|
|
|
|
|
|
by nonce42
388 days ago
|
|
|
I agree. The sudden influence of the separatist movement does match what that book (Foundations of Geopolitics) says: "Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States and Canada to fuel instability and separatism" (quote from Wikipedia). I don't want to be a conspiracy nut, but I have to wonder how many separatist and protest movements are unknowingly getting external support to produce geopolitical disorder. |
|
|
I'm Latin-American, so this doesn't sound at all nutty to me. The USA has long been doing this: from successful attempts promoting separatism in Panama and Texas, to failed attempt in Sonora and Baja California (officially a private citizen acting in his own accord, but conveniently enjoying the complacency of the US Government). It's one of the strategies big powers use, and there's more examples of this in Europe, Asia, and the rest of the world.
I think it's worth considering that perhaps this isn't Russian-fueled separatism, but American-fueled. The would gain a lot USA from an independent Alberta. It'd go the way of Texas— independent for about a year and then incorporated into the United States. Moreover, Alberta statehood would create a geographical rift in Canada that would place immense pressure on British Columbia to go independent or join the United States too.
It would also make the future annexation of the Northwest Territories and the Yukon much more likely, which would not only give the USA better access to the North-West Passage [1] and a wealth of resources, but it would connect Alaska to the rest of the continental USA.
[1]: https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/future-northern-sea-route...