The Four Horsemen

Harbingers of Collapse?

The Four Horsemen and the Collapse of Empire

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse - they don’t look happy or confident.

History may not be kind to these four men, all of whom have been infected since birth with arrogant American ‘exceptionalism’ which is obvious from some of their utterances. They refused to allow a peaceful nation to use nuclear enrichment for peaceful purposes - which is their right under the JCPOA - because their exceptionalism told them that they had a right to make this demand. In an Orwellian moment, Donald J had the nerve to call Iran a ‘bully’ - which, given the reputations of both itself and Israel, takes US hypocrisy to new and dizzy heights.

In an interview with ABC news, JD Vance noted that the US, China and Russia agree that Iran should not have nuclear weapons to avoid a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. But he did not highlight the difference between the US approach, which is that of an arrogant tyrant who does not feel obliged to obey International law, while risking a serious nuclear catastrophe - on the one hand - and the more measured and rational approach of both Russia and China who want the issue resolved through existing institutions that will also ensure that Israel should give up its nukes, or at least sign up to the IAEA. Maria Zakharova criticised Vance for interfering with Russian affairs. Iran has the right to develop a peaceful nuclear program, she said, and the US should stop providing missiles to Kiev and abandon its militarisation of Taiwan.

Ignoramus Vance made the embarrassing claim that Iranians are not very good at war: a claim he may come to regret, while Hegseth kept a straight face in saying that this war is not about regime change, only for Trump to contradict him in a tweet the next day - according to Janta Ka. Marco Rubio made the ridiculous claim that the world is now a safer place than it was before the US attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities. Trying to sound tough, he said that if the Iranians retaliate it will be the worse decision they ever made and that ‘we have capabilities they haven’t even seen yet'. But Iran did retaliate and Trump did not respond. No one can accuse the ‘horsemen’ of singing from the same hymn sheet while the words and music change on a daily basis.

On June 26th JD Vance made an effort to distinguish Trump foreign policy from that of his predecessors:

We're not trying to change a regime. We're not trying to create a democracy. We're not trying to turn Iran into Wisconsin, we're destroying their nuclear program, and once we do that, we're gone.

Some believe this guy to be bright but this is the sort of nonsense that comes from someone who does not fully understand the concepts he is juggling with. Vance is being dishonest about regime change in Iran for a start but he seems to think its OK to undermine a nation’s sovereignty by attempting to eliminate a peaceful nuclear program. And he appears to be announcing this as a new foreign policy that’s supposed to be an improvement on Biden?? These horsemen are dangerous creatures indeed.

They may appear clever and powerful but I suspect that underneath they are unsure of themselves and their mission. In my view, they are simply ‘phonies’ who are dishonest, immoral¹ and ignorant about matters that would save the Hegemon from an embarrassing disaster of biblical proportions. Their actions could signal the end of International Law, the UN Charter and nuclear non-proliferation treaties. This could also be the end of the US constitution as something sacrosanct - though this process has been in place for some time. It is also the end of trust in the US and the abandonment by the Hegemon of any moral high ground it was clinging to by its fingernails.

It is becoming crystal clear that the institutions created by the West over centuries, but particularly since the end of the World War Two, have become corrupted - or maybe the cracks that were built into them are inevitably widening into crevices. The United Nations was never going to work while some states were given the power of veto. Ask yourself: ‘would Israel have been allowed to oppress, murder and destroy the Palestinians and their society since 1949 if the US did not have the power of veto?’. I doubt it. NATO is another example of an institution that may have been useful at one point but turned into another instrument of US oppression. The IAEA is also being used as a political tool which may have been involved in espionage on behalf of Israel and the US. It appears that a recent report from the institution was couched in ambiguous language that provided Trump with his excuse to attack Iran. In the field of International Justice, the ICJ and ICC are being used as toothless political footballs with little independent authority. None of these institutions actually work.

Furthermore, Parliamentary institutions and the political systems in many Western countries are no longer functioning in the interests of the electorate and people have lost faith in them. These have always operated on the basis of some sort of consensus among the people but when divisions are so evenly split at 50-50 there can be no consensus and so we will always have to contend with the fact that half the population wants one thing and the other half wants another. Moreover, these divisions sometimes take the form of outright hostility between groups such as that between Democrats and Republicans in America.

In the UK, the ‘Reform Party’, at 30%, has surged ahead of Labour on 23% and the Conservatives on 17%. Thus, the two party system that has existed for centuries (arguably) has been shattered. In Europe, generally, the ruling parties do not represent the beliefs, wishes and aspirations of the people they claim to represent. There is no doubt that there is a crisis of faith in the political systems and in institutions such as the National Health Service or the Police Force here in the UK. I imagine that people in other countries have similar experiences.

During the ten years I have been engaging with US politics, it seems that the constitution is frequently under attack.

One of the the Uni-Polar World Order’s biggest problems is that it lacks the consistency that has historically underpinned liberal moral and political systems. In an autocracy, rules can be in place one minute but not in place the next, or they can apply to some but not to others. But any democracy worth its salt, is supposed to ensure that rules are applied equally among people and at all times. If you take a close look at Western ‘democracy’ it will become obvious that this is not the case. It doesn’t happen because none of the institutions is working - and people are beginning to see that.

Trump has taken matters an authoritarian stage further by apparently ignoring his intelligence institutions and making decisions based on an ambiguous non-evidence based IAEA/Israeli backed report - which Trump may have wanted to believe. He also ignored the constitution by going to war with Iran without consulting congress.

All of this is part of the Evil Empire’s decline as it gradually gives way to the emerging Multi-Polar World Order. We can only hope that the Four Horsemen do not lead us to Apocalypse.

You can read more in Friday’s Update.

Best Rob

1. In my view, anyone who backs Israel’s genocide is, by definition, immoral.