EDITORIAL
‘Cockpits for War’ Being Transformed Through the Spirit of the New Silk Road
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—Over the past months, the strategic results of the primarily economic Belt and Road Initiative have begun to demonstrate for the world what Lyndon LaRouche has known for many years—there is no distinction between the economic and the strategic issues facing mankind. If you want peace, LaRouche said, get the tractors rolling.
When Presidents Trump, Xi Jinping, Putin, and Moon—all four—presented development plans to North Korea, backing each other up on the concept of “peace through development” as well as on sanctions, the supposedly impossible proved possible indeed. When India and Pakistan both joined the SCO, working directly with China and Russia on joint development ideas, the “permanent crisis” created by the British at the time of the partition of India became suddenly resolvable. On the Horn of Africa, with China’s Belt and Road proposing a development alternative to each of the three nations of Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia, an intractable conflict has turned into joyful peace and cooperation. In Southwest Asia, a similar solution to the century of war is now possible.
This process is active across Africa. The BRICS Summit in South Africa last month saw Russia, China and India joining hands with all the people of Africa in bringing real development—nuclear power, high-speed rail connectivity, water projects to green the deserts—and thus posing a real solution to terrorism and to poverty.
The problem remains, however, that the media in the U.S. and in Europe have carefully isolated their populations from any knowledge of this world-historic transformation, which is sweeping through Asia, Africa and Ibero-America.
In the U.S., the LaRouche movement is mobilizing to resolve this problem. A first step is a call for transforming the negotiations between President Trump and President-elect López Obrador of Mexico, from a revision of NAFTA to the higher-ordered concept of NABRI—the North American Belt and Road Initiative. This must become a step forward in uniting the U.S. and China through the New Silk Road, a process of building advanced industrial nations throughout the Americas and beyond, and fulfilling Trump’s commitment to restoring America’s former industrial power as a primary source of capital exports for nation-building. This, not coincidentally, is the path to resolving the trade imbalance.
But the British and their assets in the U.S. will stop at nothing to prevent such a new paradigm from taking hold in the U.S. The Council on Foreign Relations, the foremost voice for the Empire within the U.S., has published a report entitled, “Is Made in China 2025 a Threat to Global Trade?” It details the supposedly devious intentions of the Chinese effort to develop their domestic expertise in high-tech manufacturing: through “recruitment of foreign scientists, its theft of U.S. intellectual property, and its targeted acquisitions of U.S. firms,” the CFR claims, China intends to “control entire supply chains,” and eventually “entire industries could come under control of a rival geopolitical power.”
Such hysteria is matched by the emergence this week of “Big Brother” frantically shutting down access to social media for multiple voices which have countered the Russiagate madness, and supported President Trump’s denunciation of the “Russia hoax.” Alex Jones’s Infowars was thrown off Facebook and YouTube—a site which has more than 15 million visits per month— while others were thrown off Twitter.
But the New Paradigm exists—it cannot be stopped, other than by world war. China has arisen, and has joined with Russia and India through the BRICS to offer the nations of the Global South an alternative to the poverty imposed upon them as a legacy of colonialism. They have extended this offer, to join the Belt and Road Initiative, to the United States and Europe, as a win-win alternative to the geopolitics of war, economic decay and cultural decadence infecting the West. The patriotic spirit in the U.S. has been awakened through the phenomenon of Donald Trump, rejecting the warmongers and the post-industrial society advocates within both the Republican and Democratic Parties—what LaRouche long ago denounced as the “two-potty system.” LaRouche’s Four Laws, implemented through the “four powers” of the U.S., Russia, China and India, provide the way forward.
The arc of history has reached a branching point, towards either victory or tragedy. The future is in our hands, each and every one.
U.S. POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC
Trump Tells Ohio Rally, McKinley Was a Great President and Steel Is Making a Comeback
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—President Donald Trump continued to stress the return of American steel manufacturing in his Aug. 4 rally speech in Delaware, Ohio near Columbus, last Saturday, as he had at rallies in Pennsylvania and Illinois over the past 10 days, and also in Florida July 31. He praised Ohioan President William McKinley as “a great President…. He understood the crucial importance of tariffs in maintaining a very strong country…. McKinley said, ‘We ought to take care of our own nation and her industries first.’ ” Trump said that bad trade deals were made in the past, and “we are changing them now.”
Trump went on to list steel plant investments, reopenings and expansions, saying, “Thanks to our pro-American economic policies. American steel—one of the things I’m most proud of—American steel is making one of the biggest comebacks that anybody has ever seen for any industry.”
In Illinois, Trump appeared July 26 before workers at the U.S. Steel Granite City plant, where a new shift is starting for the reopened blast furnace works, shut since 2015. He said, “If you don’t have steel, you don’t have a country.” U.S. Steel CEO David Burritt spoke alongside Trump, telling workers, “We have a President that believes in you.”
In Pennsylvania, Trump appeared Aug. 2 at Wilkes-Barre, in old coal country, calling on Pennsylvanians to support his returning steel jobs to the state, and more than 300,000 manufacturing jobs to the country at large.
At the Ohio rally, Trump gave a run-down of new steel activity, saying that until now, “The steel mills were closing; they were all closing up. Nucor has announced an $85 million upgrade in Marion [Ohio]. Charter Steel announced a new $150 million steel plant in Cuyahoga Heights. JSW Steel is restarting the furnace and investing $500 million in Mingo Junction and Cleveland Cliffs announced a $700 million plant in Toledo.
“United States Steel is building or renovating or improving over seven new plants. They never thought they would see a day when this happens. This all happened within a very short period of time because we’ve stopped the dumping. If they want to dump, you know what, that’s fine, but they have to pay a 25% tax. It’s amazing what impact that has on people that want to rip-off and destroy our industries….”
Trump’s stress on steel and manufacturing jobs, going back to his 2016 campaign, is in sharp contrast to the has-been Hillary Clinton camp, which put out “job re-training” at best, and much worse, as their program, for “deplorables” in the rust belt and coal country. Now, the hysterical media from this camp are disputing “data” issues with Trump, e.g., whether “four or seven” U.S. Steel facilities are expanding.
In his early months in office, Trump commissioned a study of steel. On April 21, 2017, he signed a memorandum, “Steel Imports and Threats to National Security,” calling for a report-back within 50 days. He was joined by leaders of steel firms, the United Steelworkers union, and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross.
Big Brother Extends the Thought Police in the U.S.
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—In the past few days, Facebook, Apple, YouTube, and Spotify threw Alex Jones and his Infowars off their platforms, podcasts, pages, and channels.
Jones, who celebrated 30 years as a “radio talk show” host last week, was praised by the Fox News station (Hannity got his start with Alex Jones) for being the initiator of the conservative talk show process. Jones received a direct phone call from President Donald Trump while on the air, congratulating him for his career.
The Infowars website got (before today) as many as 10 million visitors a month, while his YouTube channel has roughly 2.4 million subscribers, with 17 million views in the past 30 days.
The social media companies say they blocked Infowars not because of his support for Trump and his attacks on the Russiagate hoax, but because, in Spotify’s words, “Infowars expressly and principally promotes, advocates, or incites hatred or violence against a group or individual based on characteristics.” (How about Maxine Waters, one may ask.)
On May 17, 2018, Facebook announced that it was “partnering” with that rabidly anti-Russia, Maidan-supporting NATO outpost, the Atlantic Council, “to combat election-related propaganda and misinformation from proliferating on its service.” Just a few months later, Facebook moved to shut down several of Jones’s pages, on the pretext that it was “glorifying violence, which violates our graphic violence policy, and using dehumanizing language to describe people who are transgender, Muslims and immigrants, which violates our hate speech policies.”
The reality is that Jones, although often reporting rather outrageous speculations, has mobilized millions to reject the mainstream media lies. In particular, Jones went after British agent Robert Mueller on his show, using the image of a Western-style showdown: “We’re going to walk out in the square, politically, at high noon, and he’s going to find out whether he makes the move first, and then it’s going to happen,” miming a pistol with his hand. This is called inciting to violence!
Facebook acknowledges the real issue negatively in its statement: “While much of the discussion around Infowars has been related to false news, which is a serious issue that we are working to address by demoting links marked wrong by fact checkers and suggesting additional content, none of the violations that spurred today’s removals were related to this.” Thou dost protest too much.
As Sen. Ted Cruz said in response: “Who the hell made Facebook the arbiter of political speech? Free speech includes views you disagree with.”
As private companies, social networks are not required to adhere to the First Amendment, the anti-Trump press gleefully reports.
Who Do These Democrats Calling for Censorship Think They Are?
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—Simultaneously as Alex Jones’s Infowars was removed from Facebook, YouTube, etc., Twitter took it upon itself on Aug. 5 to silence three other voices who have opposed the Russiagate lie (amongst other lies), freezing the Twitter accounts of former State Department employee and whistleblower, Peter Van Buren, Antiwar.com Editorial Director Scott Horton, and Ron Paul Institute Director Daniel McAdams. Their old tweets remain, but no new ones allowed, Antiwar.com reported yesterday.
The reasons given are ridiculous, but the war party is beating the drums for instituting general censorship, in their hapless desperation to crush the global rebellion against the British oligarchical system which has destroyed itself. Wall Street’s Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy (CT) tweeted Aug. 6 that democracy requires more such censorship, writing, “Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart. These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it.”
His crony, Sen. Mark Warner (VA), is circulating a 23-page draft White Paper titled “Potential Policy Proposals for Regulation of Social Media and Technology Firms,” which argues that the time has come to set up a government thought police to control social media. The paper came to public attention when it was posted by Axios July 30.
Number one of the three areas Warner argues must be addressed through new regulations and laws is “understanding the capacity for communications technologies to promote disinformation that undermines trust in our institutions, democracy, free press and markets.” Here, he asserts the principal enemy is Russia, which Warner writes has been “conducting information warfare for decades” against the U.S. For example, he claims that “during the Cold War, the Soviets tried to spread ‘fake news’ denigrating Martin Luther King, Jr.”
Wow! That’s quite a revelation by the Senator; who knew that J. Edgar Hoover was a Russian agent?
Trump Imposes Sanctions on Iran; Rouhani Replies with His Own Proposal for Negotiations
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—Just as he said he would on May 8, when he announced that he was pulling the U.S. out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, President Donald Trump issued the executive order, yesterday, imposing the first round of reimposed sanctions on Iran. This round of sanctions targets Iran’s automotive sector and on its trade in gold and precious metals, as well as sanctions related to the Iranian rial currency. The next round of sanctions, to be imposed on Nov. 5 will target Iran’s energy sector, including petroleum-related transactions, as well as transactions by foreign financial institutions with the Central Bank of Iran. After applauding those European firms that have already pulled out of Iran, Trump called on all nations to take such steps “to make clear that the Iranian regime faces a choice: either change its threatening, destabilizing behavior and reintegrate with the global economy, or continue down a path of economic isolation.”
Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani responded in a very interesting manner, both denouncing the sanctions but also opening a door to talks. In a nationally televised speech, he focused on the question of negotiations: “If somebody claims that they are willing to negotiate, they have to observe the basics, the first one of which is honesty that the two sides must believe in, as well as reaching a conclusion,” he said. “The person who is claiming to be willing to negotiate today, has withdrawn from all international commitments from Paris Agreement to its business commitments with other countries,” he said. Rouhani also went on to say: “If somebody puts a knife in its opponent or enemy’s arm and says we want to negotiate; the answer is that they must first pull out the knife and then come to the negotiation table….
“Negotiation at the same time with sanctions is meaningless and these sanctions are targeting Iranian children and people,” he continued. But, he stated: “I have no preconditions. If U.S. administration is ready today, we’re ready to negotiate with them about the compensation that they must pay to Iranians since 1953.”
STRATEGIC WAR DANGER
CFR Declares China’s Dedication to Progress Is a Crime
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—The Council on Foreign Relations, the foremost British imperial institution in the U.S., published a piece on Aug. 2 entitled, “Is Made in China 2025 a Threat to Global Trade?” by CFR Deputy Editor James McBride. While explaining first that China has committed itself, through “Made in China 2025,” to “rapidly developing ten high-tech industries. Chief among these are electric cars and other new energy vehicles, next-generation information technology (IT) and telecommunications, and advanced robotics and artificial intelligence. Other major sectors include agricultural technology; aerospace engineering; new synthetic materials; advanced electrical equipment; emerging bio-medicine; high-end rail infrastructure; and high-tech maritime engineering.”
Obviously a devious and aggressive policy, right?
McBride reports that “President Trump and other leaders of industrial democracies see the plan as a threat,” although he would be more correct to say that some members of Trump’s cabinet see it that way. McBride does acknowledge that this policy is necessary if China is to become a modern industrial nation, but he then retails the lies being peddled by those who intend to stop China’s development.
China’s crimes? “Chinese recruitment of foreign scientists, its theft of U.S. intellectual property, and its targeted acquisitions of U.S. firms constituted an unprecedented threat to the U.S. industrial base,” writes McBride. “More broadly, policymakers worry that China’s state-led model and its ambition to control entire supply chains … means that entire industries could come under control of a rival geopolitical power.” McBride reports that a June 2018 report by the U.S. Trade Representative “warned that China’s economic moves threaten not only the U.S. economy but also the global innovation system as a whole.”
Perhaps the giveaway is the following regarding the WTO, in which China is a member: “The Trump administration believes that the WTO forum is insufficient for addressing China’s abuses, because, they allege, China has been undermining the principles of open trade even while observing the letter of the law.” So, one may ask, what happened to the mantra that China is failing to follow “the rule of law”? Perhaps the CFR believes that the law is what London and Wall Street say it is.
ECONOMY
Megabanks Choose the EU over Brexit
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—HSBC has announced it will move coordination of its European activities from the City of London to Paris. This involves some 1,000 employees and it follows Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Standard Chartered, and Nomura which have all decided to move part of their staff to Frankfurt. Bank of America is moving 200 people between Frankfurt and Paris.
At the moment, the move involves a small part of the 483,000 people employed in the Square Mile, but this is used by the pro-EU faction to insist that lack of confidence in a negotiated Brexit will push the rest of the financial institutions out of the City of London.
British Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond has accused Paris of plotting to replace London, according to the Financial Times. There was a meeting at Downing Street July 16, attended by Shriti Vadera, chair of the European Financial Services Chairmen’s Advisory Committee; Michael Cole-Fontayn, chair of the Association for Financial Markets in Europe; John McFarlane, chair of TheCityUK; Andy Briggs, chair of the Association of British Insurers; Peter Harrison, chair of the Investment Association; and Stephen Jones, chief executive of UK Finance.
According to a note made by one participant, “The chancellor claimed that it was only France that seemed interested in ‘politically motivated rule changes’ because of the desire of Paris to seize business from London. One person at the meeting with Mr. Hammond said he was expressing wider industry concerns about French efforts to win business from the City. In June, France proposed that foreign investment banks based in third countries, such as the U.K. after Brexit, should not receive a blank cheque to operate in the EU and should face tighter controls.
EU ‘Deeply Regrets’ U.S. Sanctions on Iran
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini and the foreign ministers of the U.K., France, and Germany issued a statement yesterday expressing disappointment with the reimposition of U.S. sanctions on Iran. “We deeply regret the reimposition of sanctions by the U.S., due to the latter’s withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA),” their statement said. “We are determined to protect European economic operators engaged in legitimate business with Iran,” the statement continued. “This is why the European Union’s updated Blocking Statute enters into force on 7 August to protect EU companies doing legitimate business with Iran from the impact of U.S. extraterritorial sanctions.”
The German government has vowed that it will protect German companies doing business in Iran. “Export guarantees and investment guarantees from the Federal Ministry of Economics are still available to companies,” the ministry said in a statement. However, according to the German Chamber of Commerce, many companies are stopping business with Iran. One problem is that completion of deals with banks does not work any more. EU Commissioner for Budget and Human Resources Günther Oettinger has proposed to bring in community banks which have no connections to the U.S. and therefore cannot be hit by secondary sanctions, such as Volksbanken and saving banks.
The European Commission issued a statement yesterday that explains that the Blocking Statute “allows EU operators to recover damages arising from U.S. extraterritorial sanctions from the persons causing them and nullifies the effect in the EU of any foreign court rulings based on them. It also forbids EU persons from complying with those sanctions, unless exceptionally authorized to do so by the Commission in case non-compliance seriously damages their interests or the interests of the Union.”
Could Turkey Be the Spark That Crashes the Western Financial System?
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—The collapse of Turkey’s currency and bond markets has now beat out that of Argentina, another country caught in the international speculative system’s “carry trade” which is blowing up. The Turkish lira on Monday, Aug. 6, had its greatest fall in value since the 2008 financial crisis (down 6.7% at worst in the day). The currency is now 29% lower than at the start of the 2018. The yield on 10-year bonds also went over 20% yesterday, giving bondholders of lira-denominated bonds a 38% loss so far this year in dollar terms.
The combination of those two factors threatens to blow out Turkish private corporate debt. Citing Central Bank data, Bloomberg today reported that Turkish companies hold $337 billion in foreign-exchange liabilities—i.e. dollar-denominated bonds made greatly more expensive to repay as the exchange rate drops—backed by just under $120 billion in assets. $100 billion of that debt comes due over the course of 2018.
International Institute of Finance Chief Economist Robin Brooks recently warned that the Turkish and Argentine currency collapses are not local matters, but warning signs of the crisis of the overleveraged international financial system, yet international financial hitmen are playing a dangerous chicken game, using the crisis to demand Turkey impose economic “shock” policies and once again accept their geopolitical orders (such as not purchasing Russia’s S-400 anti-missile system and enforcing the sanctions on Iran) if it wants to receive assistance.
Turkey is sending a delegation to Washington this week to discuss the financial crisis, as well as ongoing tensions, which will reportedly arrive on Aug. 9.
THE NEW GLOBAL ECONOMIC ORDER
Pompeo’s Indo-Pacific Plan Is Compatible with Belt and Road
Aug. 7 (EIRNS)—China’s Global Times today published an article positively responding to the policy announced by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at the Indo-Pacific Business Forum on July 30. Pompeo announced a new U.S. push for investments in Asian infrastructure, which, although the program has been analyzed as a counter to the Belt and Road Initiative, was welcomed by Prof. Long Xingchun, a senior fellow at the Charhar Institute and director of the Center for Indian Studies at China West Normal University.
Professor Long writes: “While the geopolitical connotation of the strategy may lead to regional tensions and conflicts and thus put countries in the region on alert, the geoeconomic concept will promote regional economic development and should be welcomed.” He further states that “geoeconomic cooperation is better than geopolitical struggle. As U.S. and Chinese investments can both facilitate Indo-Pacific development, the two can synergize to create a complementary effect.”
Professor Long assesses that Pompeo’s emphasis on a “free and open” Indo-Pacific, “shares similarity with an open, inclusive and transparent BRI of China.” He continues: “Pompeo defined that a ‘free and open’ Indo-Pacific means the U.S. wants all nations ‘to be able to protect their sovereignty from coercion by other countries’ and ‘to enjoy open access to seas and airways.’ This is actually in the interest of China, the world’s largest trading and shipping country.” He writes that “China and the U.S. share a target of promoting infrastructure construction and connectivity…. Given the common goal, all efforts are welcome as long as they can help promote regional infrastructure development…. Governments and companies in China, the U.S., Japan, India and others can cooperate in the Indo-Pacific region to advance economic development and share the achievements.”
While there are certainly those in the U.S. who want the new U.S. initiative to be used to contain and confront China, this Chinese response is appealing to the wiser minds in the U.S., to join in the win-win spirit of China’s BRI.
