London seriously aims to deprive New York of its global financial capital status and has recently unveiled an ambitious five-year plan on achieving this, REUTERS reports. Thus, according to the agency, the UK hopes to win back positions it lost after leaving the European Union (Brexit), and to generally improve its financial climate.
According to the plan's author TheCityUK, one of the most powerful British special interest groups, present-day London is still far behind New York. According to the group's analysts, Brexit not only closed the UK capital to its largest financial services client as represented by Europe, but also made the British rules of doing business less competitive. Moreover, London itself became suddenly pressed for financial experts over recruitment complexities for citizens of EU countries, not to mention those from "far abroad".
Here it's reasonable to ask whether Her Majesty's subjects have a chance of implementing the "Rule, Britannia, rule the money!" principle? A paradox as it may seem, the one to help Britain regain its former financial primacy is... Queen Elizabeth II, with her huge fortune. If she agrees to a number of moves. But first let me give you some background.
In early 2013, over a hundred agents of the US Secret Service (USSS) descended on the neighboring isles in quest for money stolen from taxes. And they did find some $6 trillion! The only mischief was that those isles were.. Britain's Virgin Islands. That is, not just an overseas territory of the United Kingdom, but the planet's largest offshore, where some 40% of all the shell companies are located, as official figures alone show.
And most importantly, the British Virgin Islands, like all the other overseas lands, are directly governed by the British monarch, i.e. Queen Elizabeth II. For this reason, all the offshore assets worth tens of trillions of dollars circulate there for Her Majesty's benefit. In simple terms, offshore money belongs to the British crown. Rumors have it that the monarch's outrage over Washington guests' aggressive actions made London refuse to give the go-ahead to the "final solution of the Syrian issue", which implied Bashar al-Assad's removal from power. This provided for Russia's taking Syria under its wing and preventing it from the same destiny as Libya, with all that it entails for the entire Middle East. And, secondly, such an ill-considered American attack against Her Majesty's property is said to have resulted in election triumph of Donald Trump, the son of a former British citizen Mary Ann MacLeod, also with all the consequences that come with it for both the United States and the rest of the world.
It is worth noting that right around the time, London took at least a couple more steps to safeguard its financial resources. The first one was Chinese leader Xi Jinping's landmark visit to Britain in October 2015. He was received at the highest level as a guest of the British Queen. The visit resulted in contracts worth $40 billion brought by the Chinese leader, as well as London's proclamation of a "golden age" between Britain and China. This actually implied "saddling up the Red Dragon", as well as the trade and financial flows of the real economy, instead of interaction with the United States' lame economy with it trillion-dollar debts and unsecured dollar bills. To say that it was a wicked blow to the White House is an understatement. Washington was so eager to soar into the sky on the back of a Chinese Red Dragon, but "the Englishwoman" came to ruin everything...
London's second step to protect its assets was Brexit, which TheCityUK group analysts are weeping their "crocodile tears" for. Then and now many experts said Brexit was mainly caused by the Brussels-planned changes of 2015 to the European Union's financial rules supposed to become binding as regards Britain's money and thereby the Queen herself. Elizabeth II was certainly not going to share her trillions and pure freedom to hold the purse strings without supervision either with the American spies, or with the Brussels clerks.
However, Her Majesty's money is not the money of the British treasury, but the personal funds of Queen Elizabeth II to be spent at her sole discretion, without investing in the country's economic development. And it’s fair to say that the British monarch is unlikely to ever take such a step. For which reason (not only due to the coronavirus pandemic), does the present-day situation in British economy leave much to be desired. Of course, life with external debt over 100% of GDP is certainly livable, but emissions alone will get you only so far. Especially in case of lacking physical gold, which London has been feverishly trying to buy from Russia and the United States over the last few months.
Much to Britain's regret, its bet on the Red Dragon has also failed for a number of reasons. Xi Jinping was even exposed to virtual obstruction after his keynote speech at the Davos forum in 2017, where the Chinese leader tried to declare his country's universal leadership to replace American hegemony.
Sooner or later the United Kingdom will be compelled to do its thing , i.e. to shuffle off the ever-increasing costs and risks on somebody else's shoulders. To this end, the near-complete absence of such a vital fasces as a modern capable army will make London get along with its old-time American "friend", whether it likes it or not, while keeping up the facade of a "special relationship" and signing new "Atlantic Charters" from time to time, which are of little value as a matter of practice. At least for the affluence of Her Majesty's subjects.
It is also obvious that without the US as a global hegemon, the "Global Britain" project adopted not so long ago by Boris Johnson's government will never come true. London would be only able to play its own global game under the umbrella of Washington's political, military and economic power. A clear proof of this is the current crisis in Afghanistan, where the United States suffered an epic disaster, along with the entire collective West, including Britain.