[News] The Concept Of The Triad

[Anti-Imperialist News]

popularresistance.org
<https://popularresistance.org/the-concept-of-the-triad/>
The Concept Of The Triad - PopularResistance.Org
By Vijay Prashad, Tricontinental: Institute For Social Research.
June 2, 2023
------------------------------
[image: image.png]

Above Photo: Yayoi Kusama (Japan), Infinity Mirrored Room – The Souls of
Millions of Light Years Away, 2013.

At the close of the May 2023 Group of Seven (G7) summit in Hiroshima
(Japan), the foreign ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
the United Kingdom, and the United States and the High Representative of
the European Union (EU) released a long and informative statement
<https://www.state.gov/g7-japan-2023-foreign-ministers-communique/>. In a
section titled ‘China’, the eight officials wrote that they ‘recognise the
importance of engaging candidly with and expressing our concerns directly
to China’ and that they ‘acknowledge the need to work together with China
on global challenges as well as areas of common interest, including on
climate change, biodiversity, global health security, and gender equality’.
The diplomatic tone of the statement stands out in comparison to the heated
rhetoric that these countries have adopted in recent years and is much
softer than the language used at the G7 meeting
<https://thetricontinental.org/newsletterissue/g7-summit/> itself, where
the heads of government bandied about the phrase ‘economic coercion’,
indirectly aimed <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-65662720> at China.

A close reading of the speeches at the meeting suggests that there are
differences of opinion amongst the leaders of the G7 countries,
particularly when it comes to China and their own domestic industrial
policies. Certainly, several European states are uneasy about the domestic
economic consequences of prolonging the war in Ukraine and of a possible
military conflict over Taiwan. It is perhaps this uneasiness that prompted
US President Joe Biden to say
<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/05/21/remarks-by-president-biden-in-a-press-conference/>,
‘We’re not looking to decouple from China, we’re looking to de-risk and
diversify our relationship with China’.

For Europe, the notion of decoupling from China is inconceivable. In 2022,
EU figures show
<https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=China-EU_-_international_trade_in_goods_statistics>
that China was the third largest partner for goods exported from the region
and the largest partner for good imported to the region, with most of the
goods imported by China being high-end, value-added manufactured goods.
Europe’s domestic economies have already been grievously injured by the
West’s refusal to negotiate a peace agreement in Ukraine; being cut-off
from the burgeoning Chinese market would be a fatal blow.

The G7 meeting reveals the gaps between the United States and its allies
(Europe and Japan), but these differences of interest and opinion should
not be overestimated. As part of our work at Tricontinental: Institute for
Social Research, we have been researching and analysing the nature of the
cooperation between the United States, Europe, and Japan – the
‘Triad’, as Samir
Amin <https://thetricontinental.org/globalisation-and-its-alternative/>
called them; while our research is still ongoing, we present some of the
data in this newsletter.

Following the end of the Second World War, the United States built an
international system that was premised on the subordination and integration
of Japan and Europe. This process of subordination and integration was
evident in the military apparatus constructed by the United States, with
the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) established in 1949 and
US-Japan Security Treaty of 1951 being the lynchpins. Establishing a system
of US military bases in the defeated powers – Germany, Italy, and Japan –
allowed Washington to set aside any talk of a sovereign military or
diplomatic project for either Europe or Japan (tantrums from France,
inspired by Charles De Gaulle’s grand sense of French destiny, led not to a
withdrawal from NATO but only to a removal of French forces from the
alliance’s military command in 1966).

There are currently 408 known US military bases in the Five Eyes countries
(Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and – because they
share intelligence with each other – Israel), in Europe, and in Japan.
Stunningly, Japan alone has 120 US military bases, while Germany hosts 119
of them. It is important to understand that these bases are not merely
instruments military power, but also political power. In 1965, Thomas
Hughes of the US State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research
authored an important memorandum
<https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/17558-document-13-inr-thomas-l-hughes-secretary>,
‘The Significance of NATO – Present and Future’. NATO, Hughes wrote,
‘remains essential to the US as a well-established and easily available
instrument for exercising American political influence in Europe’ and
ultimately ‘it is important for the protection of American interests in
Europe’. Such a system had already been put in place in Japan, as detailed
in this US military memorandum
<https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v22/d365> from
1962. The network of US military bases in Europe and Japan are the symbol
of their political subordination to Washington.

With the signing of the US-Japan Security Treaty in 1951, Japan’s Prime
Minister Shigeru Yoshida accepted
<https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/japanese-journal-of-political-science/article/deconstructing-the-yoshida-doctrine/FC8977F907AF6297D9F36D711267003F>
the dominance of the US military over his country but hoped that the
Japanese state would be able to focus on economic development. Similar
doctrines were articulated in Europe.

In the post-war era, an economic bloc began to form between the United
States, Europe, and Japan. In 1966, Raymond Vernon published a significant
journal article <https://www.jstor.org/stable/1880689>, ‘International
Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle’, in the *Quarterly
Journal of Economics* in which he showed how the large international
corporations built a sequential structure: goods would be first produced
and sold in the United States, then in Europe, and afterwards in Japan,
after which they would finally be sold in other parts of the world. In
1985, Kenichi Ohmae, managing director of the global consulting firm
McKinsey’s Tokyo office, shed further light on this arrangement in his
book *Triad
Power: The Coming Shape of Global Competition*. Ohmae illustrated how
international corporations had to operate simultaneously in the United
States, Western Europe, and Japan; increasing capital intensity, high
research and development costs, a convergence of consumer taste, and the
rise of protectionism made it essential for international corporations to
work in these countries, which Ohmae collectively called the Triad, and
then seek markets and opportunities elsewhere (where seven-tenths of the
world lived).

Samir Amin used that term – Triad – for a very different purpose. In 1980,
he wrote
<https://invenio.unidep.org/invenio/record/6570/files/amin-samir-class-and.pdf>
of the ‘gradual consolidation of the central zone of the world capitalist
system (Europe, North America, Japan, Australia)’, and soon thereafter
began to refer to this ‘central zone’ as the Triad. The elites in Europe
and Japan subordinated their own national self-interest to what the US
government had begun to call their ‘common interests’. New institutions and
terms emerged in the 1970s, giving shape to these ‘common interests’,
including the Trilateral Commission <https://www.trilateral.org/> (set up
by David Rockefeller in 1973 with headquarters in Paris, Tokyo, and
Washington) and the concept of ‘trilateral diplomacy
<https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/qfp/103525.htm>’ (which brought
together Western Europe, Japan, and the United States under one unified
diplomatic worldview).

*Here is an important document to study about the Trilateral Commission.
<http://freedomarchives.org/Documents/Finder/DOC38_scans/39.trilateral.commission.1979.pdf>*

Intellectuals in these trilateral circles saw the United States as the
central power with its vassal states (Europe and Japan) empowered to
maintain control over the tributary states (such as South Korea) in order
to keep the rest of the world stable. Much harsher language was used by
Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the architects of the Trilateral Commission and
National Security Advisor to US President Jimmy Carter. In *The Grand
Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives* (1997),
Brzezinski wrote, ‘To put it in terminology that hearkens back to the more
brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial
geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among
the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the
barbarians from coming together’. You can guess who the barbarians are in
Brzezinski’s imagination.

In recent years, the concept of the Triad has largely fallen out of favour.
But there is a need to recover this term to better understand the actual
world order. The imperialist camp is not solely geographically defined;
both the older term, Triad, and the more currently used term, Global North,
are geopolitical concepts. The majority of the world – the Global South –
now faces a US-led and dominated imperialist system that is rooted in an
integrated military structure. This system is composed of three groups: (1)
the United States, the United Kingdom, and other Anglo-American white
settler states; (2) Europe; and (3) Japan. The Global North is home to a
minority of the world’s population (14.2%) but is responsible for a clear
majority of global military spending (66.0%). According to the Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute
<https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2023/world-military-expenditure-reaches-new-record-high-european-spending-surges>,
total world military spending reached $2.2 trillion in 2022, with the Triad
and its close partners responsible for $1.46 trillion of that amount
(China’s military spending is $292 billion, while Russia spends $86
billion). It is this immense military power that allows the Triad to
continue to assert itself over the world’s peoples, despite its weakening
hold on the world economy.

In recent years, the United States has encouraged a Japanese rearmament and
a German military build-up, both of which were discouraged after the Second
World War, so that these ‘vassals’ can strengthen Washington’s parochial
New Cold War against Russia and China as well as the newly assertive states
of the Global South. Although some elites in Europe and Japan are able to
see the domestic crises in their countries that are being accelerated by
the US foreign policy agenda, they lack the cultural and political
confidence to stand on their own two feet.

In 2016, the European Union’s High Representative Federica Mogherini laid
out the concept of Europe’s ‘strategic autonomy’ from the United States in
the EU Global Strategy
<https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/global-strategy-european-unions-foreign-and-security-policy_en>.
Three years later, France’s Emmanuel Macron said
<https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-in-his-own-words-english>
that NATO was suffering ‘brain death’ and that ‘Europe has the capacity to
defend itself’. Today, it is clear that neither assertion – Europe’s
strategic autonomy nor its capacity to defend itself – holds any water.
Modest returns of Gaullism in France do not offer the kind of courage
required by European and Japanese leaders to break with the trilateral
bargains that were set up seventy-eight years ago. Until that courage
arrives, Europe and Japan will remain entrenched in their conditions of
vassalage, and the Triad will remain alive and well.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20230603/cac0fd57/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1353781 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20230603/cac0fd57/attachment.png>