After the end of the BRIC summit at Durban, South Africa, a review of our puppet government’s handling of foreign policy would not be out of place. But first a look at the emerging global balance of power in the light of recent history is necessary. In brief, the worst years of the Cold War between America and the Soviet Union were globally dominated by American bankers. They had a foot firmly planted in the power systems of both nations to afford them unique leverage. There is insufficient public awareness about how American bankers funded Russia’s communist revolution and later the Soviet economy.

Among the oodles of evidence testifying to critical US finance to the Soviets is the assiduously researched and scholarly work by Professor Antony K Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, published in June 1993. The book, among other sources, relied heavily on State Department files. Professor Sutton warned,

“The synthesis sought by the Establishment is called the New World Order. Without controlled conflict this New World Order will not come about. ... And this is being done with the calculated, managed, use of conflict. ... This explains why the International bankers backed the Nazis, the Soviet Union, [and] North Korea ... against the United States. The ‘conflict’ ... [builds] profits while pushing the world ever closer to One World Government.”

There is considerable evidence that the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Schiffs, Warburgs, Morgans, Harrimans, and Milners – the world’s leading financiers – bankrolled the Soviet movement and economy during the height of the Stalinist era. According to a report on file with the State Department the leading firm of Kuhn Loeb and Co. bankrolled the first five year plan for Stalin.

Many such facts had been written in conspiracy theory books that were debunked. But can Professor Sutton’s scholarly researched work be dismissed? Can the view of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill be similarly dismissed? Alluding to the role of finance capital Churchill on February 18th, 1920 in the issue of the London Illustrated Sunday Herald wrote:

“From the days of Spartacus [Adam] Weishaupt ... to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, Bella Kuhn, Rose Luxembourg, and Emma Goldman, this world-wide conspiracy has been steadily growing…It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century; and now at last, this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

Now consider India’s role in the bipolar world during the Cold War. Pandit Nehru touted his much acclaimed Non-Alignment policy during the height of the Cold War. In theory it was a wonderful policy. In practice under the custody of Nehru and Krishna Menon it was simply a device to use India for tilting the balance to protect or promote the Communist world whenever required. Whether it was the Soviet invasion of Hungary, the crisis in Czechoslovakia, sacrificing the offer of permanent seat in the UN Security Council to India in order to give it to China, or the betrayal of Tibet – India’s record was anything but non-aligned. India acted like a Soviet stooge. Indeed, arguably the only practitioner of non-alignment was perhaps Charles De Gaulle who positioned France and Europe as an independent force between the American and Soviet blocks. India betrayed its core interests while acting as a puppet manipulated by global finance capital. The mainstream world’s media never projected India as such of course because media in the ultimate analysis is the mouthpiece of corporate power

With the collapse of the Soviet Union the bipolar world gave way to singular American dominance. This did not suit the big bankers of course. They needed leverage against a superpower. So they accomplished two things. First they derailed the original strategic initiative of President Nixon which was to divide the Communist world through the US opening up to China and thereby deepening a wedge between Russia and China. Instead the bankers subverted US trade and foreign policies by building up China at the expense of America and at the same time entering China’s economy in a big way. Instead of weakening the Communist world as Nixon intended the bankers replaced the Soviet Union by China to create in the words of Nixon, a new “Frankenstein”. Ironically, after Nixon was used he was unceremoniously discarded.

It may be recalled that similar to Nixon, Winston Churchill was reclaimed from the political wilderness and used when his talents and leadership qualities were sorely required to confront Hitler. But surprisingly this war time hero who saved Britain could also be unceremoniously discarded immediately after the war through a defeat in the elections! After sufficiently weakening America through economic subversion and the global meltdown, and having strengthened China to become a potential countervailing force, the bankers are poised for the final step to revive the old bipolar world order. That is why Goldman Sachs launched the irrational concept of BRICS to realize which the puppet government of Dr. Manmohan Singh is doing everything possible to promote.

Neither strategic nor economic considerations justify the new grouping of Brazil, Russia, India and China. All four nations have vastly different priorities and concerns. Why, then, did the bankers come up with this harebrained idea blindly promoted by the puppets of South Block? The answer should be obvious. BRICS is intended to make China its dominant voice in order to balance America. An economically weakened Russia and the perpetual puppet India are there to serve the bankers and further their cause. The bankers have one foot in China and one in America. A new bipolar world will revive the good old days of the US-Soviet rivalry when they could exercise unfettered leverage. That is what the BRICS venture is all about.

Now consider what happened in Durban when the PM met Mr. Xi Jinping for the first time after he became China’s new boss. After assuming office Mr. Xi announced a five-point peace proposal to India. The first four points were inane platitudes that were meaningless. Only the fifth point suggested that both nations “accommodate each other’s core interests… to properly handle differences”. One would have thought that our government would have identified this nation’s core issues related to China and conveyed them at the earliest. In Durban the PM suggested joint management of the dams that China plans to construct on the Brahmaputra River. He discounted any serious crisis arising from the proposed Chinese dams. Mr. Xi suggested deepening military ties with India which our PM welcomed.

Is this how our government protects its core interests? China has armed Pakistan with nuclear weapons and missiles that can be used only against India. China continues to give arms and provide sanctuary to Indian insurgents operating against India. China brazenly flouted its 2005 written commitment not to disturb settled populations while addressing border disputes by continuing to claim Arunachal Pradesh. And ignoring all this the PM assured the Chinese President once again that India will not allow Tibetans in India to take any action objectionable to Beijing.

The PM is hoping for a third term after the next general election. He might get it given our myopic ruling establishments of both political parties and media. This nation’s drift towards global irrelevance will continue as long as foreign puppets govern our nation. But the information revolution will not allow this drift indefinitely. Even the Indian people are waking up. They will inevitably revolt against foreign puppets and compel India to play its rightful role in world affairs. This may not happen while I am alive. But happen it will.