Trading partners & subgroups

NWO's plan is sloppy, thoughtless, a big mess, a total madness, a huge disaster. AntiNWO's plan is well thought out, meticulous, all around. Part of the plan is AntiNWO's group organizational model. It is more thorough and more flexible compared to NWO's which is EU, a complete failure. NWO plans to implement EU's failed model in all other three pseudo-continental Unions, American, Asian, African. That will be an even bigger disaster.

AntiNWO will not impose any organizational model on the Groups. It is expected though that AntiNWO's model will be the standard for most groups. We need to elaborate a little more on two important features of AntiNWO's plan, trading partners and subgroups. Trading partner status has pros and cons. AntiNWO's model is decentralized and gives members more autonomy compared to EU's total failure.

Trading partners have even more autonomy compared to members. On the other hand they have similar trading privileges with members but not exactly the same. How much similar will be determined by each group. Only members participate in group's meetings or decision making and are considered in the group's economic plan. Trading partners are excluded.

There would be some extended meetings as well where trading partners will participate but these meetings will not take place so often like regular meetings for members. A country can't be a trading partner in several groups, only in one. So, in a sense, it can be viewed as an inner circle and an outer circle. The inner circle are the members of the group and the outer the trading partners.

Members will decide if a country will become a trading partner or a member. Also a country can move from the outer circle to the inner and the opposite. Again members will make this decision, if a trading partner will become a member or if a member will become a trading partner. It makes sense that moving from the inner circle to the outer would be easier, compared to the opposite.

Trading partner status can be useful in a number of instances. In Eastern European Group 4 (or Eastern - Southern if Italy participates), the poorest countries are expected to start as trading partners. These are Ukraine, Moldova, Bosnia, Albania, Georgia, Armenia. The line could be drawn before or after N. Macedonia, meaning it could be either a trading partner or a member.

In the case of Western European Group 3 (or Western - Northern if German Wannabes participate) it could be the richest countries that are trading partners. Currently the only Western European countries that are not in EU are UK, Norway, Switzerland. The last two are among the richest. These three could start as trading partners in Group 3, if this feature is added in EU's disastrous organizational model.

It could be easier for UK as well. After countries spin off from EU to form Group 4, there would be a new Union, Western European (or Western - Northern if German Wannabes participate). That would be a reason for a new referendum in UK. Trading partner status may not require a referendum because UK will not be in the inner circle. Trading partners have more autonomy than members, are independent countries that have similar trading privileges with members.

That could be more suitable for Turkiye in Group 4. If Turkiye is a member of the Group, it can't have an important role in the Muslim world. If that is their goal, they should be in a Muslim group. Trading partner in Group 4 is an in between situation. Turkiye can have autonomy to play a somewhat important role in the Muslim world but not as much as if it was a member in Muslim Group 8.

Trading partner status can also be useful when there are serious conflicts between countries. It would be awkward and difficult for them to be in the same group. But if one or both are trading partners, it would be OK. Another way to handle conflicts is to place countries in different subgroups. It would be difficult for Russia and Ukraine to be in the same group. Luckily, Ukraine will start as a trading partner with the rest of the poorest countries.

Also that could be an option for Turkiye and Israel. One or both could be trading partners in Group 4. For Israel there are other options as well; a) participate in Western European Group 3 b) be in no Group c) be US territory d) not exist. There is lack of homogeneity between USA - Canada and Mexico in Group 1. Having Mexico a trading partner and USA - Canada members could make the Group function better.

Subgroups is another useful feature in AntiNWO's group organizational model. It is optional, group members will decide if they want to have further division in subgroups. Members of a subgroup will have closer relations among them. Also they could have more frequent meetings and a subgroup capital. There are four possibilities regarding capitals; a) no capitals for group and subgroups b) capital only for group c) capitals only for subgroups d) capitals for group and subgroups.

Poland, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia (German Wannabes) strongly oppose their participation in Group 4, under the guidance of Germany and France. Although German Wannabes are Slavic countries they want to be German and together with Celtic and Germanic countries. One option would be to form a relatively autonomous subgroup in Group 4.

Each group will determine if there will be subgroups and the degree of their autonomy. Of course, as it has been explained, if Italy comes first, German Wannabes will not have the option to participate in Group 4 and will lose a tremendous opportunity. Italy has the options to be a trading partner in Group 4 or form a subgroup with other countries.

One alternative could be if Italy and Balkan countries formed a subgroup in Group 4. Byzantine (Balkan) or Greco-Traco-Illyrian countries (Balkan, Hungary and Slovakia) could also form a subgroup. The options are many. Some of them are presented in "many ways of division". In Group 3, Celtic countries could form a subgroup and Germanic another, if this feature is included in EU's catastrophic model.

In Central and South American Group, there are three groups ready, MERCOSUR, PARLACEN, Andean Community. These could make some type of agreement to form Group 2 and the currently existing three groups could remain as subgroups. Something similar can happen is Sub-Saharan Africa where there are four groups, ECOWAS, ICAD, CEMAC, SADC.

In Arab Group 5, African part could be a subgroup and Asian part another. In the other Muslim Group 8, Iran - Afghanistan - Pakistan could form a subgroup and the rest another. Some kind of division in subgroups can also happen in the remaining Groups 9 and 10. Group members will decide if a certain group will be divided in subgroups, how it will be divided and the level of autonomy subgroups will have.

The point is that NWO's plan is sloppy, thoughtless, a big failure and NWO's vicious cabal is extremely incompetent. They create many problems and cause wars. Only when AntiNWO will take charge of matters all problems will be fixed, all wars will end and there will be peace and prosperity all over the world. We will have some more articles regarding wars soon.