The North Korea conflict has escalated tensions between the US on one side and Russia and China on the other. The narrative being regurgitated by US media's many talking heads is, "America good, North Korea bad." Former US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, recently told Fox News:
I think the only diplomatic option left is to end the regime in North Korea by effectively having the South take it over.
Michael Rozeff rebuffs Bolton and his ilk by laying bare their real desire:
What he’s actually proposing, hidden inside the notion of attacking N. Korea, is rule by force of U.S. arms of as much of the planet as the U.S. can get away with.
The assumption among Americans is that the US is always good and right, because, well, we're the US. It's understandable, though not defensible, to think in this egocentric way. Yesterday, an acquaintance said to me, "We can't nuke North Korea because it's right next to South Korea, and a lot of Americans are living there." To which I replied, "And a lot of South Koreans, too." The argument could be extended to North Korea: We can't nuke the North because there are a lot of North Koreans living there. Suppose North Korea was threatening to nuke a country we didn't like, such as Iran? Would we be as morally outraged? A nuclear attack on Iran would kill as many innocent Iranians as an attack on the US would kill innocent Americans. Never mind that
for the last three weeks, Japan, South Korea and the US have been engaged in large-scale joint-military drills on Hokkaido Island and in South Korea. These needlessly provocative war games are designed to simulate an invasion of North Korea and a "decapitation" operation to remove the regime…. Monday’s missile test (which flew over Hokkaido Island) was conducted just hours after the war games ended.
"In other words," Mike Whitney writes,
the test was not a "bold and provocative act" (as the media stated) but a modest and well thought-out response by a country that has experienced 64 years of relentless hectoring, sanctions, demonization and saber rattling by Washington.
Going back to Rozeff, he gets what this North Korea conflict is really about. It's about US global hegemony.
That's also what the BRICSCoin is about.
It's no coincidence that as tensions over North Korea escalate, the hot topic at this year's BRICS Summit is the creation of a cryptocurrency to improve trading among the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS). The Duran writes on the implications of this hypothetical BRISCCoin:
While the US Dollar remains the most popular global trading and reserve currency, this is rapidly changing. A BRICS backed cryptocurrency may be both the proverbial ‘Dollar buster’ as well as a ‘sanctions buster’.
In many ways, the most powerful asset the US has internationally is the Dollar. If the effective hegemony of the Dollar is broken, it could be a substantial opportunity for emerging markets to assert their monetary and consequentially fiscal independence.
BRICS nations such as Russia and China - semi-allies and trading partners of North Korea - are trying to beat back the heavy hand of US hegemony, both militarily and monetarily. Regardless of what you think about national governments creating their own cryptocurrencies, it would be inconsistent of us American citizens who advocate cryptocurrencies to criticize Russia and China for wanting the same thing we want: freedom from the US Dollar.