LaRouche Warns Against Hot-Heads
Starting World War III
Lyndon LaRouche issued a sharp warning today that the world is precariously close to thermonuclear World War III, and that any kind of provocations at this point, particularly in the area of the Persian Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz, would be insane. LaRouche was responding, in part, to reports from a senior U.S. intelligence source that a "pro-war" faction within the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps was contemplating a "limited" military incident in the Straits, to allow them to consolidate power on the eve of the March parliamentary elections. Iran is swept up in an intense political faction fight among rival groupings, going into the crucial elections.
"The only people who would benefit from such an irresponsible provocation at this moment would be the worst enemies of Iran," LaRouche warned. "If some element within the Revolutionary Guard were to consciously provoke even a minor incident in the Straits of Hormuz, I would have to ask: Who's side are you on? Are you an Israeli agent?"
In the past 48 hours, a number of public calls have been issued for the activation of a war-avoidance back channel between Washington and Tehran, modeled on the Robert Kennedy-Anatoly Dobrinyn channel during the Cuban Missile Crisis, that successfully averted a thermonuclear world war between the United States and the Soviet Union. On Jan. 12, David Ignatius published an explicit call for such a back channel in the Washington Post, and today, former Carter Administration National Security Council staffer Gary Sick published a similar call on CNN. Sick explicitly called for the U.S. and Iran to reach an agreement based on Iran turning over its 20 percent enriched uranium, in exchange for 20 percent enriched nuclear fuel rods, needed for their isotope reactor which is part of Iran's medical system. Lyndon LaRouche gave his full endorsement to that proposal.
LaRouche reiterated that the only assured war-avoidance action is the removal of President Barack Obama from office, either through Section 4 of the 25th Amendment, providing for the removal of a President who is no longer mentally fit to do the job, or through impeachment. "President Obama must be removed from office now," LaRouche declared. "He is criminally insane. Remove him from office by prescribed Constitutional means and we have a whole new situation. As long as he remains in office, we are on the very edge of general war, which is why I am issuing this warning against any hot-heads, who might be deluding themselves into thinking that a 'limited' confrontation in the Persian Gulf might be good for business. That is precisely the kind of provocative blunder that can bring us World War III."
Britain's Cameron Demands the Queen's War!
January 14th, 2012 • 11:04 AM
British Prime Minister David Cameron deployed personally into the South West Asia cockpit of war today, to stoke the flames of global war during his visit to the Queen's satrapy, Saudi Arabia. Although the full details of the agreements signed with the Saudi kingdom are yet to be known, press accounts of the bellicose interview Cameron taped with Al Arabiya television during his trip, lay bare that it is the Asian giants, Russia and China, which are the targets of the war Britain wishes the United States to start over Iran and Syria, precisely as U.S. statesman Lyndon LaRouche has identified.
Cameron labelled Iran "a clear threat," demanded an international embargo against its oil, and promised that "the whole world" would join in crushing Iran, should it attempt to close the Straits of Hormuz in response to any embargo. Cameron bragged that "Britain has been leading the way ... in the European Union arguing for sanctions," and sounding ever so much like Tony Blair, he threatened that "it is in the interests of the whole world that those Straits [of Hormuz] are open and, if there was any threat to close them, I am sure the whole world would come together and make sure they stayed open."
Likewise, he declared the Assad regime in Syria to have lost all legitimacy, and demanded that Russia and China drop their opposition to United Nations sanctions against Syria, pronouncing: "I would urge the Russians, the Russian government, even at this late stage, to look really carefully at why it is proposing to do what it keeps doing in respect to Syria. This is appalling bloodshed, appalling murder on the streets of Syria."
Despite British bragging that the Royal Navy's newest combat ship, the destroyer HMS Daring, is steaming towards the Persian Gulf, the British have no capability to fight a war themselves, without deploying the U.S. military as their own. EIR is investigating further just how much control President Obama has handed over to Britain, in such arrangements as the Joint U.S.-British National Security Council signed in May 2011, and the more recent "training" and equipment-sharing deal signed during British Secretary of Defense Philip Hammond's Washington visit in the first week of January.
Top Russian Spokesmen Issues Warning:
An Attack on Iran Threatens Our Security
January 14th, 2012 • 10:51 AM
In a somewhat extraordinary turn of events, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitri Rogozin, formerly Russian ambassador to NATO, returned to Brussels today, in order to give his final press conference at NATO headquarters. The tone and content follow upon the warnings issued by Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev Jan. 12.
Rogozin's message, reported by Interfax and posted on the United Russia web site, is provided here in EIR's translation. Asked about Iran, he said:
"For the Americans, that is very far away, on completely the opposite side of the Earth, the planet, the globe. But for us, it is just south of our Caucasus. And therefore if something happens with Iran, if it becomes involved in some kind of military action, then this is a direct threat to our security."
He said that Russia, as a "responsible" power, shares the interests of the USA and others in non-proliferation of WMD.
"Furthermore, as the deputy chairman of our government responsible for the nuclear industry, for Rosatom, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that we will conduct a very tough policy, designed to prevent countries, while we are helping them to develop modern sources of energy, from acquiring technologies for using the atom for military purposes. That is not going to happen. I assure you of that." Saying that monitoring of the export process is being tightened up, he added, "We shall strictly fulfill our international obligations in this area."
At the same time, Rogozin added, it is the right of every country "to have everything they need, to feel comfortable and secure. Iran has this type of right, as well. Therefore we would like to say to all the participants in this agitated game around Iran: 'Calm down. Tone down your discussions and public statements. Bear in mind that every public statement has material consequences.' ... We hope that the current crisis around Iran will be cooled out jointly by us all. If tension continues to grow around Iran, and then multiply that by the situation in Syria, the aftermath of the civil war in Libya, and the oncoming 'Arab summer' in North Africa, nobody's going to say that's something insignificant. So we repeat, 'Take a drink of cold mineral water and calm down.'"
Rogozin's concerns on sanctions were underscored in a statement made in Moscow today as well, by Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov, who identified the sanctions policy, presented by many in the West as an alternative to war, as a war policy. He said (in EIR's translation):
"Additional sanctions against Iran, or a possible military strike against the Islamic Republic of Iran, will unquestionably be perceived by the international community as pursuing the goal of 'regime change' in Tehran."
He was also asked about Susan Rice's statement that a new draft UNSC resolution on Syria is awaited from Russia, and he again answered in terms of regime change:
"Unfortunately, the West's approach is fundamentally different from ours and, judging by the proposed amendments, essentially has the goal of unseating the B. Assad regime in Damascus."
S & P Downgrades France, Austria, and 7 Other Euro Nations
January 14th, 2012 • 10:53 AM
Late Friday afternoon, after U.S. financial markets had closed for the weekend, Standard & Poors announced that it had downgraded the credit ratings of France and Austria — which formerly had AAA ratings — as well as seven other European nations. Although expected for some time, the downgrades sent shockwaves through world financial markets, and may well be the last nudge which pushes the entire trans-Atlantic financial system over the brink into uncontrolled disintegration.
The French downgrade, in particular, could unleash a totally uncontrolled chain reaction, since large amounts of European banks' debt is collateralized against their holdings of French and other government bonds, which by contract must be AAA-rated. Downgrade the collateral, and the bank bonds go up in smoke. And with only four European countries (one of which is Germany) still retaining a AAA rating, the London Financial Times fretted about "the knock-on effect on [Europe's EFSF] rescue fund, which could now lose its own triple A rating, reducing its firepower or forcing eurozone nations to increase contributions yet again."
S & P announced that "today's rating actions are primarily driven by our assessment that the policy initiatives that have been taken by European policymakers in recent weeks may be insufficient to fully address ongoing systemic stresses in the eurozone." In other words, they are angry that the Dec. 9 Euro summit came up with only words and promises, and failed to agree to implement either sufficient fascist austerity, or the kind of Geithner-style hyperinflationary bailout of the banks that the British Empire has been demanding.
The sham of the Dec. 9 Euro summit agreement was unraveling visibly, in the days and hours leading up to the S & P announcement. The draft of a new fiscal discipline treaty for the euro area — agreed to in principal at the December summit — amounted to "a substantial watering-down" of the tough measures needed, according to the ECB, which therefore refused to endorse the draft. The austerity agreement itself was meant to be the fig-leaf which the ECB could use to justify their massive purchases of Italian and Spanish bonds. So, the ECB now finds itself in the awkward position of having ripped off its own fig leaf.
Another "agreement" from the December summit — that Greek bondholders would accept a 50% haircut — also fell apart, as the bankers' cartel, led by the IIF's Charles Dallara, suspended talks with the Greek government today, because no agreement could be reached — raising the specter of an imminent Greek default.
LPAC had warned you that precisely this would occur, writing on Dec. 9, within hours of the summit's conclusion: "The Brussels EU Council summit was a complete failure. While a EU 'treaty change,' imposing budgetary rigor and super-austerity was held up as the 'last chance' to give again credibility to the euro, after ten hours of clashes, it appears clearly that there will be no treaty change at all for lack of unanimity among EU members. It means in essence and spirit (not yet in law) the break up of the current EU."