It reads like a Tom Clancy plotline: The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence gets briefed on the national security implications of a collapse in the $. Suddenly there is a realisation that the US is very exposed not just economically but politically. Those who have read “Debt of Honour” will be familiar with the plot which involves a crashing of the US financial system using a coordinated attack on the $ and the Treasury market. Alas this is now not fiction but real time.

The $ is being abandoned wholesale and the US intelligence service is right to be focusing on what this could mean for national security just as the Pentagon did when they commissioned a report on the security implications of climate change back in 2004.

With Gold heading towards $1000/oz, Oil above $100/bl, the $ in freefall and the financial system in a mess, one could be forgiven for thinking that things couldn’t get much worse. Well stock prices still have plenty of room to fall and probably another 10-15% is about right. Property will continue to sag also.

But the main problem is the US getting the big fat raspberry from the rest of the world. It’s stretched militarily, politically it’s pretty much lost all credibility and now economically its kaputski, as its Russian pals would say.

Who caused this mess? Well according to some it was Sir Alan. No not Alan Sugar of Asmtrad and Spurs fame but Alan Greenspan. This little piece on his actions in 1987 paints an interesting picture.

Let’s hope someone with half a brain is in charge back in Washington otherwise this could get very messy.

The recent visit of the Saudi Arabian King Abudullah has caused no end of consternation amongst activists of all hue. Let’s face it the Kingdom is not exactly progressive when it comes to human rights or gender equality.

The famous “ethical foreign policy” of the Blair years, a deception like most other announcements of that time, is clearly is misnomer. The real question is can there ever be ethics in foreign policy?

Foreign policy is all about making sure ones national interest is enhanced, or at least not set back, by international events. As Mick Hume notes realpolitik is still the name of the game. Yes we will be enraged at hideous regimes but we have to consider our trade interests blah blah blah.

New Zealand tends to take the higher moral ground where possible but of course people would argue NZ is too small for anyone to notice. The stance of our neighbours across the ditch is somewhat different and maybe its because they have more to worry about with Indonesia to the North and as a bigger economy they interact more competitively with other interests in the region.

It’s an interesting dilemma. The Great Game continues and its hard to see when its going to stop. Until then expect ethics and morals to be trotted out only around election time.