|
Posted: 16 Jun
2015 01:43 AM PDT
E.I.R.STRATEGIC ALERT
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
Volume 29, No. 24-25 - June 11, 2015
Foolish Western Leaders Rush into War
As the global
financial crisis comes to a head over the Grexit issue, geopolitical
schemes playing out in Central Europe and Asia have reinforced the central
dynamic towards a global war. Blind G7 leaders, led by President Obama and
Prime Minister Cameron, boosted this dynamic, by renewing their hostile
policy to Russia.
In advance of the
closing of the G7 meeting, the White House stated June 7 that “President
Obama and Chancellor Merkel” agreed to extend sanctions against Russia
until Moscow fulfills the provisions of the Minsk agreements. Meanwhile,
the West is providing military assistance to Kiev, which has passed a law
allowing foreign troops to fight alongside the Ukranian army on Ukrainian
territory.
On June 6, Russian
President Vladimir Putin stated that Moscow sees the Minsk 2 agreements as
the only way for the solution in Ukraine, but that it is the Kiev
government that is not fulfilling any of the provisions of the agreement
and still refuses to accept the so-called separatists as a counterpart.
Putin made those remarks in a long interview with Corriere della Sera,
which was published in leading newspapers in Europe as well as on the
Kremlin website in English (http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/49629).
Putin also demanded
an explanation as to why the European leaders who had mediated the deal
between the Ukrainian government and the Maidan on Feb. 23, 2014, did not
denounce what happened afterwards, when the violent faction on the Maidan
ripped up that agreement and implemented the coup.
Putin also addressed
overall relations with the EU. While Russia would favor a common economic
space between the Eurasian Economic Union and Europe, he said, the EU wants
to “build a new wall” between Russia and Eastern Europe.
Rather than
answering the issues raised by the Russian President, G7 leaders continued
to issue ultimatums. Obama called for “standing up to Russian aggression”
as he arrived in Bavaria, while Angela Merkel told German television ZDF:
“We should send a firm signal here. Not sanctions as an end to itself, but
sanctions… to reach a target”.
At the same time, EU
leaders, backed by Washington, are pushing confrontation with Greece in
order to save the bankrupt euro financial system. As we have often written,
what is at stake is not the tiny dimensions of the Greek debt per se, but
the derivative Ponzi-scheme attached to it, and even more importantly, the
political effect a “Grexit” would have, by establishing a precedent and
changing the nature of the Monetary Union, from an “irreversible” system as
Mario Draghi used to say, into a system that can lose pieces and ultimately
dissolve. That means that the “safe” tag on euro-denominated assets is
replaced by the “unsafe” tag, pulling the rug under the entire system.
Whatever the outcome
of the EU-Greece negotiations is, the euro is ultimately finished. And for
the trans-Atlantic system, the only way the oligarchs see, is war.
Angela Merkel’s Foreign Policy Comes under
Strong Attack from Within
German Chancellor
Merkel was hit with unusually sharp criticism last week, for her refusal to
invite the Russian President Putin to the Group of Seven Summit in Bavaria.
The critics include two former chancellors, Helmut Schmidt and Gerhard
Schröder, the chairman of the influential Eastern Trades Board
(Ostausschuss) of German industry Eckhard Cordes, the chairman of the
German-Russian Forum Matthias Platzeck, and even her own Foreign Minister
Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
The latter declared
on June 4: “I believe we cannot have an interest in keeping the G7 format
as a G7 format in the long term,” because “we urgently need Russia to help
solve conflicts in our European vicinity and in Syria, Iraq, Libya and the
Iranian nuclear program.” This is in clear dissent with Angela Merkel, who
asserted in an interview with dpa the next day that, on grounds of
“fundamental values” which she claimed Russia had “severely violated”, the
right decision had been made not to invite the Putin back into the G7.
The vice-chairman of
the SPD, Ralph Stegner, also criticized the exclusion of Putin from the G7
Summit in Germany. According to TASS, he said this is “not a meeting over a
cup of coffee. If the Western countries have a desire to hold meetings only
with those who share common values, then they will find it hard to assemble
enough people even for the G2 format.”
Lyndon LaRouche, in
comments June 6, underscored the strategic importance of the opposition to
Merkel coming from these three SPD leaders, who recognize that her virulent
anti-Russian policy, if not stopped, will lead to war, and very likely a
thermonuclear war. Merkel should simply be removed from power, LaRouche
said, especially since, at this point, Germany is the only country in
Europe that could stop this war posture against Russia.
Also last week,
Merkel suffered a major defeat on another front where she has stuck to
Obama’s position, and that is Egypt. While she had refused to meet Egyptian
President Al-
2
EIR STRATEGIC ALERT
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
Sisi on so-called
human rights grounds, due to heavy internal pressure, she was forced to
receive him officially and to let him address a gathering of 180 German and
120 Egyptian industrial and engineering experts in Berlin.
The Egyptian
President’s trip had been endorsed and prepared in close cooperation with
German industrial leaders, by Merkel’s own Vice Chancellor and Economics
Minister, Sigmar Gabriel, who had attended the international conference on
Egyptian infrastructure projects in Sharm el-Sheikh in March (cf. SAS
13/15).
The most visible
sign of the failure of Merkel’s hardline was the 10-billion-euro deal
signed between Siemens and Egypt during Al-Sisi’s stay in Berlin. Siemens
will build a huge gas power complex in Beni Suef, complete with 24 powerful
turbines, and build 12 wind power parks in Egypt as well as a factory for
the production of power machines.
The Siemens deal is
seen as a door-opener for other industrial agreements for German technology
sales for sea ports, railroads and other infrastructure projects planned.
Indeed, industrialists are looking to gain a major share in the
60-bilion-euro development plan that Al-Sisi has put forth. Finally,
cooperation with Egypt is also crucial for helping to stabilize Libya.
LaRouche: U.S. Presidential Campaign Offers
Chance to Shape a New Presidency
Despite the persistent
droning of pundits who assert that the 2016 U.S. Presidential election will
be a face-off between Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush, polls show a
volatility, among likely voters, which foreshadows the possibility that a
profound change will emerge long before the Nov. 2016 election -- if there
is qualified leadership to direct it.
There are many
“issues” which provoke strong reactions among voters, but underlying
everything is a recognition that much of the political discussion in the
U.S. is dishonest, designed to manipulate susceptible voters. This is
especially clear when it comes to the economy.
Although the Obama
administration and most media loudly proclaim that the U.S. economy has
recovered from the 2008 crash, and is on a healthy, sustainable course, few
Americans believe it. That is why Lyndon LaRouche, the most accurate
economic forecaster of the last four decades, has been saying that there is
a real chance that the election will be shaped by a campaign which focuses
on “physical economy,” and attacks the free market, monetarist policies
which have created yet another unsustainable speculative bubble. LaRouche
has insisted that a candidate who takes on the corruption of Wall Street
and the major banks will find a response among voters.
Within the
Democratic Party, there is growing support for such a campaign, as
exemplified by the number of co-sponsors to the House bill calling for
reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, which has shot up to 59 over the past few
weeks (four of them Republicans, including co-sponsor Walter Jones). As our
readers know, there is one candidate who is publicly campaigning for
Glass-Steagall, Martin O’Malley, who has been denouncing the “bullies of
Wall Street” in his first round of campaign ads (cf. below).
His campaign is a
visible indication of the splits in the Democratic Party, which have
emerged over Obama’s support for the TPP free-trade deal, as well as over
NSA spying and the undeclared wars the Obama administration is waging.
On the Republican
side, while few candidates are in the real world on crucial strategic
matters, Rand Paul took a decisive step by joining the bipartisan fight to
release suppressed evidence of the Saudi role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks
(cf. SAS 23/15). On June 5, Paul introduced the “Transparency for the
Families of 9/11 Victims and Survivors Act of 2015”, as an amendment to the
National Defense Authorization Act, with co-sponsors Ron Wyden and Kirsten
Gillibrand, both Democrats.
LaRouche noted that
this initiative in the Senate was “������a crucial flanking operation,” which contributes to removing Barack Obama from power.
LaRouche also
insisted that the O’Malley campaign opens up the potentiality of organizing
a new American presidency, by assembling a team of qualified individuals,
many of whom have been excluded from any involvement in the official
Executive branch over the last 15 years of Bush and Cheney, and now Obama.
“O’Malley is going in that direction,” LaRouche said. “Hillary can’t make
it. But one of the immediate priorities is to get rid of Obama.... Obama
must be thrown out. That means O’Malley is... the emerging figure around
which a new Presidency can be immediately assembled.”
O’Malley: Wall Street’s Nightmare That Won’t
Go Away
The Political Action
Committee supporting the Democratic presidential campaign of Martin
O’Malley has put out a new television ad titled “Wall Street’s Public Enemy
No. 1.”
The ad quotes from
O’Malley’s May 30 speech announcing his candidacy where he stated boldy:
“Goldman Sachs is one of the biggest repeat-offending investment banks in
America. Recently, the CEO of Goldman Sachs let his employees know that
he’d be just fine with either [Jeb] Bush or [Hillary] Clinton. Well, I’ve
got news for the bullies of Wall Street -- the presidency is not a crown to
be passed back and forth by you between two royal families. It is a sacred
trust.”
That quote in
particular was the basis of commentaries by Fox Business News reporter
Charles Gasparino, June 2 and 3. “Martin O’Malley is now like, I would say,
persona non grata, public enemy number-one in in the halls of Goldman
Sachs, in the halls of Black Rock, the big money management firm; all
throughout Wall Street right now,” said Gasparino June 2. “O’Malley is the
last person Wall Street would want to win. The financial industry was not
expecting a presidential candidate to adopt that kind of aggressive
approach towards Wall Street. Right now, people on Wall Street are talking
about Martin O’Malley.... What they’re really worried about is not that
he’s going to win. It’s that he’s going to force [Hillary Clinton] so far
to the left with that resonating message.
Lyndon LaRouche, who
has named O’Malley “the only qualified candidate in the race thus far,”
said it reminded him of Franklin Roosevelt, who told audiences about Wall
Street, “They hate me, and I welcome their hatred.”
And in fact, as
Business Insider June 3, “Martin O’Malley is happy to be ‘the last person’
Wall Street CEOs want running in 2016.”
Danish Elections: The Friends of The
Schiller Institute Shake Up “Politics as Usual”
On May 27, Prime
Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt (Social Democrat) called parliamentary
elections, to be held on June 18 -- the usual length of Danish elections
campaigns. According to Danish law, parliamentary elections must be called
within four years of the last election, at the prerogative of the prime
minister, in this case, by September 2015.
While neither of the
two election blocks (right-wing opposition and left-wing government and
support parties) have anywhere near the policy perspective needed to
navigate the ship of state through the accelerating economic and strategic
n°24-25 / 2015
3
EIR STRATEGIC ALERT
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
dangers, four
independent campaigns have been creating a stir. The candidates are Tom
Gillesberg, the chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark who is
running in Copenhagen, and three other activists from The Friends of The
Schiller Institute.
The focus of their
campaign is to get Denmark and the rest of Europe to join the BRICS
economic development alliance, as encapsulated in their now-famous poster
with the slogan, “Win-win with BRICS: Not collapse and war”, and a picture
of the World Land-Bridge (www.sive.dk). Both the
newspaper Jyllands Posten and TV2 channel presented that poster as among
the most special of the campaign.
Gillesberg has
received some short media coverage, including the above two outlets, as well
as the most well-known radio news analysis program Orientation, and on the
nationwide DR2 TV program Deadline, where he could outline the perspective
of the world land-bridge presented on the poster. That short intervention
prompted the host to close with: “Now illuminated, and perhaps inspired, we
say thank you for watching.”
On June 4, one of
the three leading newspapers Politiken published both in their online and
printed editions, a lengthy interview with Gillesberg, headlined: “He Is
Running a Campaign Based on the Danger of Nuclear War.” The kicker reads:
“During the 2007 election, Tom Gillesberg predicted the financial crash.
And, as is known, he was right. Now he is warning that things can go
terribly wrong, if we don’t cooperate with Russia and China.”
With ironic twists
throughout on how few votes Gillesberg received in previous elections, the
article nonetheless goes through the dangers of a financial crash and
nuclear war, as well as Gillesberg’s solutions, such as joining the BRICS,
Glass-Steagall bank separation, and the importance of large infrastructure
projects, such as the Danish maglev across the Kattegat to link the two
major cities, Copenhagen and Aarhus.
All in all, the
campaigns of the activists of the SI, while limited, have brought some
reality, and optimism, into the humdrum of failed European policies. As of
this writing, the two major blocks, are running neck and neck to get to the
90 mandate finish-line needed to form a majority government.
Washington Readies Various Options for War
on China
Over the past weeks,
U.S. President Obama, his Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and other
American officials have unleashed a tirade against Chinese “aggression” in
the Spratly/Nansha Islands in the South China Sea, a tirade which has been
duly taken up in major European media (cf. SAS 23/15).
In fact, while the
reefs in the area are disputed by many countries, China has been using
those it claims are Chinese to create several artificial islands to be used
for its trade routes, as have other claimants.
Even the Wall Street
Journal, which has been in the lead of the calls for a tough stance against
China, had to admit in the June 1 issue that “China’s island-building
doesn’t violate maritime law, and other claimants to the Spratlys,
including Taiwan, Vietnam and the Philippines, have all expanded the
geographical features they control, albeit not nearly as dramatically. Nor
has China threatened shipping in the South China Sea, which carries more
than half the world’s trade. And although the U.S. accuses China of
militarizing the islands, so far it has identified only two light motorized
artillery pieces on one of them.”
In fact, as Helga
Zepp-LaRouche pointed out in a recent speech, the many reefs in the South
China Sea that are now hotly disputed are essentially the result of the
geopolitics imposed by the major powers in the aftermath of World War I and
then again of World War II, which deliberately left many territories
without owners. In that way, they could constantly be used as a pretext for
conflict when it was deemed useful.
In fact, as Global
Times pointed out, more reefs and islands have been occupied by the
Philippines (U.S. allies) than those under the control of China.
Despite this
historical reality, Obama’s Defense Secretary Ashton Carter has again
accused China of violating “international norms” in the Asia-Pacific,
adding that the U.S. will continue provocative military fly-overs of the
Chinese islands. Then – believe it or not – he boldly asserted that America
“will remain the principal security power in the Asia-Pacific for decades
to come.”
Those are not just
empty words. The United States is proceeding with a massive military
encirclement of China, which includes: new high altitude missile systems
and radar in Japan and perhaps in Korea; intentions to place modern air,
sea and land military forces in eight bases on Philippine soil, including
two on Palawan island in the South China Sea; the “pivot” which intends to
place both more and more sophisticated military hardware in a ring around
China and Russia in the Pacific.
Under the official
U.S. military doctrine in the Pacific (“Air-Sea Battle”), if Washington
deems that China is attempting to exclude the US from the South China Sea,
the response will be a full-scale first strike on the Chinese mainland.
Iran Escalates Fight against Saudi-Backed
ISIS and Jihadists
The analysis
presented in the Strategic Alert last week has been confirmed by events in
the Middle East and elsewhere, as provocations and frantic diplomacy
compete with each other. American, British and Saudi media pushed a story
on the evening of June 4, stating that Iran has sent 10,000 armed men from
the Iranian revolutionary Guard (IRCS) and Iraqi shia militias to defend
Damascus and Lathakia in Syria, against an approaching offensive by the
Saudi-Turkish backed Islamic militants. The same wires highlighted an
unconfirmed statement by Qasem Soleimani, commander of the IRGC’s Quds
Brigades saying from Lathakia, that Iran is “preparing a major surprise in
Syria”. Although these unconfirmed statements could be just provocations to
foster rage against Iran, the Syrian government and the Iraqi Shias, they
fit into the pattern of Iran losing patience with the West’s failure to act
against the barbarous extremists.
Simultaneously, the
Iran-allied Hizbolah of Lebanon started a major offensive on the city of
Irsal on the Lebanese side of the border with Syria, which terrorist groups
like Al-Qaeda’s Jabhat Al-Nusra and ISIS have been using as a logistical
base to attack the Syrian army. This has heightened the already simmering
sectarian tension in Lebanon, as Irsal is a Sunni city and has been
protected by pro-Saudi forces in Lebanon such aas the Al-Hariri family and
its political arm in the country, the Mustaqbal party.
Recent statements
made by the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and by the Iranian
Supreme Leader’s foreign policy adviser, Ali Velayeti, point to the fact
that both Iran and Russia are committed to supporting the Syrian and Iraqi
governments to fight ISIS and what they openly describe as Western-backed
and Saudi-backed terrorist and militant groups. These two countries, as we
wrote, are in favor of a new international coalition against ISIS and
Islamic terrorism, but on completely different terms than the fake
U.S.-British-French-Saudi coalition that has prolonged and strengthened the
Islamic terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq, intentionally and otherwise.
n°24-25 / 2015EIR STRATEGIC ALERT WEEKLY NEWSLETTER 4
That coalition held
a meeting last week in Paris to discuss the strategy against ISIS, but did
not even invite Iran and Russia to participate. Lavrov insisted, in an
interview with Bloomberg, that Russia was in favor a fighting the
extremists “on a collective basis, on the basis of international law,
through the Security Council.” The Americans, however, announced their own
coalition, on their conditions, specifying that they would carry out
air-strikes in Syria, without asking the Syrian government or the Security
Council.
However, there has
been some cooperation among Russia, Iran and U.S. State Department
officials on easing the tensions in Yemen, and sponsoring a new national
dialog to end the murderous but failed Saudi aggression against the people
of Yemen that has continued since March 26 (cf. SAS 14, 17/15).
Bringing the U.S.
and Russia into a closer cooperation which would be key to ending the
nightmare in the whole Southwest Asian region.
Nuclear Energy: Over Half of New Power
Plants Are in the BRICS
Over the past 50
years, almost the entirety of the world’s nuclear power plants have been
built by, and operated in, the advanced industrial nations. But a dramatic
global paradigm-shift has taken place over the past 12 months, as reflected
in the 7th ATOMEXPO conference, held from June 1-3 in Moscow.
At the six previous
exhibitions, Russia’s nuclear company Rosatom showcased nuclear technology,
and negotiated agreements and contracts with international partners, most
often with its traditional partners in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet
Republics. This year’s conference however, on the theme “Nuclear Power as
an Impulse for Socio-Economic Development, “ focussed on Russian
cooperation with Ibero-America, Pacific Asia, and Africa.
That the BRICS today
are the global driver for nuclear power became clear to all. “Forty out of
76 nuclear power plants under construction are in BRICS,” Aleksey Khokhlov
of the Russian PwC Strategy and Services in Russia pointed out. “In 15
years time, BRICS nations would be the main driver for economic growth.
These countries are energy intensive,” he told the approximately 2,000
delegates from 48 nations attending the conference.
A myriad of other
countries are aligning themselves with the BRICS perspective of driving economic
development with the most advanced technologies.
The head of
Argentina’s delegation, Minister for Planning Julio De Vido, described the
importance of nuclear energy for his nation, and announced that while
Argentina has spent $11 billion on its nuclear plan between 2003 and 2014,
it plans to triple that over the next decade, to reach $31 billion. (By
contrast, the German delegate noted that consumers and industry in Germany
were paying EU23 billion to subsidize renewables, and that this has made it
hard to manage the stability of the power grid!)
Russia has been in
the forefront of providing a range of financing options to new nuclear
nations, making it possible for them to commit to large investments in the
future. Deputy Director of international business development for Rosatom,
Kirill Komarov, reported at ATOMEXPO that Russia’s current order book of
over $100 billion for 29 nuclear orders overseas is expected to grow to
$150 billion by 2020.
Toward that goal,
numerous agreements were signed by Rosatom during the exhibition, including:
*a Memorandum of
Understanding with Tunisia, for using radioisotopes in industry, medicine,
and agriculture, and the training of specialists;
*the strengthening
of cooperation with Indonesia, with which Rosatom is building a 10-MW
experimental high-temperature gas-cooled research reactor;
*an agreement with
Ghana, including the construction of research reactors;
*a discussion with
Cuba’s science minister, Elba Rosa Perez, regarding collaboration and the
exchange of nuclear scientific data with Russia.
China Announces up to Six Corridors
in the One Belt, One Road Initiative
The Chinese
leadership is outlining a breath-taking scope of great projects for
increasing the economic platform of over 60 countries in the framework of
the One Belt, One Road Initiative. According to the May 28 China Daily,
Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli announced that Beijing is considering six
different corridors to better connect Asia and Europe, and the many
countries lying along and between the routes.
The announcement by
Zhang was made one day earlier at the opening ceremony of a two-day
conference of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) held in Chongqing, under the
title, “Industry Dialogue on Connectivity”. The ASEM represents 53 European
and Asian nations and organizations.
The six major
economic corridors that China is considering developing, Zhang said are:
*
China-Mongolia-Russia;
* New Eurasian Land
Bridge;
* China-Central
Asia-Western Asia;
* China-Indochina
Peninsula;
* China-Pakistan;
*
Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar.
These corridors
would vector in several directions and bring about a tremendous economic
transformation. According to the article, the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank and the New Silk Road Fund, which are being brought into
being, will be tapped as the source of funding. Apparently, the AIIB would
deploy a multiple of its capital for the funding.
China’s trade volume
in goods with the countries along the designated routes, many of which are
developing countries, has been growing at an average of 22% each year since
2001.
Moreover, the China
Development Bank has also made known that it would invest more than $890 billion
into more than 900 projects involving 60 countries, as part of its efforts
to bolster the initiative.
Note to Subscribers
The Strategic Alert will not be published next week, as the
editorial board will be participating in an internationalSchiller Institute
conference in Paris.
Published by: E.I.R.GmbH, Bahnstr. 9a, 65205 Wiesbaden
Verantwortl. f. d. Inhalt: Dean Andromidas, Claudio Celani
Subscription: EUR 3000/ ISSN 0936-7527
© E.I.R. GmbH Alle Rechte vorbehalten,
auch die des Nachdrucks
von Auszügen, derphotomechanischen Wiedergabe und der
Übersetzung,
Printed in Germany
n°24-25 / 2015
|
No comments:
Post a Comment