Thread by @TheDailyMao

1/ Germany's challenge is that its financial solvency and physical security are underwritten by Fed swaps and the DoD, its leading industrial/consumer firms depend on Chinese demand for growth, and its energy inputs rely on Russia and the GCC

2/ This means its foreign policy will forever strive for balance plus a mild pro-America tilt - within an international environment that is *low tension*. Humanitarian values come after all this.

3/ This is what ideologues like IPAC don't understand - their emphasis on 1) polarizing the international environment and 2) making the EU take sides in that environment is antithetical to Germany's entire national strategy. In a sense, they are *anti-German*

4/ This national strategy can be extrapolated to a lesser degree to other advanced industrial economies as well; France, Korea, Italy, even Japan fit this mold.

(The UK and Australia don't count as one is a financial hub and the other is a commodities exporter)

5/ In that sense, China vs the US resembles the contest between Rome and Carthage for trading rights with and control of wealthy Greek colonies in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, with the advanced industrial economies of today playing the role of those colonies

end/ Those colonies themselves will strive for balance, but hegemonic tensions will eventually turn one of them into the match that sparks a massive showdown.

One wonders which one will play the role of Syracuse this time. My money is on Japan and its satrapy on Taiwan.