EIR Daily Alert Service, MONDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2018


Volume 5, Number 250

EIR Daily Alert Service

P.O. Box 17390, Washington, DC 20041-0390



Lyndon LaRouche: ‘We Have an Africa Mission, As Part of the World!’

Dec. 16 (EIRNS)—The key strategic question facing the planet at this time is whether or not we can get the United States on course for joining the fight for a New Paradigm, for a New Bretton Woods as specified by Lyndon LaRouche. In discussions over the weekend, Helga Zepp-LaRouche emphasized that the entire old order is disintegrating: the trans-Atlantic financial system is imploding, and the institutions of that order, especially in Western Europe, are crumbling before our very eyes. The decisive question boils down to our unique ability to mobilize the American population behind the necessary policies, and Lyndon LaRouche’s unique method of generating such policies. No one else has the ability to provide the necessary policies to bring a divided world together, she emphasized: not Trump, not China, not Russia.

In this fight, Zepp-LaRouche stressed, Africa is a central issue: There will be 2.5 billion human beings living there by 2050; and already today it is where the Belt and Road Initiative is putting an end to the system of British imperial looting and genocide, over London’s violent protests and threats. The development of the underdeveloped sector, such as Africa, should drive our passion for bringing about the requisite changes. Going back to the 1970s, the LaRouche movement has always placed this issue at the center of the need for a New Bretton Woods.

For this reason, we cannot let National Security Advisor John Bolton’s Dec. 13 speech on Africa policy simply pass. It is an overtly colonialist statement, pronouncing that the continent’s development with Chinese and Russian help is a threat to America’s national security interests—a total lie. It is the “Thucydides Trap” in spades—the idea that old empires go down fighting, rather than working cooperatively with rising new powers. Bolton’s speech is London’s answer to the question of whether or not the U.S. under Trump will join that New Bretton Woods: an emphatic “No!”

We must change the U.S. on this issue, Zepp-LaRouche insisted, or there will be no New Bretton Woods. That is one of the included, central issues that will be addressed at the upcoming February Schiller Institute conference, “Let us shape a new, more human epoch of Mankind!” based on the half-century of fundamental scientific discoveries by Lyndon LaRouche.

The Africa issue, as Lyndon LaRouche has explained time and time again, is the moral compass by which mankind will demonstrate whether or not it has the moral fitness to survive. For example, on Oct. 2, 2008, LaRouche addressed an audience in the nation’s capital, of Washington, D.C.-based foreign diplomats, one day before the House of Representatives caved to British pressure and voted to approve the Bush Administration’s Wall Street bailout plan. Addressing the subject of “A Four Power Agreement To Save the World From Hell,” LaRouche stated:

“Africa is still a victim of the mass genocide, by the British Empire—pure and simple! Cut away all the garbage, and that’s it: It’s the British Empire which is destroying Africa.

“So, now we have a mission: Not merely the problem of restoring economies of the United States, and Europe, and so forth. We have a problem of a world, which is already suffering from shortages caused by this system, as in the case of China—progressing but not enough; India—progressing, but 70% are extremely poor, still; similar throughout Asia. Africa is target of major genocide, chiefly by the British interests.

“Therefore, if we’re going to deal with the world to come, over the next two generations, which is about the period we have to think about, we have to think of a program for developing the planet, within the context, not of globalization, but of a system of sovereign nation-states. That means, that nations in particular regions of the world have to come to common agreements on development, long-range development, so we can create credit for up to a 50-year perspective, for investment in infrastructure, and such projects. For example: Africa can not be developed without a modern equivalent of a rail system, which means, largely, a maglev system. Without the development of power systems, and mass transportation systems, and water management, Africa can not develop. The genocide will continue to proceed by inertia. Therefore, we have an Africa mission, as part of the world!”


Bolton Proclaims New U.S. Africa Policy in Diatribe Accusing Russia and China of ‘Predatory Actions’

Dec. 14 (EIRNS)—U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton yesterday delivered an aggressively anti-Russia and anti-China speech at the Heritage Foundation, in which he attacked China’s “One Belt, One Road” policy as “predatory,” in the context of announcing the Trump Administration’s new policy on Africa. It is called “Prosper Africa,” which “the President approved yesterday,” Bolton claimed—although its contents are unadulterated British geopolitics designed to ensure that the U.S., China and Russia do not cooperate. In fact, Bolton described China and Russia’s actions in Africa as “a significant threat to U.S. national security interests.”

Bolton identified three U.S. priorities in the region: 1) “advancing U.S. trade and commercial ties;” 2) “countering the threat from Radical Islamic Terrorism;” and 3) “ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars for aid are used efficiently and effectively.”

Priority number one is to stop China and Russia, he stated. “Great power competitors, namely China and Russia, are rapidly expanding their financial and political influence across Africa. They are deliberately and aggressively targeting their investments in the region to gain a competitive advantage over the United States…. China uses bribes, opaque agreements, and the strategic use of debt to hold states in Africa captive to Beijing’s wishes and demands. Its investment ventures are riddled with corruption, and do not meet the same environmental or ethical standards as U.S. developmental programs.

He then attacked the Belt and Road Initiative by name—the global infrastructure program which has brought dramatic economic development to Africa:

“Such predatory actions are sub-components of broader Chinese strategic initiatives, including ‘One Belt, One Road’—a plan to develop a series of trade routes leading to and from China with the ultimate goal of advancing Chinese global dominance.

“In Africa, we are already seeing the disturbing effects of China’s quest to obtain more political, economic, and military power.”

Bolton went on to charge China with indebting nations such as Zambia and Djibouti, in order to gain control of their economies, establish military bases, etc.

He then turned his attention to Russia:

“Russia, for its part, is also seeking to increase its influence in the region through corrupt economic dealings. Across the continent, Russia advances its political and economic relationships with little regard for the rule of law or accountable and transparent governance.

“It continues to sell arms and energy in exchange for votes at the United Nations—votes that keep strongmen in power, undermine peace and security, and run counter to the best interests of the African people. Russia also continues to extract natural resources from the region for its own benefit.

“In short, the predatory practices pursued by China and Russia stunt economic growth in Africa; threaten the financial independence of African nations; inhibit opportunities for U.S. investment; interfere with U.S. military operations; and pose a significant threat to U.S. national security interests.”

As for U.S. funding practices, Bolton said that “The United States will no longer provide indiscriminate assistance across the entire continent, without focus or prioritization. And, we will no longer support unproductive, unsuccessful, and unaccountable UN peacekeeping missions. We want something more to show for Americans hard-earned taxpayer dollars.” And, after accusing Russia of buying votes at the UN, he announced that “countries that repeatedly vote against the U.S. in international forums, or take action counter to U.S. interests, should not receive generous American foreign aid.”

Chinese Foreign Ministry Answers Bolton Speech on Africa

Dec. 14 (EIRNS)—In measured remarks today, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lu Kang responded to U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton’s Dec. 13 speech on Africa: “What China cares about is African countries’ needs, such as industrialization and agricultural modernization. In contrast, it is interesting to see from the remarks of some Americans that, besides its own interests and demands, the U.S. is concerned about China and Russia rather than Africa…. Meanwhile, cooperation should be carried out on the premise of Africa’s will and needs and without any political strings attached and interference in internal affairs.”

Xinhua continued, in its report on Lu’s, that “He recalled that during the 2018 Beijing Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the General Debate of the 73rd session of the UN General Assembly, many African leaders articulated their countries’ desire for development and appreciation of China’s support.

“As facilitating Africa’s peace and development is the common responsibility of the international community, China has always adopted an open-minded attitude toward Africa-related international cooperation, and believed that all parties’ investments in the continent on the basis of respect should be welcome, Lu said.”

Global Times Slams Bolton’s Africa Strategy, Urges U.S. To Join China in Africa’s Development

Dec. 16 (EIRNS)—In a hard-hitting editorial published Dec. 14, Global Times responded to National Security Advisor John Bolton’s Dec. 13 Heritage Foundation speech, “The Trump Administration’s New Africa Strategy,” in which he “takes aim at China and Russia” over their actions in Africa, which the daily correctly describes as thinly-disguised colonialism.

“These accusations [by Bolton] are aggressive and groundless. Africa is no longer a colony where the U.S. and European countries can obtain slaves. Countries on the continent need to develop and they have the right to conduct economic cooperation with other countries around the world. The U.S.’s new strategy clearly regards Africa as a sphere of influence of the U.S.; viewing the continent as if it is still a colony of the West. Bolton’s remarks once again convey the U.S.’s contempt for Africa.”

The editorial then states that China is providing funding for development in Africa, which the U.S. and other Western countries have failed to do:

“Washington should respect China and Russia and the right of African countries to choose. They are independent members of the international community. The support provided by the U.S. and other Western countries to Africa’s development is far too little. It’s an inalienable right for the people of Africa to seek funding and technological support from others. The U.S. and European elites have never really cared about Africa’s development, nor have they truly respected African countries as equal partners. They would rather keep Africa in a long-term backward state, have Western democratic governance imposed on them and subjugate the continent to Western requirements for economic assistance.

“They slander China by accusing it of plundering resources and creating a ‘debt trap.’ It’s up to Africa, not the U.S., to judge China’s aid to the continent. Bolton’s remarks manifest Washington’s pettiness and unilateralism driven by its jealousy, yet the U.S. now is powerless or unwilling to support Africa’s development even as it attempts to prevent others from offering help. Washington is stuck in a geopolitical competitive mindset, which is affecting its judgment on the motives of China’s international cooperation.”

The editorial concludes with a proposal for the U.S. to change its policy:

“Foreign investors can carry out third-party cooperation on specific projects in Africa. It’s suggested China actively invite some American companies to join some China-led cooperative projects. The U.S. should abandon its prejudices, strengthen coordination with Chinese partners and make contributions by promoting peace and development in Africa.”

Russia Insists Meeting Between Putin and Trump Is Crucial for Both Nations

Dec. 15 (EIRNS)—Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated that President Vladimir Putin remains ready for a bilateral summit with President Donald Trump, TASS reported yesterday. “We are still convinced that such a meeting is equally necessary for both Moscow and Washington,” as well as for other meetings at various levels, “in order to start discussing pressing matters concerning the two countries and issues of global strategic stability,” he said.

The day before, he had responded to National Security Advisor John Bolton’s statement that any personal meeting between Trump and Putin would be impossible as long as Ukraine’s naval ships and sailors were being held by Russia, that “it goes without saying that such an opinion cannot be a reason enough for intervention in the investigation of intruders responsible for the violation of Russia’s state border.” TASS added, however, that “Peskov agreed that three Ukrainian boats and their crews were incomparable in terms of the importance of Putin-Trump talks on major international problems,” and that he hoped the U.S. would reach that same conclusion. “Progress in the investigation and a court verdict, if it comes to that, may influence the fate of the Ukrainian crews,” he commented.


U.S.-China Trade Talks Move Forward Haltingly

Dec. 14 (EIRNS)—The status of U.S.-China talks “is very complicated and fragile,” Helga Zepp-LaRouche commented yesterday in her weekly strategic webcast. Over the last 24 hours, in addition to China’s resuming significant purchases of U.S. soybeans, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce encouraged ongoing trade negotiations between the two sides. The ministry spokesman said that “The Chinese side welcomes the U.S. team to visit China for consultation and is open to visiting the U.S. for communication.”

However, a British-designed dark cloud continues to hang over the talks, both from the Canadian surprise detention of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, and the subsequent detention of two Canadians in China, as well as U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton’s Dec. 13 diatribe against China and Russia.

Chinese semi-official media such as Global Times have echoed the stern warnings coming from Chinese officials such as Foreign Minister Wang Yi, that China will not be bullied by such provocations as the arrest of Meng in Canada, at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice. Global Times yesterday quoted Zha Xiaogang, a research fellow at the Shanghai Institute for International Studies, warning that a “new McCarthyism” may be emerging in the U.S., adding that “Some industry representatives even deemed the arrest as a long-term plan by the U.S. to curb China’s rise in high technology.” A second Global Times article warned: “China and the U.S. are on the cusp of a political war, a conflict without smoke…. From whichever perspective one looks, Meng’s case seems to be related to a political war against China’s rise…. The current aim of U.S. strategy is to launch an all-out offensive against China, one that has been forged at all levels…. Canada must be clear that in the U.S. political war against China, if it picks the U.S. side, it will inevitably be injured by China’s counterattack.”

Geopolitical Nuts Are Blocking Huge U.S. Business Opportunities in Developing Ibero-America

Dec. 15 (EIRNS)—Spain’s public railway company, Renfe, a leading operator of high-speed rail lines, announced on Dec. 8 that it will be setting up an international subsidiary to coordinate its operations in Ibero-America, with specific plans already to work in Cuba, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Paraguay, Mexico, Bolivia and Peru. Keep in mind that Spain and Spanish companies are actively involved in the discussions on building South America’s first transcontinental railroad (along with German, Swiss, Austrian and Chinese companies.)

Similarly, Spain’s media-connected Fundación Vocento and the CAF-Development Bank of Latin America just held a seminar in Valencia, Spain, called “Future in Spanish: Opportunities Bridge between Continents,” to discuss how to “invest more and better in infrastructure and logistics corridors key to increasing the productivity of the countries” of the region. A top official from Spain’s Minister of Development and the president of Valencia’s Port Authority (which is being transformed by its leading position in the Belt and Road) were among the speakers. Ibero-American infrastructure, transport and logistics experts paid a working visit to Valenciaport, the national Port Authority, and a dry port to explore possibilities for joint projects, as part of that seminar.

What about the United States? The only plan “moving” so far in Washington to promote U.S. work in developing infrastructure with its southern neighbors is the administration’s so-called BUILD Act. But that is being wielded by the China-bashers as a weapon for geopolitical control. U.S. Army War College Latin American expert R. Evan Ellis now proposes that distribution of the BUILD Act’s purported $60 billion in U.S. commercial investment support be coordinated with Taiwan, “to facilitate access to U.S. markets for Taiwanese companies producing in Latin American and Caribbean states that diplomatically recognize [Taiwan]”!

Ellis made that proposal in a Dec. 7 report-back on his week-long trip to Taiwan to strategize on how to roll back the wave of Ibero-American and Caribbean nations breaking relations with Taiwan in order to join the Belt and Road Initiative. Displaying the “King Canute” mindset of this crowd, Ellis actually recommended that “the U.S. would be well-served to return to the maxim made famous by President Theodore Roosevelt: ‘speak softly and carry a big stick.’ ”


Mueller Throws Pile of Crap at Michael Flynn; Media Sucks It Up and Amplifies It

Dec. 14 (EIRNS)—The Special Counsel made his submission to Judge Emmet Sullivan at 3:00 p.m. Friday, about Michael Flynn. It is a typical Robert Mueller show, seeking to protect out-of-control agents and lawyers at the U.S. Department of Justice, who behaved criminally in this case, to justify his own criminal actions, and to feed the fake narrative that the President is, overall, in deep legal kimchee.

As most know by now, Judge Sullivan is exploring whether Flynn was set up, entrapped, framed, for the false statements to which he pled guilty and for which he is scheduled to be sentenced on Dec. 18, 2018.  What else the judge is exploring is unclear.  On Dec. 12, Judge Sullivan ordered Mueller to produce all documents by Dec. 14 relevant to an FBI interview of Flynn at the White House on Jan. 24, 2017, in which he made the alleged false statements.  The judge got only two documents, at least on the public court record, from Mueller: The Jan. 24, 2017 memo written by fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe setting up the interview (in redacted form), and a July 19, 2017 FD 302 consisting of Mueller’s interview with fired and disgraced FBI Agent Peter Strzok who conducted the interview of Michael Flynn. The Mueller/Strzok 302 was written a full six months after the event and, itself, refers to an existing FD 302 written by the interviewing agents shortly after they returned from speaking with Flynn on Jan. 24, 2017. That first FD 302 was not produced on Friday, Dec. 14, 2018 on the public docket.  It is clear from the public accounts of that 302, including the Mueller/Strzok reconstruction of July 19, 2017 which was produced, that the agents strongly argued and believed that Flynn did not lie to them. This assessment had also been stated to the Congress in March 2017, by fired FBI Director James Comey.

“Relevant documents,” as Judge Sullivan ordered be produced, is a legal term of art and involves a very broad category of documents.  “Relevant” means anything proving or tending to prove a fact in dispute, in this case, whether or not Flynn was set up or deliberately entrapped.  Here are the documents which we already know about which would be “relevant” to the Jan. 24, 2017 meeting with Flynn:

(1) The demand from British intelligence, specifically from former MI6 director Richard Dearlove, Stefan Halper, Christopher Steele and others, conveyed to the Obama Administration, that Flynn be fired from the Defense Intelligence Agency because he was “soft” on Russia, while falsely claiming and insinuating that Flynn was too chummy with a Russian-born professor at a Cambridge Security Forum event Flynn attended, spreading filthy gossip about this throughout the intelligence community.  The actual reason for their targeting Flynn, however, was his opposition to the British/Obama Administration support for outright Islamic terrorists in the Southwest Asia, specifically their campaign of regime-change coups known as the Arab Spring.  Flynn knew who did what crime and when they did it.

(2) The actual predication for investigating Michael Flynn as one of four targets in the FBI’s bogus Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign, opened in July 2016, and otherwise known as “Russiagate.”  The FBI investigation itself was the product of British demands and CIA/MI6 activities, including surveillance, infiltration, and entrapment activities directed against Trump’s presidential campaign because Trump pledged to end the U.S. role as world policeman and establish decent relations with Russia.  The MI6/Christopher Steele dirty dossier on Trump, paid for by Hillary Clinton, was the backbone of the entire FBI counterintelligence investigation.

(3) The contacts between the Washington Post and the FBI and/or the Justice Department concerning the perfectly legal conversation between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on Dec. 29, 2016. Someone leaked the contents of the classified intercept of that conversation to the Post’s David Ignatius with General Flynn’s name unmasked. The leaker or leakers committed two felonies, one for the unmasking and another for leaking the contents of classified intercepts.  The Post article asked whether Flynn had undercut Obama’s sanctions against Russia for allegedly interfering in the election and whether Flynn had violated the Logan Act in his perfectly legal discussions with the Russian Ambassador.

(4) The missing documents in the chain here.  The two documents produced publicly confirm that Andy McCabe instructed the agents to keep Flynn relaxed, told Flynn he did not need counsel, did not directly confront him with discrepancies or allow him to correct his statements, and deliberately decided not to give him standard warnings that this was an interview in which what he said could be used to prosecute him. On Sunday, Dec. 9, James Comey bragged to Nicole Wallace about all of this, saying that given the disorganization in the first weeks of the administration, he deliberately sent the agents to the White House, setting all protocols and rules aside, because he thought, he “could get away with it.”  There have to be many documents reflecting Comey’s discussions with McCabe and DOJ officials about the White House visit. There is the missing 302 concluding that Flynn did not lie. There are obviously other documents showing why Mueller revisited the Jan. 24, 2017 frameup meeting after all of this, and they will not be favorable to Mueller or the Department of Justice.

Wall Street Journal Demands Trump Declassify Documents Used To Frame General Flynn

Dec. 14 (EIRNS)—“The Flynn Entrapment,” the Wall Street Journal’slead editorial Dec. 13, reveals Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s numerous frauds on the court of U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan, in an attempt to procure the conviction of Trump’s former National Security Advisor Gen. Michael Flynn for “lying to the FBI.”

The editorial demonstrates that Mueller, the FBI’s #2 Andy McCabe and Peter Strzok lied to Flynn about the subject of the interview, and recounts many of the details covered earlier in this Morning Briefing. The Journal reports, “According to the FBI summary of the interview—known as a ‘302’—Mr. McCabe and FBI officials,” including later lead agent Peter Strzok, “ ‘decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport.’ ”

The editorial continues, “We also know from then FBI Director James Comey that this was his idea. This is ‘something I probably wouldn’t have done or wouldn’t have gotten away with in a more organized administration,’ Mr. Comey boasted on MSNBC this weekend. ‘In the George W. Bush Administration or the Obama Administration, if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House counsel, there would be discussions and approvals and who would be there. And I thought, it’s early enough let’s just send a couple guys over.’ ”

The Journal continues, “If the goal was to set a legal trap, it worked. The two agents showed up at the White House within hours of Mr. McCabe’s call, and they reported in the 302 that General Flynn had been ‘relaxed and jocular’ and ‘clearly saw the FBI agents as allies.’ ”

The editorial concludes, that “the facts suggest” that Judge Emmet Sullivan “should question the entire plea deal.” McCabe and Strzok “have both been fired for misconduct, and their behavior reeks of entrapment…. If he does nothing else, President Trump has an obligation to former aides like Michael Flynn and to the public to declassify and disclose the FBI documents related to the FBI’s Russia probe.”

U.S. Senate Passes Resolution To Remove U.S. Troops from Yemen

Dec. 14 (EIRNS)—The U.S. Senate yesterday voted up by a vote of 56-41 Sen. J. Resolution 54, directing the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in or affecting Yemen within 30 days, unless Congress authorizes a later withdrawal date; issues a declaration of war; or specifically authorizes the use of the armed forces.

Prohibited activities include providing in-flight fueling for non-U.S. aircraft conducting missions as part of the conflict in Yemen. This joint resolution shall not affect any military operations directed at al-Qaeda.

The President must submit to Congress, within 90 days, reports assessing the risks that would be posed: 1) if the United States were to cease supporting operations with respect to the conflict in Yemen, and 2) if Saudi Arabia were to cease sharing Yemen-related intelligence with the United States.

Immediately following that action, the Senate voted unanimously to hold Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman responsible for the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.


Brexit Chaos Evidences Falling Out Among Thieves

Dec. 16 (EIRNS)—The British publication Metro reports today on a furious attack by Prime Minister Theresa May against former, “New Labour” Prime Minister Tony Blair for traveling to Brussels to promote a second Brexit vote, a “People’s Vote,” and thereby “undermining” her efforts.

May said: “For Tony Blair to go to Brussels and seek to undermine our negotiations by advocating for a second referendum is an insult to the office he once held and the people he once served. How did anyone survive this car crash? We cannot, as he would, abdicate responsibility for this decision. Parliament has a democratic duty to deliver what the British people voted for.”

Metro reported that the Sunday Times claimed Cabinet Office Minister David Lidington, Mrs. May’s de facto deputy, has met Labour MPs to discuss a cross-party consensus on the idea of a new vote. The newspaper also said May’s Chief of Staff Gavin Barwell was supportive of the idea.

It sounds like May thinks that a desperate flight forward approach of calling a second vote, would only make things worse—perhaps even bring down every tree in the forest of the U.K.’s institutions. This is getting to be a familiar conundrum across Europe.


Katowice Climate Change Conference Adopts Incompetent Rules for Unknown Game

Dec. 16 (EIRNS)—The COP24, the annual meeting of Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, that took place on Dec. 2-14 in Katowice, Poland, has concluded with an apparent stalemate agreement. The parties agreed in principle to limit global temperature increase to 2°C “above pre-industrial levels.” They have not agreed on how to do this, however. They did agree on a draft 154-page “rulebook,” which is described as a compendium of accounting methods to determine each nation’s contributions to reducing carbon in the atmosphere without double counting.

China and other nations insisted that none of the guidelines can be obligatory on sovereign nations. The United States did not sign the agreement at all.

As this news agency has demonstrated in detail, such a gathering could never reach a meaningful agreement as demanded by the climate change fanatics, because they have no clue as to how climate functions. Rather, it continues the agreement to impose quackery as science, e.g., insisting global warming is produced by man’s industrial activity.




You may also like...