Under the Perverse Green Deal, Military Spending Is Sustainable
The same financial circles who forced the so-called “climate transition” on us, now tell us that war is needed to save the planet. “Defending the values of liberal democracies and creating a deterrent, which preserves peace and global stability,” is so important that weapons should be included in assets that carry an E.S.G., or “environmental, social and governance,” label, according to Citigroup’s Charles J. Armitage and Samuel Burgess. The two analysts argue, according to an article in the New York Times, that without strong militaries capable of “western” values against geopolitical adversaries like Russia and China, there can’t be much progress on other pressing global issues, such as the environment.
Those statements have spurred a controversy, with negative reactions from part of the “sustainable” finance industry. But keep in mind the following: Citigroup is the bank that received the largest bailout in history during the 2008 financial meltdown; it was key in forcing the abrogation of the Glass-Steagall bank regulations, and it also “has a heavy history with the Clintons”, according to wallstreetonparade.com. In other words, the push comes from the heart of the empire.
Readers of this newsletter should not be surprised. We have always maintained that war and so-called climate policies are both part of the attempt to prevent the final collapse of the global financial system. It is not about saving the planet, but about saving the hedge funds.
The signal from Wall Street was immediately picked up by SEB invesment Management, a leading Nordic investment fund which promptly put on their war gear: “SEB Investment Management has decided to reverse its sustainability policy and permit some of its funds to invest in defence companies. More specifically, funds that invest in equities and corporate bonds will be able to invest in the defence industry, but all the funds will continue to exclude investments in companies that manufacture, develop or sell weapons that violate international conventions, or that are involved in the development of nuclear weapons programmes.“ Again, this is not just any old fund, but the one that pioneered the green bond industry, as SEB worked together with the World Bank in 2008 to create the first green bond.
Not long ago, anyone labeling the weapon industry as climate-friendly would have been politically lapidated. Not so now, because, as the two Citi analysts explain, the population has been sufficiently brainwashed by the war propaganda. In a note dated March 2, they said “Russia’s assault on Ukraine had accelerated geopolitical shifts that are making military spending more popular among NATO countries”, the NYT reports. “The conflict in Eastern Europe is leading to increases in military spending by NATO countries and that bodes well for military contractors and their stocks, they say.”