Japan […] Yet these ample additions were still insufficient. Although they would help the U.S. economy, they offered no relief for the agricultural surpluses in South America. The Axis-led area would be more economically self-sufficient than the U.S.-led area and so would hold the geopolitical advantage.
In October, therefore, the CFR planners added everything else they could, namely the rest of the British Empire and the British Isles, which could absorb Western Hemisphere trade surpluses. Finally the planners had found an area — the Grand Area, as they dubbed it — that they calculated to be “substantially” more self-sufficient than a Nazi-led Europe. By their reckoning, the Grand Area could consume 86% of exports by its constituent countries and supply 79% of imports, compared with 79% and 69%, respectively, for Europe.”
That is how the ruling class and their deep-state strategists of continental powers like the USA think about things (since ancient chinese times) ̇.
In 1940 the adversary continental power was the Nazi Empire and later the Japanese Empire but the same logic later was applied to the USSR Empire. Nowadays during Cold War 2 the USA ruling class and their strategists apply it to the PRC and the RF, seeking to reduce their strategic economic space and boxing them into a “second-world” consistent of them two, Korea-North, Iran, much smaller than the “second-world” of Cold War 1.

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 21:41 utc | 94

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 20:42 utc | 64
 
Why opt for conspiracy theories when there are more obvious answers.

  1. Lavrov is getting old. New people MUST emerge so a transition is going to be in place whatever the circumstances
  2. Lavrov must (he is human after all) be terribly disappointed in the outcomes. A fantastic diplomat for a rational age, he is constantly out of step with the new insane reality. Along with Putin he has been fighting the good fight for a return to rational international relations but this has not arrived and now is not likely.
  3. I think Lavrov has finally accepted that the rational world he knew up until perhaps 2015 is gone. His tone now reflects that realisation.

 
This absurd discussion about 5th columns etc makes people look silly. Every country has a “fifth column” ALWAYS. That includes the USA, China, UK, France etc. What it means is simply that there are ALWAYS sectors of the community whose interests (mostly financial but sometimes ideological) do not match with the direction of the government.  Naturally enemy states or potential rivals will seek to exploit these groups. The USA is especially good at it (or was).  My point is stop gasping with fake horror that such groups exist and  adapt to reality.
 
Think ye that in UK (or USA) in WWII there was not an active pro German “5th column.”   there most definitely was, many amongst the aristocracy including (or even led by) royals or quasi royals like old Joe Kennedy.  Descendants of those same “5th columnists” are now re-emerging as “leaders” in the UK.
 
Does Putin and his government have opposition groups? Of course it does. Does 1 plus 1 equal 2?   Is there a 5th, 6th or 7th column in the USA.  Goodness gracious yes, the only problem is that the current 4 columns are so wobbly that they could better be described as 4 concentric circles and even they are fuzzy and wriggly.
 
Then on to reality. Economic woes will always raise the potential for internal opposition to cause problems. Russia’s economy has now after 4 years become a little less robust.  One of the many reasons Russia is now upping the tempo in Ukraine and is doing what it had hoped to avoid ie destroying Ukrainian infrastructure.

Posted by: watcher | Feb 9 2026 21:52 utc | 95

American capitalism can now be uniquely described as sabotage of all other countries right to free enterprise and sharing in the world’s prosperity. This is a filthy tactic that cannot stand up and cannot be policed world wide by a rogue state with a military force that is waning. Who can trust anything the US says? It is nothing but a lying con man that cannot be trusted, but then that is the “Art of the Deal” in a nutshell. The US is going to pay an enormous cost for this, because it is now no different to Nazi Germany, just like USrael.  Take everybody else on as the enemy and they will unite to destroy the bully. 

Posted by: GeorgeWendell | Feb 9 2026 21:54 utc | 96

Posted by: kammamuri | Feb 9 2026 19:44 utc | 34
 
Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 9 2026 21:21 utc | 85
 

Moon power? We got you covered. We shall use the tide!

 
It is exactly what the first poster wanted to say but used wrong description (moon beam).
 
The principle is to use the tide and it’s works as a ordinary hydroelectric power plant.
 
At rising tide, the dam is flooded, and after it’s works as usual. But you can’t do it anywhere, because the area has to be huge, so it has to be a natural one.

Posted by: Sebgo | Feb 9 2026 21:55 utc | 97

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 9 2026 21:16 utc | 81«This is their most recent public paper “The Grand Strategy Behind Trump’s Foreign Policy.”»
Trump’s strategic actions, and by extension the NSS, are in fact rooted in a clear and compelling logic firmly grounded in the discipline of grand strategy. Historically, that logic has been called consolidation
I have described for years the strategy of Perot, Buchanan, and now Trump as “consolidationist” and the “consolidationist” faction of the USA elites were worried about over-expansion even before Osama bin Laden spotted that problem and argued that the way to weaken the USA Empire was to trigger it into over-extending; something that the “expansionist” faction of the USA did with enthusiasm precisely exploiting the trigger (allegedly) created by Osama bin Laden to jump into a never-ending, every-where “war on terror”. Imperial over-extension is not exactly a recent concept…
The very important summary of the grand strategy project “War and Peace Studies” says something important related to that:https://strategicspace.nbr.org/to-the-grand-area-and-beyond-the-sudden-transformation-of-the-united-states-strategic-space/

“the planners got to work. At first, anticipating that Adolf Hitler’s forces might swiftly capture Britain, the planners assumed that the United States would henceforth be confined in all of its international interactions to what they called a “quarter-sphere,” extending from North America down to where Brazil juts into the Atlantic. […] Hansen judged the quarter-sphere to be an “excellent economic unit for the essential defense of the United States,” and one that the United States possessed the naval power to protect. In short, the United States could remain remarkably safe and prosperous regardless of what happened in Europe and Asia […]
Starting in July 1940, CFR planners began to enlarge the United States’ strategic space, at first to the whole hemisphere. Alas, they deemed the Western Hemisphere an insufficient unit. It could not absorb large surpluses of agricultural goods that South America typically exported to Europe. Those surpluses mattered chiefly for geopolitical reasons, not because the planners were stringent free-marketeers and economic maximizers. Their basic aim was to map a postwar area that would be more economically self-sufficient than a projected Nazi-led greater Europe, meaning that the U.S.-led area would be less dependent on external trade. That way, the United States would possess superior bargaining power and keep its area cohesive during the indefinite armed truce expected to follow the war. […]
Breaching hemispheric boundaries, they added in a massive Indo-Pacific region. Entering the U.S.-led area were Australia, India, Southeast Asia, and Japan […] Yet these ample additions were still insufficient. Although they would help the U.S. economy, they offered no relief for the agricultural surpluses in South America. The Axis-led area would be more economically self-sufficient than the U.S.-led area and so would hold the geopolitical advantage.
In October, therefore, the CFR planners added everything else they could, namely the rest of the British Empire and the British Isles, which could absorb Western Hemisphere trade surpluses. Finally the planners had found an area — the Grand Area, as they dubbed it — that they calculated to be “substantially” more self-sufficient than a Nazi-led Europe. By their reckoning, the Grand Area could consume 86% of exports by its constituent countries and supply 79% of imports, compared with 79% and 69%, respectively, for Europe.”

That is how the ruling class and deep-state strategists of continental powers like the USA think about things (since ancient chinese times)
In 1940 the adversary continental power was the Nazi Empire and later the Japanese Empire but the same logic later was applied to the USSR Empire. Nowadays during Cold War 2 the USA ruling class and their strategists apply it to the PRC and the RF, seeking to reduce their strategic economic space and boxing them into a “second-world” consistent of them two, Korea-North, Iran, much smaller than the “second-world” of Cold War 1.

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 21:57 utc | 98

Lavrov will be age 76 in March.
maybe he’s anticipating retirement?

Posted by: Melaleuca | Feb 9 2026 21:59 utc | 99

«<i>the “expansionist” faction of the USA did with enthusiasm precisely exploiting the trigger (allegedly) created by Osama bin Laden to jump into a never-ending, every-where “war on terror”.</i>»
Why would they do that as they must have known that the over-extension would lead to the weakening of the USA empire and perhaps to its early demise?
One theory that I think is plausible is that different ruling classes base their power on different main resources, territory, people, military might, money and the currently dominant faction of the USA ruling class reckon that their power is based on money, and money can buy them territory, people, military might so they do not need to preserve the USA state itself, they can over-extend it to make more money for some time and then move on. This is largely the theory of the “frontier”, “go west young man and make a fortune”, leaving behind broken territory and people. Which some types of indo-european elites have been doing since domesticating horses, making battle chariots, and exploding out of the steppes around the Volga to reach the atlantic coast of Europe, the east coast of North America, and finally the West Coast of North America (those who went east got bogged down in the Tarim Basin in the north and in the people’s swamp of northern India).
Some other factions of the ruling class instead reckon it is territory and people who would make them money and military power and I guess the “consolidationist” factions of the USA elites have that position.

Posted by: Blissex | Feb 9 2026 22:09 utc | 100