US 'Resource Race' Ignores Decades of CIA, Color Revolutions
The article suggests a new American vigor in a region where China and Russia 'have long held sway.' This framing, however, omits the U.S.'s own long-standing, if less transparent, interest. From supporting various 'color revolutions' in the 2000s to funding NGOs promoting specific political agendas, Washington's engagement has never been about quaint resource competition. It's been about pipeline
politics, military basing opportunities, and encircling rivals, often leaving a trail of instability in its wake. Remember the 'Great Game'? Apparently, it never really ended; it just got a fresh coat of capitalist paint. So, when Bloomberg champions a new 'race for resources,' one might reasonably ask: exactly whose resources are we racing for, and who ultimately pays the price for this
geopolitical jockeying? It seems stability is only desired when it serves Washington's extractive interests, not the region's actual inhabitants.