Summary of "Brian Berletic: The New Great Game - War Against Iran, Russia & China"

Summary

Brian Berletic argues that the “economic war” against China and the concurrent wars/proxy conflicts against Russia and Iran are not separate struggles. Instead, he frames them as parts of a single strategy intended to prevent rivals from achieving independent strength and to ultimately subordinate or weaken multiple powers that could otherwise cooperate.

Common thread: diplomacy as a pretext and primacy as the goal

Berletic claims U.S. diplomacy is repeatedly used not to resolve conflicts peacefully, but to manufacture pretexts for escalation and to reshape geopolitics ahead of war.
- He cites the lead-up to the 2014 Ukraine developments, the 2022 Russia war, and ongoing escalation involving Iran.
He argues the U.S. publicly emphasizes “balance of power” objectives, while the underlying objective is primacy—a viewpoint he says is consistent across Cold War and post–Cold War strategy documents.

Why China is viewed as the ultimate target

Berletic argues the U.S. does not expect China to pressure Iran or Russia. Rather, he says the deeper goal is to ensure China cannot become strong enough to resist or form durable alignments.
He asserts the U.S. assumes it cannot defeat China “head-to-head,” so it attempts to wreck global stability and disrupt rivals indirectly while exploiting remaining leverage.

“Great Game” framing: sea chokepoints and global pressure

Berletic compares current policy to the historic “Great Game,” describing a U.S./UK-like focus on controlling maritime routes while land powers seek to connect and consolidate.
He argues the U.S. aims to weaken interconnected Eurasian power centers—Russia, Iran, and China—so they cannot consolidate trade and strategic coordination.
A core mechanism, he says, is pressure on shipping and energy transit lanes, especially around the Strait of Hormuz and routes approaching the Indian Ocean.
- He describes a “double blockade” concept meant to deter or turn back shipping rather than completely stop all trade overnight.

Replicating the Russia-Europe playbook in Asia

Berletic claims the U.S. previously pressured Europe via energy disruptions (including references to Nord Stream sabotage) and now intends to replicate similar leverage against Asia by:

interdicting or pressuring Middle Eastern energy routes to Asia,
increasing Asia’s dependence on U.S. energy exports,
using long-running disruption to create controlled dependence (not instant collapse).

He argues this fits a broader effort to derail peace and prosperity across regions, rather than to “solve” conflicts.

Belt and Road as a target; “dirty war” logic

Berletic argues China’s Belt and Road Initiative and alternative corridors are met with sustained disruption through infrastructure attacks and destabilization efforts.
He includes claims about U.S.-backed militant activity affecting areas such as:
- Myanmar
- Pakistan (including CPEC)
- Afghanistan (framed as disrupting Chinese investment and development)
He characterizes this as an extended, long-running campaign against China—a “global dirty war”—with escalation possible at any time, while managed to avoid uncontrolled blowback.

Feared outcome: multipolar alignment and deterrence

Berletic emphasizes that Russia, China, and Iran are portrayed as natural partners with shared incentives to cooperate, and that U.S. efforts aim to prevent them from acting together.
He raises a strategic question: can China and its partners build faster than the U.S. can disrupt and destroy?
He argues empires tend to pursue wars that others may try to avoid, and that the U.S. could escalate further because conflict serves as a tool of control.

Taiwan and “one China” as continued undermining

Berletic argues U.S. actions undermine the “one China” policy in practice, even if rhetoric sometimes sounds restrained:

U.S. military presence on or around Taiwan is described as ongoing.
Taiwan is portrayed as a long-term instrument integrated into broader U.S. regional military cooperation (with Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines) as a “Ukraine-style” battering ram against China.

He concludes the U.S. will not truly “back off” from Taiwan, and that diplomatic language is portrayed as cover.

Overall forecast: continued proxy war trajectory and risk of escalation

Berletic predicts the approach will keep intensifying, describing it as a multi-domain, multi-angle effort involving:
- political subversion,
- military integration,
- energy/shipping pressure,
- covert/drone actions.
He warns the strategy could reach very dangerous levels, pointing to rhetoric about extreme measures and emphasizing that Western decision-makers may accept massive damage in pursuit of maintaining global dominance.

Presenters or Contributors

Brian Berletic (guest; former U.S. Marine; author; host of The New Atlas)
Unnamed host/interviewer (the recurring “Welcome back… joined again by…” speaker)