Basis for exchanges 2
Basis for exchanges 2
These are not all possible exchanges. There are really very many exchanges or changes that can be done. We only presented a few examples that seem to have more chances than the rest but this is something subjective. We are not suggesting that these exchanges should be made. On the contrary, the arrangement in Appendix 45 seems very good. However, there may be exchanges or changes.
We stated that there does not seem to be a reason for Turkey - ACA (Azerbaijan - Central Asia) exchange. Actually, there are reasons for and against it. It does not seem that the scale is tipping on one side. It is questionable if Turkiye would prefer D instead of B. Generally, Turkey is considered leaning more towards the "West" than the "East". It is in NATO and they have been desperately trying to be a member of EU, since 1987.
For the sake of argument, suppose that Turkiye prefers to be in Coalition D than in B. Current President Erdogan has good relations with the presidents in USA and Russia. If in Turkey they prefer to be in Coalition D, USA and Russia may consider the exchange seriously. Russia may have a problem because probably it would prefer to have all ACA (D4) countries in Coalition D. They were together in Russian Empire and USSR. Currently, they are together in CIS.
At the same time, the exchange would be something Iran may want and Russia has good relations with Iran. Iran has also good relations with Turkey but they are also competing for leadership. With the exchange, Iran will be the leader in the area and four more smaller countries will be added. Most Balkan countries do not want Turkey in their Coalition because they were under Ottoman (Turkish) rule for centuries. Albania may be the only exception.
Also, Saudi Arabia may not prefer Turkiye to be in D. But the two countries generally have good relations and will get along. It is not the same with Israel, if it is in D. USA has good relations with Israel and Turkey but with Israel, relations are undoubtedly much closer. Pleasing Turkey (if they want to be in D) will dissatisfy Israel and Balkan countries. For USA and Russia, there are pros and cons with this exchange.
If the exchange is considered seriously, Kazakhstan is first on the list to remain in D and Azerbaijan is second. Kazakhstan has the highest per capita income (ppp) in D4. According to IMF, in terms of per capita income (ppp), it is above Greece, Latvia, Bulgaria and slightly below Romania, Hungary, Slovakia. Also it has very close relations with Russia and the seventh largest population of Orthodox Christians.
Azerbaijan is second in per capita income, much lower than Kazakhstan but above Albania, Bosnia, Ukraine, Moldova. Also Azerbaijan is on the western side of the Caspian Sea (which is a lake). With Armenia and Georgia, they are at the borders between Europe and Asia, on Asian side. Georgia and Armenia are Orthoodox Christian while Azerbaijan is Muslim. Turkey has close relations with Azerbaijan and may want to have it in the same Coalition.
Turkey's placement is a minor problem. As always, Western Europe is the big problem. Western Europe can be with Eastern only if Russia is included. But this is not a good arrangement for several reasons explained. Generally, there is DISTRUST of WESTERN EUROPE in MOST AREAS of the WORLD. They do not want to be in the same Coalition with them because they believe that Western Europeans will try to control and impose their will.
Luckily, VOLUNTEERS have been found that are WILLING to DEAL with WESTERN EUROPEAN NWO psychopaths. These volunteers are INDIA and MERCOSUR. In the arrangement proposed (Appendix 45), Western Europe gets India but does not get Mercosur. That is a possible exchange. If WESTERN EUROPEANS get INDIA and MERCOSUR, they should be VERY SATISFIED because they get all they asked for.
If Mercosur+ (C3) is exchanged for A3, the percentage of C becomes too low and that of A too high. Additionally, a triangular exchange can be made, D gets A2 (Scandinavia - Finland - Austria) from A and C gets D6 (Oceania) form D. Still the percentage of C remains low at 23,33 %. There is a way to increase it further, if A gets Mercosur only instead of Mercosur+.
Mercosur has five members; Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Bolivia. Western Europe made a trade deal with Mercosur only, the five countries. Peru and Chile are not members of Mercosur. However, due to their location, it is reasonalbe to place them together with the five Mercosur countries but it is not necessary. If Peru and Chile remain in C, the percentages become 24% for C and 25,2% for A.
Suppose that Western Europe wants to have Mercosur (not Mercosur+) and keep A2 (SFA). A3 is exchanged for C3, without Peru and Chile which remain in C. The percentages of A and C will be 25,67% and 23,47% respectively. For A it is not too high but for C it is too low. Let's say that D gives to C Oceania (D6). The percentages of C and D become 24,02% and 23,92% while for A and B remain 25,67% and 26,34%.
C and D may be willing to accept that arrangement. They are within the 25 ± 1% range. D is only slightly below that. However, D could get Sudan from B. That would be a change, not an exchange. The percentages for B and D will become 25,71% and 24,55%. This also seems to be a good arrangement. We should note that the total of the percentage is not exactly 100% because Israel is not included in any Coalition.
There are six Engilish speaking countries; UK, Ireland, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand. With this arrangement, they are all in the same Coalition. This is a plus and many people like it. However, Australia and New Zealand are far away from the rest. This is a disadvantage. It is debatable whether it is better to place Oceania (Australia, New Zealand, Papua) in C or in D.
If Western Europe does not want to have India in its Coalition, it has more chances to persuade North America than Eastern Europe. So in both cases a) exchange Mercosur b) exchange India, Western Europe will be dealing with North America (USA). Instead of being obsessed with Eastern Europe, they should approach North America and see if they can make the arrangement better for them, assuming that the one proposed is not satisfactory.
Western Europe has less chances to persuade Eastern Europe to take India in its Coalition but it is not entirely impossible. D1, D2 and D3 are Eastern Europe plus Cyprus, Armenia, Georgia. D4 is ACA (Azerbaijan - Central Asia) and D5 is Japan, S. Korea. This is a continuous area. The country in D4 that is closest to India is Tajikistan. It does not have borders with India but it is relatively close. In that case, it would be better if Turkiye is not exchanged for some D4 countries because that will make the distance from India longer.