Electronic Intelligence Weekly
Online Almanac
Volume 1, number 3
return to home page

March 25, 2002

An Empire with Feet of Clay

The bombast of imperial ultimatums filled the air this week, as spokesmen for the Anglo-American heirs of H.G. Wells, and President George W. Bush himself, brandished one threat after another against nations around the world, if they don't kowtow to the "war on terrorism." But no assessment of the strategic situation is possible without looking as well at the weak and dirty underside of this drive for an "American imperium," which also made itself dramatically visible.

Most notable was the testimony of the chiefs of the U.S. Pacific and European Commands before the House Armed Services Committee on March 21, in which they made clear that they don't have the capability of carrying out the missions they've already been committed to, much less the planned military action against Iraq. These military leaders were seconded later in the week by others.

Behind these revelations, one must recall, lie the shambles of the U.S. physical economy, which has been systematically looted by the "free trade" and "globalization" regime of the past 37 years, and which is now taking down one corporate giant--GM, General Electric, Marconi, Philip Holzman--after another.

The other aspect of the "feet of clay" of the would-be Anglo-American monolith is the lightning-like spread of terrorism, and other forms of social unrest and disintegration, around the globe. As in the case of the Roman Empire, an imperial system does not create "order," but rather rules over a pandemonium of disorder, which is most conducive to its continued hegemony. Indeed, the acceleration of this disorder leads to the imposition of greater and greater dictatorial means from the top.

On top of Afghanistan, Israel-Palestine, Georgia, and the Philippines, we have now seen a flare-up of terrorism across Western Europe, and, perhaps most dangerously, in Peru, itself only the tip of the iceberg of the terrorist resurgence in Ibero-America. In addition, the crisis-spots in Asia--especially the communal violence between Muslims and Hindus in India--hold the potential of accomplishing what some financial oligarchs have desired for decades: a population-reducing nuclear war between India and Pakistan, which could create a contagious upheaval throughout all of Asia.

The question which looms is this: Will the reality of the collapsed condition of the U.S. military and economy, and the reality of the brutalizing chaos and terror which is unleashed by the imperial game, actually be used by sane forces around the world, and especially in the United States, to bring the "new American imperium" posture to a halt? Or will the illusion of imperial omnipotence be permitted to survive until it has done its destructive work?

Imperial Threats...

Not since the early 1960s have the arrogant threats from the Anglo-American establishment against those who "cross them," been so heavy. Increasingly, these threats--as in the case of the "leaked" Nuclear Posture Review--involve the potential preemptive use of nuclear weapons. Indeed, what else can a great power do if it has no logistics, or competent personnel, for a war, whose purpose is only destruction anyway?

Leading the pack was that evil old veteran of bluster and geopolitical intimidation, Henry Kissinger, who appeared before the Italian Senate in order to tell his audience that "we have a nuclear arsenal with which we are ready to react." React to what? Kissinger intimated that it would be wrong to "wait" until nations who allegedly have "weapons of mass destruction" actually use them, or to seek a diplomatic alternative to military aggression. When you realize that Kissinger is referring to Iraq, among others, on which there is no evidence of a threat of weapons of mass destruction against anyone, the horror of his threat is clear.

But Kissinger was not alone. He was joined by none other than British Defense Minister Geoffrey Hoon, who blurted out that "dictators" like Saddam Hussein "can be absolutely confident that in the right conditions (sic!), we would be willing to use our nuclear weapons." On a lesser scale were the threats of the likes of Richard Perle, who told those assembled at the American-Turkish Council, that the only "inspectors" which Iraq should see are the 82nd Airborne, and newspaper columnist Tony Blankley, who is demanding a preemptive nuclear strike against Iraq.

This kind of talk first surfaced in the wake of Sept. 11, and serves as a marker for those who subscribe to the universal fascist world outlook of Brzezinski, Kissinger, Huntington, et al. They are out to destroy the nation-state, and that includes the United States, as well. The ravings also reflect an utter hysteria on the part of those, like President Bush, who seem to have been virtually brainwashed into believing the fantasies about the capabilities, not to mention intentions, of nations like Iraq.

Meet Physical and Social Disintegration

The emergence of American military voices telling the truth about both the U.S. inability to successfully wage the wars it's threatening, and its misjudgment of its capabilities, is more than overdue. Up until this point, the civilian lunatics in the Defense Department, in particular, have been running the propaganda show.

By now, however, it's become almost impossible to hide the fact that the U.S. is not handily winning in Afghanistan, as has been so widely touted. In fact, it's been the assessment of numerous sources that the quagmire the U.S. has entered in that country, is the only thing that has frustrated the Wolfowitz cabal in its insistence on an invasion of Iraq.

A roster of leading military men have now come forward to testify that the U.S. does not have the naval forces, the manpower, or the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance forces needed to take further military action beyond Afghanistan. In addition, other military voices, such as Col. (ret'd) David Hackworth, and even General Wesley Clark, have joined Lyndon LaRouche's earlier warnings that the Afghanistan war is going to intensify, rather than calm down. Some intelligence sources contacted by EIR estimate that as many as 60% of the al-Qaeda and Taliban forces remain intact, hidden in the hills, and can be expected to engage as spring advances in Afghanistan.

Add to this the fact that the United States has run into a near-solid wall of opposition among the Arab nations, to collaboration in expanding the war into the Middle East, and the imperial threats become even more apocalyptic. If the U.S., like Sharon, feels impelled to "go it alone," the conflict they desire is much more likely to be nuclear.

Global Disintegration

In assessing the Sept. 11 atrocities at the time, Lyndon LaRouche made two crucial points. The first was that this assault had to have come from inside the United States, and was geared toward creating a "Clash of Civilizations" war. The second was that the only competent approach toward stopping a global religious war of devastating proportions, would be to reassert sanity in the economic domain, through governmental action for a New Bretton Woods and global development projects. Without such economic action, the irrationality, LaRouche said, was likely to spread.

Indeed, this is precisely what has happened in response to the "military crackdown" approach taken by the Bush Administration. Rather than calming tensions, this approach has inflamed them, in a political atmosphere in which means of winning the war are being ruled out of order.

Thus, the intensifying conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians is being met by threats from the U.S. Administration against Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, while the U.S. ignores the clear evidence that Sharon is pursuing a genocidal, Nazi policy against the Palestinians. In response, social unrest is spreading in other Arab nations--just a foretaste of what will come if the planned attack on Iraq is not stopped.

And old terrorist insurgencies are once again being resurrected. While the wave of assassinations in Western Europe this last week was notable, even more dramatic was the deadly bombing in Lima, Peru. It could be that this was a revival of Sendero Luminoso, which brought Peru almost to its knees in the early 1990s, but even more dangerous is the possibility that the perpetrators were the FARC of Colombia. Already, the FARC--which has been supported by powerful pro-narco forces like the New York Stock Exchange's Richard Grasso--is known to have established an active presence in Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, and Peru, at minimum. In effect, it's a continental army prepared to destroy every nation, in favor of the global empire.

Even more dangerous than the Ibero-American eruption, is the increase in tensions between Muslims and Hindus in India, an increase which has potentially short-term repercussions for relations between the two nuclear powers, India and Pakistan. Stoked by the "anti-Muslim" war which the "war on terrorism" appears to be, and by Anglo-American intelligence networks set on preventing Eurasian collaboration, this communal conflict in India has the potential to bring on worldwide disaster.

The Crucial Flanks

Three aspects of the global picture provide us with the necessary handles to flank what would otherwise be an overwhelming picture of disaster.

The first aspect is the ongoing financial and physical collapse of the world economy, a process which demonstrates that only LaRouche has the credentials to deal with the current crisis, and that there is no alternative to that radical reorganization of the financial system, and reorientation of the physical economy to production. Contrary to the "recovery" propaganda, which people want to believe, there is an unarguable reality of massive layoffs, bankruptcies, and collapses in production and trade. It is that reality which led to the steel import tariff in the U.S., although the Administration has so far not taken the necessary lessons from it. For that, political leaders will have to master the approach which informs LaRouche's "Fair Trade as a Phase Shift" article, which appears in this edition of EIW.

One should also note a late-breaking item showing the fraud of the so-called stock market recovery, a piece in the March 25 Financial Times of London which reveals that the January meeting of the Federal Reserve "considered" (and most likely carried out) a massive bailout of the equity markets, to deal with the looming blowout crisis.

Another political handle which was presented this week came from none other than Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, who took the occasion of an interview with ABC's Barbara Walters on his peace plan, to call for a crackdown on drug-money-laundering, as the crucial handmaiden for terrorism. This proposal resonates strongly with that put forward by LaRouche in his campaign Special Report "To Stop Terrorism, Shut Down Dope, Inc.," and, with the turn against the Colombian narcoterrorists which occurred officially this last week, underscores the potential to ram this policy through.

Most important, those who want to stop the Clash of Civilizations and new "American Imperium" are coming forward around the leadership of Lyndon LaRouche. Media coverage of LaRouche's statements continues to proliferate in the Arabic-language press and in Iran, especially. And this week, LaRouche was once more the guest of the Northern Italian entrepreneurs' association, where he had the occasion to speak with dozens of influential leaders about how to solve the current crisis. Our short report in the Almanac, will be elaborated in a future issue.

ECONOMICS NEWS DIGEST

U.S. Trade Deficit Grows, Despite Collapse of Imports

According to a March 19 release by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the United States' trade deficit in goods and services rose to $28.5 billion in January, from a December 2001 deficit of $24.7 billion. The trade deficit on merchandise (physical) goods alone rose to $34.1 billion, from $31.0 billion in December.

The principal reason for the growth in the deficit is that imports rose, while exports remained the same. Some economists tried to present a widening trade deficit as a good sign. Britain's Reuters news service claimed that the deficit occurred as "an improving [U.S.] economy boosted demand for foreign oil and other imports."

But there are three reasons that this is not so.

First, about 40% of the physical goods imports increase in January, relative to December, was due to imports of consumer goods. One-sixth of the increase in imports was due to increased oil imports, reflecting mostly a price increase in petroleum in January.

Second, while this January's import levels increased relative to their very depressed levels in December, January's physical goods import levels, at $106.5 billion, are still down 13.7% from the $123.4-billion level of January 2001. This January's physical goods exports, at $54.8 billion, are down 15.7% from the $65.0-billion level of a year earlier. This indicates an overall decline in the United States' role as the importer of last resort for the world economy.

Third, America's insane appetite for such a large volume of physical goods imports is not a sign of health, but rather reflects the fundamental condition that America can no longer reproduce its own existence by its own productive facilities, and must siphon physical goods imports from the rest of the world to prevent an increase in the rate of collapse.

Even Greenspan Nervous at U.S. Current Account Deficit and Foreign Debt Claims

In his address via satellite to the Independent Community Bankers of America conference in Honolulu March 13, Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan noted: "During the past six years, about 40% of the total increase in our capital stock in effect has been financed, on net, by saving from abroad. This situation is reflected in our ongoing current account deficit, which, by definition, is a measure of our net investment in domestic plant and equipment financed with foreign funds, both debt and equity. But this deficit is also a measure of the increase in the level of net claims, primarily debt claims, that foreigners have on our assets. As the stock of such claims grow, an ever-larger flow of interest payments must be provided to the foreign suppliers of this capital. Countries that have gone down this path invariably have run into trouble, and so would we."

Securities and Exchange Commission Still Protecting U.S. Housing Bubble

Speaking to the House Financial Services Committee on March 20, SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt backed off from requiring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to file financial statements, despite widespread knowledge that the two "government-sponsored enterprises" are oversubscribed with derivatives, and face an imploding real estate market that could bring down the speculative bubble with a splat.

Pitt first suggested the two corporations should be held accountable, held to the same disclosure requirements as other publicly traded companies, then later "clarified" that they would not be required to do so. "Disclosure is critical for the GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises] as well as for other public companies," he said. But currently, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not required to disclose insider transactions, file audited financial statements, and register their securities with the SEC.

An SEC spokeswoman later said that while Pitt believes GSEs should meet the highest standards of disclosure and transparency, neither he nor the commission "is advocating any change in the legal status of GSEs."

During the same hearing, Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman, testified that the GSE will disclose insider transactions. But Raines also admitted that the company holds $533 billion in interest-rate derivative contracts. Clearly, this is a bubble about to explode.

IMF Sees Some Big Risks to World 'Recovery'

"Setbacks in the fight against international terrorism" could hit the U.S. economy and world stock markets later this year, warned the International Monetary Fund in a draft of its World Economic Outlook released to wire services March 20. The report will be officially released in mid-April. Reuters claims it obtained the draft from an unnamed "Group of Seven government source." According to Reuters, the draft states that there are "good reasons to expect the global economy to pick up." However, risks remain, such as an overvalued dollar, the high current account deficit, and low savings. Overoptimism in the financial markets and "setbacks in the fight against international terrorism" could also undermine the recovery process.

The Philippines May End Current Program Under IMF

Sources told Business World that some quarters view the IMF's post-program monitoring (PPM) facility in the Philippines as having limited effectiveness, especially since it excludes any financial assistance. "If it proves to be of little use, the government might as well terminate it," an official said, requesting anonymity. He was quoted in the March 20 edition.

At present, the Philippines subscribes to the PPM, which broadly aims to provide a continuing review of the country's monetary, fiscal, and macroeconomic performance. Local officials reportedly asked IMF officials to clarify and define more clearly the program's parameters and benefits, and what is expected of the government's economic managers. Officials complained that since the PPM is not an official funding program, the country does not have access to IMF resources in the event it encounters balance-of-payments problems associated with capital flight.

This is aggravated by the fact that the government's bilateral dollar swap arrangements signed with various ASEAN-plus-3 countries last year are conditional upon an IMF program. "The bilateral swaps facility can only be availed in tandem with an IMF program," the official said. "So since the PPM is not an official funding program, we are effectively shut out from the bilateral facilities as well.

"Either they upgrade the PPM to a full program or they can just terminate it," he said.

Malaysian Prime Minister Seeks Cooperation in Russia and Europe

Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, speaking March 14 at an official luncheon sponsored by Russian President Vladimir Putin during Mahathir's visit to Moscow, called for cooperation between the two countries on Land-Bridge projects in Central and East Asia. While not using the term "Land-Bridge," which is universally identified with Lyndon and Helga LaRouche's Eurasian Land-Bridge perspective, Dr. Mahathir said, "Our private sectors should look beyond their borders, to the economically dynamic and vibrant region of East Asia and Central Asia. Malaysia has envisaged plans to extend its economic reach to the East and Central Asian region through railway connections with China. This will pave the way for greater interchangeability of goods and technology amongst countries in the region, with Russia being an integral partner of it. The prospects appear to be even better with the eventual creation of an Eastern corridor that will link Southeast Asia with East Asia. The ensuing economic growth will in turn bring about a more stable and peaceful international security environment in the region.

Dr. Mahathir went from Moscow to Germany, where he and Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder also discussed projects of intensifying economic and scientific cooperation.

Egyptian Company Plans Largest Ever Investment in Russia's Aerospace Industry

Egypt's Sirocco Aerospace International, which was created in 1996 by an Egyptian businessman to market a commercial airplane from the famed Russian Tupolev line, has already invested about $200 million in Russia's Aviastar SP company. Sirocco owns about 18% of the southern Russia-based aircraft manufacturer. The Aviastar plant in Ulyanovsk, the Wall Street Journal reports, is the largest aircraft factory in Europe, and produces the Tu-204 passenger jet. Unable to compete with giants Boeing and Airbus in the commercial aircraft market, for lack of capital investment, Aviastar has dropped its labor force from 36,000 to 10,000 over the past decade, and the number of aircraft it produces, from 60 per year to five.

Reportedly, Sirocco is planning to invest $280 million over the next three years to modernize the plant, and increase production to nine planes next year, and to 36 by 2005. In return, Sirocco will receive at least a 25% share in the factory, and a similar share in Tupolev. An investment agreement is expected to be signed by the end of March.

Germany's Premier Construction Firm Files for Bankruptcy

Philipp Holtzman AG, the German construction firm which built the Baghdad Railway, filed for bankruptcy March 21, after 152 years in business. The plan for a bailout, which had been proposed by the firm's largest shareholder, Deutsche Bank, was rejected by Dresdner Bank, Commerzbank, and the HypoVereinBank Group. Deutsche Bank has been allied with Holtzman since the 19th century, when they collaborated to build the Berlin-to-Baghdad Railway. Loans valued at 1.5 billion euros are at stake, and as many as 40,000 jobs are at risk around the world.

Holtzman has lost money since 1994, and was bailed out in 1999 with a $1-billion rescue package, after Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's intervention. Its stock has fallen from a high of 536 euros to 2.75, leaving the capitalization of the company at only 47 million euros.

This Week's Collapse in the U.S. Physical Economy

Despite reams of "recovery" hype which is being produced by the major U.S. press, the unrelenting pattern of collapse in physical production and jobs, not to mention increased bankruptcies, cannot be missed by anyone who is not gripped by a delusion.

One leading element of the collapse is collapse of state budgets, caused by the sharp reduction in tax collections. Another is the ongoing crash of the telecommunications sector. Internationally, KPN, a Dutch telecom company, had a record $6.6-billion (7.5-billion-euro) net loss in 2001; some 5,280 jobs will be cut this year, and an additional 1,300 jobs by the end of 2004.

Meanwhile, the auto giant General Motors plans to cut spending by $4.3 billion this year, imposing fiscal austerity to "help meet our goal of earning $10 a share mid-decade," by cutting $2 billion from its North American material costs; $1.3 billion from its manufacturing, engineering, and health-care budgets; and $1 billion from capital spending, executives told securities analysts at a meeting in Detroit on March 19. The company has said it will have to inject $2 billion into its pension plan next year. Engineering staffs will be slashed, in favor of unscientific, and deadly, "benchmarking"; less expensive generic drugs will be promoted; and the number of suppliers will be reduced from the current 3,300.

The cuts would cause another ratcheting-down of the economy as a whole, hitting machine tools, steel, etc.

Then there's Verizon, the major U.S. telephone company, which has revealed that it has $18.7 billion in debt due within the coming 12 months, out of its total of $64.3 billion in debt. Marconi announced March 22 that it has failed to obtain new bank loans to deal with its billions of pounds in debt, and is cutting 13,000 jobs.

Goldman Sachs, a top U.S. investment bank, saw its first-quarter profit tumble by 32%, to $524 million from $768 million a year ago, and is planning job cuts, as merger activity slows down.

A regional example of the non-existence of the "recovery" is the Silicon Valley area of California, where much of the "New Economy" was headquartered. According to a major article in the San Francisco Chronicle Business Section on March 17, "The main indicators of the Valley's economic health--job creation, unemployment, office vacancy rates--are still deteriorating, and are expected to do so for months to come." Vacancy rates for valley office space have gone from 0.6% in the second quarter of 2001 to 15% in the fourth quarter of 2001, with a 25% jump from the third quarter to the fourth quarter of last year. "Start-up" companies that rely on outside venture capital, began running out of cash in the fourth quarter, and are now collapsing at an escalating rate. The article quotes Paul Fassinger, research director of the Association of Bay Area Governments, predicting a rise in the unemployment rate to 8.5% in coming months.

U.S. Steelworkers Pledge To Fight for Health Benefits

A March 13 statement from United Steelworkers of America union president Leo Gerard said that the battle over "The Steel Industry Retiree Benefits Protection Act of 2002," expected to be introduced into the Congress by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W Va), will be "the fight of our lives, ... a fight that will make the battle to secure tariff remedies seem easy." It urges locals to begin to gear up for demonstrations in support of the measure. Many retirees will begin to lose their benefits as of March 31.

Gerard sounded a similar theme in March 14 testimony before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, chaired by Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.). In his testimony Gerard reviewed various Bush Administration general proposals for increasing health benefits, such as tax credits and the "Medicare Prescription Drug" legislation, pointed to their obvious inadequacies and declared that the USWA insists that honoring pension and health benefit promises is as important as tariff relief. Gerard told the committee, "No one is asking us to bail out the bosses; this is to help real working people who have suffered."

While continuing his attack on unfair and illegal trade policies, Gerard refrained from direct attacks on alleged "competitor" nations such as China and Russia, and in a welcome departure from previous statements made no reference to "world overproduction of steel."

UNITED STATES NEWS DIGEST

Leak of Nuclear Posture Review Was Deliberate Terror Tactic

While many people presumed that the leak, in the March 10 Los Angeles Times, of the list of countries targetted in the U.S. Nuclear Policy Review was aimed at exposing and stopping the change of U.S. nuclear warfighting doctrine, Lyndon LaRouche has charged that the contents of the new doctrine were leaked by the proponents of the "Clash of Civilizations" doctrine associated with Samuel Huntington, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Bernard Lewis, and Henry Kissinger. These lunatics, LaRouche said, are playing a "nuclear chicken-game" with the rest of the world, attempting to scare nations, including America's European NATO allies, into capitulating to the drive to provoke a new world war, beginning in the Middle East.

On March 17, the Washington Post admitted that LaRouche's analysis was on target (without mentioning LaRouche). Ombudsman Michael Getler, in the leading editorial item for the Post, defended the paper's editorial decision not to put the story on its front pages, unlike the New York Times and Los Angeles Times.

Getler wrote that, "adding to the spectacle of such widely differing news display among the nation's three top dailies is the attitude of the Administration toward the leak, to the New York and Los Angeles papers—of this supposedly secret document. Hardly a peep—until Defense Secretary Rumsfeld blasted the leakers on Wednesday [March 13]—from an Administration that threatens federal employees if they utter an unauthorized word about the war in Afghanistan. It makes you wonder if White House officials didn't mind this leak, so they could get their 'don't mess with us' message out without launching it, and then look cool and calm, explaining that this kind of review goes on all the time, and it's nothing new." In a discussion on March 18, LaRouche evaluated the Post's assessment as being correct.

Kissinger: We Have a Nuclear Arsenal We're Ready To Use

In a March 19 speech in the Italian Senate, Henry Kissinger threatened that "We have a nuclear arsenal with which we are ready to react." Speaking almost precisely on the anniversary of the kidnapping of the former Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro (March 16, 1978), whom Kissinger had threatened in brutal terms, the former U.S. Secretary of State delivered a threatening speech in the Zuccari Room of Palazzo Giustiniani in Rome. As observers noticed, Kissinger's "lecture" (attended by, among others, the U.S. Ambassador) coincided with tremendous ferment in the Italian Senate in favor of Lyndon LaRouche's New Bretton Woods proposal—ferment expressed in now-famous motion signed by former Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti and a large group of senators.

Officially, Kissinger had been invited by the Senate President, Marcello Pera, to speak on "Globalization and Geopolitics."

Declared Kissinger, "From Iraq and the other rogue states we learned that weapons can be used suddenly against us, but also against Europe. What do we do with countries that have weapons of mass destruction, don't have a democratic system, and have already used these weapons against their own people and their neighbors?"—referring to Iraq. "Do we wait until these weapons are used or will we find the way to prevent this risk? We Americans gave up our chemical weapons in 1969, but we have a nuclear arsenal with which we are ready to react. Nobody wants a war without consulting our allies, but those who reject the use of weapons must propose an alternative and not just a diplomatic alternative" (emphasis added).

Sen. John Warner Warns of Dangers in Attack on Iraq

In a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with CIA Director George Tenet on March 19, Virginia Republican Senator John Warner, who has close ties to the armed services, went on record with his concern that an Iraq adventure would create more terrorism in the world, and would bring down the governments in friendly Muslim nations. Central Intelligence Agency chieftain George Tenet had presented to the Committee a paper along the lines of the "axis of evil" (which won fulsome praise from Sen. Joe Lieberman, especially in regard to Iraq), and responded to questions on Iraq by saying he would answer only in closed session.

Warner, clearly wanting to go on the record, said that every day sees more speculation in the press on "taking out Saddam Hussein militarily if all other avenues diplomatically in the end fail." He said he agreed that Iraq was a danger, and this approach might be important, but added: "I think we have an obligation to talk about what are the consequences ... if we have to go it alone. Here are my concerns." The Senator specified:

"[W]ho fills the vacuum [of leadership in Iraq]? Are there persons that exist that can step in and gain the confidence of the Iraqi people and lead that nation hopefully in a direction that's more compatible with a degree of democracy and freedom in that part of the world? We will also have to evaluate—and this is my question to you—in the aftermath, what is the likely degree of increase in the threats to this nation by means of terrorism..., how do we go about evaluating the degree of the increase of terrorist attacks, particularly by individuals who are ready to give up their lives, willingly, to bring further damage on our nation? Will not that invasion of a sovereign nation, the transformation of that government by force, spawn an increase in the number of individuals, not necessarily from Iraq, but from around the world, who will come and be inspired to inflict greater damage on this nation?"

When Tenet answered evasively, twice, Warner cut him off:

SEN. WARNER: Well, that's all very well and good, Mr. Director, but I must tell you that I think it's important that we begin to spend a lot of time on this subject and try as best we can to inform the American people and others of the consequences of a significant military action to take out Saddam Hussein.

Now, what about the other governments in the Muslim world? They are very fragile, and some of these leaders are saying that type of operation could in fact bring down the government in my nation. Is that a potential?

MR. TENET: Well, Senator, let me say that I'd like to hear from the Vice President when he gets back because he's had these kinds of conversations. You often get a public face and a private face on these discussions and sometimes—

SEN. WARNER: Well, you and I know that. We've all travelled and talked to those folks. I guess I'm not going to make much progress this morning. But I'm spending a lot of my time on this issue, and I feel an obligation, and I hope our President consults with the Congress. That representation has been made by a series of individuals to this committee. But it is a major, major decision that we've got to prepare the American people for what the consequences would be.

Yes, we would destroy weapons of mass destruction, the ability of that nation to produce it. But in the wake, would we spawn a higher, much higher degree of terrorism?

Say U.S. Military Unprepared for Further Actions

The chiefs of the U.S. Pacific and European Commands told the Congress March 21 that the U.S. military is unprepared for further actions. Speaking to the House Armed Services Committee, Adm. Dennis Blair of the Pacific Command went even further, saying: "We do not have adequate forces to carry out our missions for the Pacific if the operations in [Afghanistan] continue at their recent past and current pace." The commanders were asked whether they had enough forces to carry out all current operations, as well as possible military action against Iraq, and their answers were "very troubling," said Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), who had asked the question.

"The answer to your question as you posed it is: I do not have the forces in EUCOM today to carry out these missions," Air Force Gen. Joseph W. Ralston, commander-in-chief of the European Command, told Skelton, the Committee's top Democrat. If more operations are assigned, Ralston said, "I will come back to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Secretary of Defense and ask for additional forces. Then they are going to have to come up with a choice: Where are they going to take them away from?"

"I have not had a marine amphibious ready group since October of last year," Ralston said. "This is the primary unit that I use to evacuate Americans if there is a NATO operation taking place in one of those 91 countries" under his command. "And I don't believe I will have a marine amphibious ready group this year, other than just for a few days as they transit the Mediterranean." Likewise, he said he has not had an aircraft carrier in many months. He has also sent AWACS aircraft to support operations in Southwest Asia.

Blair said: "There are shortages of naval forces, of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance forces, in particular, that have to be made up for if we are to continue the current level of operations in the Central Command."

Army Gen. William F. Kernan, commander-in-chief of the U.S. Joint Forces Command, recently told the Committee that U.S. troops are overextended and exhausted, and supported calls by service leaders for more troops.

Washington Times, New Republic: Make War on Iraq

In the midst of the intensifying drumbeat for war against Iraq, among the news media and neoconservative circles in and out of government, the Washington Times March 20 ran an op-ed column by Tony Blankley entitled "A Fear of the Nuclear." In it, Blankley compared the concern that Iraq has nuclear weapons to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, and quoted from Henry Kissinger: "Statesmen always face the dilemma that when the scope of action is greatest, they have a minimum of knowledge. By the time they have garnered sufficent knowledge, the scope for decisive action is likely to have vanished. In the 1930s, British leaders were unsure of Hilter's objectives ... [and failed] to act on the basis of assessments which they could not prove. The tuition fee for learning about Hilter's true nature was tens of millions of graves."

Blankley ended his column by commenting that these are the terrible calculations the President will have to make in the coming months: Going to war and risking destabilizing much of the world without knowing for certain, or embarking on a course of inaction, resulting in the annihilation of a major American city.

A similar message was put out in an article in the current issue of the New Republic, entitled "The Case for an American Osirak." The argument is made that the United States should do what the Israelis did in 1980, with reference to Israel's preemptive strike on the Iraqi nuclear reactor. The article asserts that with all the smart weapons at the disposal of the U.S., it should be no problem to target the facilities suspected of making weapons of mass destruction.

Washington Post Reveals More 'Neo-Con' Penetration of Bush Inner Sanctum

The March 19 Washington Post carried a useful exposure, by Dana Milbank, of the extent of penetration of the Bush Administration—particularly the White House—by the neo-conservative networks of William Kristol. The article opened with the shocking observation that "Karl Rove's loyalty police should be on deep orange alert, if not hot pink. There is a sleeper cell operating in the White House." Milbank's article documented the case of Joseph Shattan, a former National Review writer who last fall had viciously attacked President Bush for endorsing the idea of a Palestinian state, but is now being brought in as a White House speech writer.

"How did it happen? Sounds like the work of the Kristol cabal, a vast, neoconservative conspiracy centered on William Kristol, publisher of the Weekly Standard magazine," wrote Milbank. "Kristol, who backed Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in the GOP primaries, is persona non grata at the White House. But he has some operativers on the Inside." The article ran down a long list of Kristol cat's paws who are now in key Bush Administration posts: Bush speechwriter Matthew Scully, Cheney speechwriter John McConnell, Bush speechwriter Peter Wehner, National Security Council speechwriter Matthew Rees, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, Domestic Policy Council director Jay Lefkowitz, NSC Senior Director Elliott Abrams, Cheney Chief of Staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of State John Bolton, bioethics panel chairman Leon Kass, and Bush "Kitchen Cabinet" member Al Hubbard.

The Post story warned that the Kristol gang is wreaking havoc at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. "For much of Bush's first year in office, Kristol was a steady critic.... Since then, however, something curious has happened. Bush's 'compassionate conservatism' is morphing into Kristol's—and McCain's—'national greatness' agenda.... His 'axis of evil' reference (coined by a Kristol acolyte) echoes McCain's and Kristol's calls for a broad assault on rogue states. Kristol's not talking, but the innocent explanation for all this is that Bush aides, though hostile to McCain, embrace the senator's neoconservative ideas. But could it be Kristolean mind control at work on his inside agents?"

Feds Raid Islamic Groups, Homes in No. Virginia, Georgia

On March 20 and 22, the Federal agents led by the U.S. Customs Service conducted raids of Islamic groups' offices, Islamic schools, and homes of Muslims in Northern Virginia and Georgia. The raids of March 20 involved 14 sites of Islamic organizations in Northern Virginia and one in Georgia, and individuals. Documents, computers, and other materials were seized, but no arrests were made. The raids were part of a putative investigation into the financing of terrorism.

The individuals and organizations targetted, and the Islamic community in general, reacted with outrage, characterizing the raids as harassment, and a giant fishing expedition. About the same time as the raids, Attorney General John Ashcroft was announcing that another 3,000 Arab and Muslim men in the U.S. were to be rounded up for questioning.

At a press conference March 21 sponsored by the Council on American Islamic Relations, representatives of some of the people targetted for raids, described armed men, with guns drawn, surrounding their homes; officers refusing to show search warrants (which are reportedly under seal); the handcuffing of women, and other indignities. Shaker ElSayed of the National Muslim Leadership Council said the operation "contradicts President Bush's declarations that the campaign against terrorism is not against Muslims. These actions presume that these people are like drug dealers, and that their homes should be violated...."

Congressman Conyers Blasts Use of Secret Evidence

According to a press release from his office March 18, Michigan Congressman John Conyers (D) has said that the "Bush Administration decision to use secret evidence [in prosecuting suspected terror-supporting organizations—ed.] is a slap in the face for those who supported him." The Congressman criticized the Justice Department announcement that it will use secret evidence in the case against the Global Relief Foundation, a Muslim charity active in the Chicago area. The DOJ will give to the Federal court, but not to the defense, the "secret evidence" which is supposed to demonstrate that the charity is connected to al-Qaeda networks. The source of the "evidence" is to be protected, the Justice Department argued, for "national security" reasons.

Reportedly, since Sept. 11, Israeli security sources have delivered a large amount of information concerning Muslim charities in the United States. In a statement reported by Forward magazine on March 15, an "intelligence expert," Peter Unsinger, stated: "I have no doubt Israel has an interest in spying on [Muslim fundamentalist] groups. The Israelis give us good stuff, like on the Hamas charities."

The Federal case in Chicago appears to constitute the first time the government has tried to use secret evidence under a provision of the anti-terrorism Patriot Act passed by Congress and signed by President Bush in October. Roger Simmons, an attorney for Global Relief, called the use of secret evidence is "a very dangerous legal precedent."

Congressman Conyers' statement stressed that, "in his Oct. 11, 2000 presidential debate with Vice President Gore, then-Governor Bush condemned the use of secret evidence. In December 2001, a Justice Department spokesman repeated the Administration pledge and stated: 'It was a campaign promise by the President.... We've abided by that promise.' I call on the President to abide by his campaign promise and to cease the practice of gutting the very freedoms we are attempting to protect."

MIDDLE EAST NEWS DIGEST

Richard Perle Rattles Sabers at American-Turkish Council

At the annual conference of the American-Turkish Council March 18, rightwing ultra-hawk Richard Perle participated in a forum with two Turkish representatives and CNN's "Islam expert" Peter Bergen. Perle asserted that the Bush Administration is engaged in ongoing discussion on the need for "preemptive actions against Saddam Hussein," and--although he insists that there is evidence connecting Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda--said that the main reasons for a preemptive strike are Saddam's drive to acquire and/or use weapons of mass destruction and "Saddam's hatred of the United States."

When one of the speakers asked Perle about Arab leaders' rejection of Vice President Cheney's appeal for support against Iraq, Perle commented, "Well, I just don't know what they told the Vice President in private.... The Arab leaders feel there is nothing to be gained by getting ahead of the U.S. on this issue." Perle indicated that at the point the U.S. acted, they would all get on board--and if not, too bad.

Regarding Egypt's possible reactions to an assault on Iraq, Perle said, "We should do it anyway and not worry about the Egyptians. Turkey is more important than Egypt." He claimed that, compared to 1990-1991 and the Persian Gulf War, Saddam is much weaker, the U.S. has more sophisticated weaponry, and 11 more years of Saddam Hussein's rule have increased the domestic opposition even from within the Iraqi military. "It would be much quicker, much easier now. Not like 1991.... There will probably be dancing on the streets of Baghdad when Saddam falls."

Asked if a military attack on Iraq required as a precondition, a relaxation of tension in the Middle East, Perle replied, "No. And we can't let that determine our actions. The Palestinian media is still calling for a holy war against Israel. You can't have peace when one of the parties wants to destroy the other...."

Summing up, Perle laid out the perspective of the Clash of Civilizations worldwide: "We have an interest in defeating fundamentalist groups around the world, so that they don't come to power anywhere."

Jane's: Israeli Spy Scandal Political Dynamite

"Political dynamite which could result in a political backlash against Israel, which is finding itself increasingly isolated"--thus does the March 15 issue of Jane's Intelligence Digest, one of the best-informed British intelligence and defense outlets, describe the scandal of the Israeli spy network in the United States.

The British magazine supports the recent exposure by Intelligence Online, which is considered close to French Intelligence circles (see Issue #2 of EIW). It also stresses that since its founding, Israel has been spying on the United States. Jane's even mentions the spying on the White House that EIR's exposure made known all over the world.

Writes Jane's: "It is rather strange that the U.S. media, with one notable exception, seems to be ignoring what may well prove to be the most explosive story since the 11 September attacks--the alleged break-up of a major Israeli espionage operation in the United States which aimed to infiltrate both the Justice and Defence Departments and which may also have been tracking Al-Qaeda terrorists before the aircraft hijackings took place. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been quick to dismiss a 4 March report by Intelligence Online, a French web site that specialises in security matters (and expanded on by French daily Le Monde the following day) that U.S. authorities had arrested or deported some 120 Israelis since February 2001, and that the investigation was still continuing. The FBI insists that no Israeli has been charged with espionage, but has agreed that an undisclosed number of Israeli students have been expelled for 'immigration violations.' Justice Department spokeswoman Susan Dryden dismissed the espionage allegations as 'an urban myth that's been circulating for months'....

"If the reports from Paris are correct, it would be the largest known Israeli espionage operation mounted in the USA, the Jewish state's closest ally and one on which it depends for its survival. Israel's intelligence organisations have been spying on the USA and running clandestine operations on U.S. soil since the Jewish state was established. This has included smuggling an estimated 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium for its secret nuclear arms programme in the 1960s to widescale industrial espionage, much of it conducted by the highly secret Scientific Liaison Bureau, known by its Hebrew acronym Lakam, which was run by the Israeli Defence Ministry and its equally little-known successor Malmab (the Security Authority for the Ministry of Defence). Indeed, the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress, reported in April 1996 that Israel 'conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the United States of any U.S. ally.' While the sort of operation described by Intelligence Online and Le Monde (if indeed the allegation is true) is unlikely to have caused anywhere near the damage to U.S. security inflicted by Navy analyst Jonathan Pollard, an American who was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1987 for providing Israeli intelligence with a mountain of top-secret material in 1984-85, it would still be political dynamite which could result in a political backlash against Israel, which is finding itself increasingly isolated within the international community....

"U.S. officials admitted to reporters that the entire investigation had become 'too hot to handle,' but declined to give further details. However, some FBI officials did confirm at the time that the Israelis were running a major eavesdropping operation that had penetrated into the highest echelons of the U.S. administration."

Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah: War on Terror, War on Drugs

In an interview with Barbara Walters aired on ABC's 20/20 program on March 15, Crown Prince Abdullah, acting head of state of Saudi Arabia, called for expanding the war on terrorism into a war on drugs:

WALTERS: Osama bin Laden wants to damage Saudi Arabia as well as the U.S. Is there any danger that he can accomplish this?

CROWN PRINCE ABDULLAH: Bin Laden is no threat to us. When he was in the Sudan, he was virtually nothing. When he moved to Afghanistan, he became involved in the drug trade and his income increased. In my opinion, the drug trade allowed him to expand his influence and organization. This is a fact. Drugs and terrorism are two sides of the same coin. Terrorists get their funding from the drug trade, and drug lords use terrorism to protect their turf. The same means used to combat terrorism can also be used to combat drugs. We need a multinational effort, and countries that require assistance to join in the effort should be helped. Countries that refuse to participate should be punished.

In fact, the Bush Administration has sent signals from time to time that it is contemplating such an extension, of the war on terror into a war on drugs. As far back as last November, joint press conferences between Presidents Bush and Putin featured the two heads of state referring to the connection of drugs and drug-money funding, to terrorism, and recent actions by the U.S. to support the Colombian government in its battle against the narcoterrorist FARC insurgency, point in the same direction.

Cheney's Mideast Tour: Arab Leaders Say No War on Iraq

In Jordan March 12, Vice President Dick Cheney was told by King Abdullah that the latter opposed any military action against Iraq, as it would undermine the anti-terrorism war, and destabilize the whole Middle East. The Jordanian Foreign Minister added that Iraq's territorial integrity must be safeguarded, and pointed to fears of violent repercussions of a war inside Jordan, where over half the population is Palestinian.

Next, Cheney heard President Hosni Mubarak telling him Egypt is opposed to any American plan to overthrow Saddam Hussein, and is committed "to maintain the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq ... to preserve regional stability." Mubarak added that Saddam should be given the opportunity to comply with UN resolutions, regarding inspectors. "And I think," he said, "as far as my knowledge is, that he is going to accept the inspectors."

In Yemen, President Ali Abdullah Saleh told Cheney March 14 that he opposed military action, because it would undermine regional stability. "We don't want more oil on the fire," an adviser told reporters. In the United Arab Emirates, Cheney met Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan, who told him the Emirates "are opposed to any military strike against Iraq," according to the official WAM agency.

Even Kuwait was not happy about a war against Iraq. First Deputy Premier and Foreign Minister Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmed al-Sabah told Cheney that Kuwait does not support any military strike against Iraq, because it will not harm the Iraqi regime as much as the Iraqi people.

Saudi Arabia had the same message for Cheney. "I do not believe it is in the interests of the United States, or the interests of the region, or the world," to attack Iraq, Abdullah said. He said that Saudi Arabia will not allow its bases to be used for any U.S. attack on Iraq.

After meeting Cheney, Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit told the press an attack on Iraq was "not necessary," and "Turkey and the U.S. would be able to prevent any Iraqi aggression."

Did Cheney Discuss Military Coup Option in Turkey, Saudi?

At the end of his tour, during his talks with Turkish Prime Minister Ecevit, Vice President Cheney said, as always, that there were no immediate plans for a U.S. attack on Iraq--but indications point in a different direction, according to Neue Zuercher Zeitung March 20.

Ecevit said that from the Turkish standpoint, there could be "no question" of an attack against Iraq, because of the danger of Iraq's disintegrating, and the emergence of a Kurdish entity which would immediately affect the 12 million Kurds in Turkey, NZZ explained. Turkey's economy is reeling, and would be dealt a death blow if its trade with Iraq were stopped.

Cheney also met Chief of Staff Kivrikoglu and, according to former Ambassador Sukru Eledag, who is close to the Turkish General Staff, they discussed three options: 1) eliminating Saddam Hussein through a secret services operation; 2) mounting an Afghhanistan II operation, using the Kurds as the Northern Alliance; and 3) deploying U.S. ground troops with the active participation of Turkey. Since the generals would exclude the deployment of Turkish tanks or troops, but would okay use of air space and bases, the implied conclusion is that the first option was upfront in the discussion.

The Saudi paper Al Watan indicated that something similar may have been on the agenda of Cheney's talks with Crown Prince Abdullah. The paper quotes Saudi Foreign Minister Al Faisal saying a change in the Iraqi regime would be possible, and acceptable, only if carried out by the Iraqi people--and that this would require U.S. support. On the other hand, a failed intervention, like an invasion, would be a catastrophe, which would only increase the suffering of the Iraqi people.

In light of all this, analysts will want to keep an eye on the meeting planned for the end of March in the Washington area, between leading former Iraqi military men and U.S. personnel.

Newsweek: Iraq's Defector-Generals Found To Be Defective

The latest issue of Newsweek magazine (cover date March 25) says the big question being raised by President Bush's talk of "regime change" in Iraq is: Who will replace Saddam? Iraqi National Congress head Ahmed Chalabi is popular among top civilian aides in the Defense Department, but is regarded with scorn by most the rest of the U.S. national-security establishment, Newsweek says.

At CIA, the State Department, and among the uniformed military, the search is on for a respected Iraqi military officer who can ride in, take control, and unite Iraq's tribes and religious groups; but, Newsweek reports, interviews it conducted with five of the most prominently mentioned Iraqi ex-generals "raised questions about their readiness, willingness, and fitness to lead."

"The good news is that the generals are all very experienced war fighters. The bad news is the way they fought--sometimes, with chemical weapons."

Nizar al-Khazraji, for example, has impressive credentials, and was the top commander of the Iraqi Army from 1980 to 1991. But there's one problem: The Danish government is investigating him for possible war crimes.

General al-Shamari, who now runs a restaurant in Northern Virginia, might present a problem of a different sort. He says he carried out Saddam's orders to gas Iranians during the Iran-Iraq War, and he says the effect was devastating. How does he know? From U.S. satellite intelligence, conveyed to the Iraqis by the CIA.

Chalabi Facing 20-Year Jail Term

Richard Perle's candidate to replace Saddam Hussein in Iraq--namely, Iraqi National Congress head Ahmed Chalabi--is facing a 20-year prison term in Jordan. According to a Jordanian diplomat, Chalabi fled from Amman to London in 1988, after he was caught in a massive money-laundering and embezzlement scheme, which almost brought down the Jordanian currency. He was tried in absentia, found guilty, and sentenced to a minimum 20 years in prison. When Dick Cheney was in Jordan, King Abdullah II told reporters that, if Chalabi set foot in Jordan, he would immediately be sent to prison, to start serving his sentence.

Kurdish 'Option' Is No Option

German journalist Scholl-Latour, writing in the March 10 issue of WeltamSonntag, reported on a visit he made to Iraq in which he interviewed PUK Kurdish leader Talebani. The latter made no bones about his opposition to any war against Iraq. Scholl-Latour writes as follows:

"'I ask you a direct and naive question,' I begin our evening discussion. 'Will it come to a war between the U.S. and Iraq?' The answer is an unequivocal yes. The only unknown is the timeframe of the U.S. offensive, and no one in Baghdad knows what strategic plans the Americans will try this time to oust Saddam Hussein." Scholl-Latour writes that he got the same response from Iraqis.

Asking Talebani, "If then, as mooted, the rebellious Kurds of northern Iraq, comparable to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, should offer themselves as allies and march on Baghdad?" Talebani replies, "We are not mercenaries ... and one should be careful not to compare Mesopotamia with the Hindu Kush."

The article points out that war would be against the Kurds' interests, since they have a secure livelihood through the oil-for-food trade going through their region.

Scholl-Latour also interviewed Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, who also sees the war as inevitable. "The American President clearly admitted that Iraq for him, is not a matter of fighting terrorism, and not even a question of control over new weapons. He wants, in violation of our sovereignty, to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein and build up an armed opposition, in order to unleash a civil war."

Militarily, Scholl-Latour thinks the Iraqi Army would not offer major resistance. But he notes that, whereas the elder President Bush had, in 1990-91, a half-million U.S. troops and tens of thousands of allied troops, this time, the U.S. has 30,000 troops in Kuwait, and the British as many again. This is not sufficient to occupy and hold a country as big as Iraq, with 25 million inhabitants.

More Israeli Reservists Go to Jail in Protest

According to the March 21 issue of Ha'aretz, the Israeli newspaper, more Israeli reserve soldiers and officers who have signed the Combatants Letter 2002, which declares their refusal to serve in the occupied territories, have been sent to jail. Approximately 10 soldiers have been sentenced to military prison terms of 28 days, the most recent being Staff Sergeant (Res.) Yishai Mor, 34, who refused to serve in the Gaza Strip, and Sergio Iani, 35, director of the Center for Alternative Information in Jerusalem, who refused to serve at all in the Reserves as long as the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories continues.

The U.S.-based liberal Jewish organizatin Tikkun on March 22 ran a full-page ad in the New York Times headlined: "Support the Israeli Army Reservists Who Say 'No' to the Occupation."

"We are committed to a pro-Israel movement that, like the reservists, upholds the highest vision of what Israel and the Jewish people stand for--a world a peace, justice, love of the stranger, generosity and goodness," the ad says. It supports calls for a worldwide day of fasting on March 27 in support of the reservists, and urges people to use the Passover seders, beginning March 27, or Christian Holy Week observances, for "a mini-teach-in about the way that Israel is increasingly perceived as a Pharoah to a population that is seeking its own freedom and self-determination."

Netanyahu Says He'd Deport Arafat, Build Wall Against Palestine

Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave an interview to the March 25 issue of Time magazine in which he detailed his so-called "peace" plan between Israel and Palestine. Asserting that Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat has never accepted Israel's right to exist, despite the Oslo Accords (because Arafat continues to insist on a Palestinian right-of-return, including in Israel), Netanyahu said that if he were in power in Israel, he would invade the Palestinian territories, deport Arafat, disarm the PA police, the Tanzin militia, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and then set up a security buffer between Israel and Palestine. He would build a permanent wall between the two states--a wall that did not run along the 1967 borders. In other words, he would annex portions of the West Bank and Gaza. This same "peace plan," dubbed "a war and then a wall," was formally presented by Edgar Bronfman at the most recent World Jewish Congress convention in Jerusalem.

IBERO-AMERICAN NEWS DIGEST

Lima Bombing Underscores That LaRouche Was Right

When former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori was ousted, and replaced by Alejandro Toledo, Lyndon LaRouche and his associates at EIR and in Peru stressed that this change portended disaster. As Lyndon LaRouche charged was intended, the dismantling of the state intelligence and security apparatus in the name of a "democracy" bought and paid for by George Soros, is handing the country back to narcoterrorism.

Less than three days before President George W. Bush's scheduled visit there, a car bomb exploded at 10:45 p.m. March 20 in a shopping mall directly across from the U.S. Embassy in Lima, Peru, killing nine, and wounding at least 30 others. The explosion set off a shockwave of 300-meter radius, knocking out the windows of a nearby hotel where many of Bush's large security advance team were already lodging. Some three hours later, an emergency was declared around the Hotel Marriott, where Bush is to stay, after an abandoned car was noticed. (Apparently, a false alarm.)

No group took responsibility for the car bombing, the first in many years in Peru. Unnamed U.S. intelligence officials and a former Peruvian anti-terror chief, Gen. John Caro, told the media they believed the attack to be the work of Sendero Luminoso ("Shining Path"). Sendero, reduced to a few holdouts in the jungle by the Fujimori government, has been reactivating its networks under the Toledo government, particularly in the coca-growing regions.

That the bombing could occur where it did, and under supposedly top security conditions, is a devastating indictment of the Toledo government, which is held up by the Bush team (among many others) as a model of how free trade and "reformist democracy" bring stability. The exact opposite is true.

One wonders about the wisdom of the security officials and others who permitted President Bush to go ahead with his visit to Lima March 23, going into such an extraordinarily dangerous situation.

Assassination of Colombian Archbishop Shakes the Country

The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Cali, Colombia was assassinated at close range on the evening of March 16, as he left a church after celebrating a wedding mass. So far, no group has claimed responsibility for the murder of Archbishop Isaias Duarte Cancino, but the Archbishop was an outspoken opponent of the drug trade and narcoterrorists of all ideologies. Right before Colombia's March 10 election, he had issued a call for Colombians to vote against anyone involved in the drug trade, be they left or rightwing.

The murder of the Archbishop as he left a church in one of Colombia's biggest cities, has shaken the country, and the Roman Catholic Church generally. In his address to pilgrims in St. Peter's Square March 17, Pope John Paul II called the murder "barbaric," and said this "generous and brave pastor" had "paid the highest price for his energetic defense of human life, his firm opposition to all types of violence, and his dedication to the social good."

President Andres Pastrana presided over an emergency security council meeting in Cali, and announced a reward for information leading to the capture of the authors of the crime. The Mayor of Cali, John Maro Rodriguez, said Colombia had hit "rock bottom" with this murder, and added that it is therefore important to do more than capture the killers (described as two 20-year-olds)--it is necessary to identify who ordered the killing.

U.S. Government Indicts FARC Members for Drug-Trafficking

In a move that signals the ongoing shift of the Bush Administration toward recognizing the threat of narcoterrorism, the U.S. government on March 18 indicted three members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), including the head of its 16th Front, for drug-trafficking. Indicted were Tomas Molina Caracas (alias "El Negro Acacio"), head of the 16th Front, and six others, three of them Brazilian nationals. Only one of the indicted is in custody: Luiz Fernando da Costa, known by his mafia nickname, "Fernandinho Beira Mar," who is jailed in Brazil. The U.S. is requesting the capture and extradition of the rest (all of whom are believed to be in Colombia), along with the forfeiture of all proceeds of their trafficking.

Attorney General John Ashcroft, who made the annnouncement with Drug Enforcement Administration Asa Hutchison at his side, made clear that these indictments are a hit at the FARC as a whole, not just the specific individuals named:

"Today's indictment charges leaders of the FARC not as revolutionaries or freedom-fighters, but as drug-traffickers. The world's largest producer of cocaine and the source of 90% of the cocaine Americans consume is Colombian. For the past two decades, the FARC has controlled large areas of Colombia's eastern and southern lowlands and rain forest, the primary coca cultivation and cocaine-processing regions in the country. Today's indictment strikes at the heart of the terrorism/drug-trafficking nexus by charging that members of the FARC created a, quote, 'safe haven' for drug-traffickers in Colombia." Their cocaine was exchanged for weapons.

According to the indictment, Ashcroft continued, "from their base in Barranco Minas ... the 16th Front processed cocaine, collected cocaine from other FARC fronts, and sold it to international drug-traffickers for payment in currency, weapons and equipment. Molina and his co-conspirators loaded airplanes with cocaine in Barranco Minas," many of these loads destined for the United States.

The FARC indictment came off a multi-year operation ("Operation Black Cat") involving U.S., Brazilian, and Colombian forces. Collaboration between these three nations was key to the arrest of Luiz da Costa, the "Pablo Escobar of Brazil," in April 2001; he is key to the case against the FARC. It also led to the seizure of documents which proved that the drug business is "led and managed" by the FARC, "under the leadership of its secretariat."

The Colombian military turned the documents seized in Operation Black Cat over to U.S. Justice Department officials.

LaRouche Associate in Colombia Endorses Gen. Bedoya

Maximiliano Londono, head of the Colombian branch of the Ibero-American Solidarity Movement, Lyndon LaRouche's associates in Ibero-America, issued a statement March 19, calling on Colombian patriots to support Gen. (retd) Harold Bedoya in the Presidential round of elections, scheduled for May. Londono, who serves as Bedoya's economic adviser, gave the following reasons why Bedoya should be supported:

*Bedoya was one of the first to recognize and denounce the FARC as the "Third Cartel" of cocaine.

*Bedoya has denounced the alliance of Wall Street with the narcoterrorists, which is captured in the infamous photograph of the "Grasso Abrazo," showing New York Stock Exchange head Richard Grasso, who had travelled to the FARC-controlled demilitarized zone, embracing the FARC's so-called "Commander" Raul Reyes; the purpose of Grasso's trip was to coordinate "mutual investments."

*Bedoya has denounced the IMF for wanting to include drug crops as part of the Gross National Product, and for imposing austerity policies that are destroying Colombia and the world.

*Bedoya proposes great infrastructure, agricultural, and industrial development projects to reactivate our economy, and recognizes the need to reorganize the international financial system, as LaRouche has proposed.

Peruvian Daily Prints EIR Column on Narcoterror and Bankers

"War against Narco-Communism: the Grasso Factor" was the headline of the column by EIR correspondent Sara Madueno published on March 6 in Peru's largest-circulation daily, Expreso.

"If there really exists the political will in the Colombian and U.S. governments to end the narcoterrorism of the FARC and others," she wrote, "then the war against it should not be waged only upon the military battlefield. It is the Bush government's responsibility to attack the FARC's principal protectors, who are not in Colombia, but in the United States itself: on Wall Street. The FARC could not have become the largest cocaine cartel in the world, nor the principal narcoterrorist force in the Americas, without the support--political, financial, and military--of the financiers from Wall Street and London, who are carrying out a new Opium War against all the Americas. If this support is cut, and adequate support is given to Colombia's own Armed Forces, this country could crush the FARC."

Expreso, which at the end of last year had been running weekly columns by EIR's correspondent, began running occasional columns again on Feb. 8, with an article on LaRouche's call for the United States, and the rest of the world's nations, to renew the fight to "Continue the American Revolution!" as the way out of the present world crisis.

Bush Says 'No, No, No, No' to Sending Troops to Colombia

Contrary to the implication left by Attorney General John Ashcroft during his March 18 press conference on the FARC indictments (see above), President Bush took a strong stand when asked by a Telemundo interviewer March 21, if we are closer to seeing U.S. troops in Colombia. "No, no, no, no," the President said. "I don't see any role beyond advising and training," he said. The U.S. "will help [the Colombians] help themselves," in fighting the terrorists--Bush cited the FARC by name--which have taken over half the country.

The Administration has not yet officially requested a change in current Congressional rules on aid to Colombia, to permit the aid to be used in counter-terrorist operations.

Monterrey 'Development' Conference Means No Such Thing

The United Nations International Conference on Financing of Development, held in Monterrey, Mexico between March 18 and 22, purported to launch a "new compact for global development." In fact, the "new compact" rested on two rotten principles which will make the situation for developing (and other) countries much worse: first, the demand for an expansion of free trade, and elimination of barriers against exports from the world's poor countries (despite the recent U.S. decision to impose tariffs on steel); and second, the launching of a series of outright grants to poor countries, contingent on a new set of conditionalities such as "transparency, good governance, human rights, and the rule of law."

Fifty heads of state came together at this conference to agree on the "consensus draft" outlining these principles. The keynote, of course, was struck by U.S. President George W. Bush, who laid out the U.S. contribution as a "Millennium Challenge Account" of $5-$10 billion (over three years, 2004-06); the U.S. contribution in the year 2006, an additional $5 billion over current U.S. donation levels, is a major increase for the generally pathetic amount of U.S. foreign aid, at present at $10-11 billion/year. But this money, Bush made clear, will be gained by "competition between countries to put the right policies and programs in place," White House officials said, particularly policies of free trade ("economic freedom") and "good governance."

Argentina Is Bowing Down Before the IMF Again

The bankrupt Argentine government is still desperately seeking to propitiate the International Monetary Fund, in hopes of getting international approval, and a bailout which has not even been promised. Meanwhile, the country's economic situation worsens by the day, with bank accounts still frozen, and consumption, production, and the peso dropping like stones.

In response to IMF pressure, President Eduardo Duhalde has now promised to change Argentine law in order to protect bankers from the prosecutions for capital flight and other illegal activity, which they are now undergoing. The IMF had demanded these changes, in the name of "juridical security."

Secondly, the government has let it be known that it intends to "reverse the default" which had been announced last December, and resume debt payments later in the year. According to Argentine newspapers of March 12, Finance Ministry officials fantasize that if an agreement with the Fund is signed by April--the IMF made clear this isn't likely--they will move to the second phase of the debt swap begun by former Finance Minister Domingo Cavallo, this time with foreign creditors, with a write-down possibly as high as 50%. The idea is then to launch an international "road show" to present foreign creditors with a variety of options for debt repayment. "Before the end of the year, therefore, Argentina will have abandoned the default," the Finance Ministry blithely predicts.

EUROPEAN NEWS DIGEST

Lyndon LaRouche Holds Meetings in Milan

American economist and Democratic Party Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon LaRouche held public meetings, and met with Italian legislators and businessmen, in Milan, Italy March 21-22. On March 21, he was guest speaker at a VIP dinner organized by Lombard regional legislator Luciano Valaguzza and attended by about 100 select representatives from political, business, and professional circles in the Lombardy region. March 22, he met with the presidency of the Lombardy regional parliament, and with a delegation of regional legislators, from the government and the opposition both.

Britain's Military Leaders: War on Iraq Doomed To Fail

According to an article ("Army Fear Over Blair War Plans") in the March 17 issue of the London Observer, "Britain's military leaders issued a stark warning to Tony Blair last night that any war against Iraq is doomed to fail." According to the British paper, the military leaders insisted that such a war "would lead to the loss of lives for little political gain," and "The leaders urged 'extreme caution' over any moves towards war, saying servicemen faced being bogged down in a perilous open-ended commitment. The sources warned that Arab countries were likely to rebel over any Western attack on Iraq without a Middle East peace deal. Failing that, the sources said Saudi Arabia was unlikely to allow its bases to be used against Saddam Hussein. Defense sources said that, without Saudi cooperation, it would be difficult to launch a sustained attack by American and British forces."

In the coming days, "Senior armed forces figures will warn the Prime Minister that without a leader-in-waiting to take over from Saddam, there is little chance of any successful move to overthrow the Iraqi dictator. There is no potential successor to Saddam that the West and Iraq's Arab neighbors could accept," and any British military involvement in Afghanistan would be an extended one. The Observer asserted that increased military strikes are the only option being seriously considered by President George W. Bush, and reported that it had received leaks of British Ministry of Defence papers prepared for Chief of the General Staff Gen. Michael Walker, which show that the armed forces' budget is by no means enough for what is being demanded in terms of present and future deployments.

British Defence Secretary: We Would Use Our Nukes

In testimony March 20 before a defense committee of the British Parliament, British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon identified Iraq, Iran, Libya, and North Korea as "states of concern," and warned that rogue nations could be confident that if Britain is attacked with weapons of mass destruction, she will be willing to use her nuclear weapons in her own defense.

Speaking to a House of Commons that was already in an uproar over Hoon's announcement that Britain would be sending 1,700 additional British troops to Afghanistan for offensive military operations, Hoon openly mooted British use of nuclear weapons against Iraq, and possibly against other so-called "states of concern," such as Libya, North Korea, and Iran. He blurted that "dictators" like Saddam Hussein "can be absolutely confident that in the right conditions (sic), we would be willing to use our nuclear weapons."

Meanwhile, according to British press reports of March 18, British Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan-Smith (who is very close to the American Enterprise Institute/New Atlantic Initiative mafia in Washington) has demanded 100% British support for an American attack on Iraq. He charged that the European Union, by withholding such enthusiasm for that attack, is busy "gazing at its political navel."

Support for Duncan-Smith comes from the Tory leader's guru, the Iron Lady: former Conservative Party leader and Prime Minister Baroness Margaret Thatcher. In her new book, Statecraft, Thatcher describes the European Union as one of the biggest mistakes of the 20th century, and argues that Britain should leave it; this she motivates by asserting that the most of the problems the world has faced, including Marxism and Nazism, come from Europe. Instead of the EU, she suggests, Britain should join a North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (a new NAFTA, expanded from the North American Free Trade Agreement). Her writings are being serialized in Rupert Murdoch's Times of London.

Iron Lady Rusty, Retires From Public Life, Cites 'Health'

Baroness Margaret Thatcher, aged 76, has been told by her doctors to sit down and shut up. She has retired from public speaking and public life, reportedly after suffering a number of small strokes.

Thatcher's spokesman said that, "After thorough investigation involving a number of tests, her doctors have told her that these [small strokes] can neither be predicted nor prevented. They have therefore told her to cut back her program at once and in particular to avoid the undue strains that public speaking places her in."

Germany Won't Support Attack on Iraq Unless UN Backs It

When briefing the heads of the parliamentary groups on his government's position on Iraq March 18, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder did not state full support for an American attack on Baghdad; he said that Germany would not take part in any military operation "unless it were officially mandated by the UN Security Council." He saw no indication at present for such a mandate, Schroeder added.

Schroeder also stated, however, that German Fox tanks now stationed in Kuwait will remain there, even if the U.S. goes ahead against Iraq unilaterally. (The tanks have the capability to detect use of atomic, biological, and chemical agents.) The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung quoted Schroeder as saying, "No one could take responsibility for German-American relations for the next 30-50 years, if the tanks were withdrawn and it then actually came to the deployment of ABC weapons"--in other words, if Germany withdrew its troops and tanks from Kuwait, and then the Iraqis in fact used ABC weapons against the American troops.

European Political Weakness Exposed at Barcelona Summit

The tone of the resolution on the Middle East which was passed by the European Union foreign ministers on March 15, on the eve of the EU's Barcelona summit, was unprecedented in its harshness, calling for a complete withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces from Palestinian territory and for an end to assassinations.

But the next day the same EU foreign ministers failed to decide on a joint EU proposal for peace in Mideast. The proposals, notably from Italy and France, for an economic development package for Israel and Palestine, were turned down, after an intervention by British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and German Foreign Minister Oskar Fischer. Straw and Fischer argued that discussing a genuine EU proposal of this kind made no sense in the absence of a ceasefire, and that for the time being, EU support for the Mitchell and Tenet plans is sufficient.

Thus, Europe did not make use of a potentially decisive flank, to intervene productively in the Mideast crisis.

Also ambiguous was the European position on Iraq: British Prime Minister Tony Blair and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder reportedly signalled to the Americans that Europe might support a limited military strike on Iraq, should Iraq refuse to let a new UN weapons inspection team arrive and do its work. An Italian initiative for a strong European "no" to any military strike on Iraq was blocked at the heads-of-government meeting in Barcelona.

Assassinations in Italy, Spain; New Terror in Europe

Marco Biagi, a top consultant to the Italian Labor Ministry and to past Labor Ministry staffs, on March 19 was shot to death in front of his house; the bullet was said to be from a gun associated with a killing three years ago, attributed to the Red Brigades. The two killers escaped by motorcycle, according to witnesses. Biagi was close professionally and personally to Romano Prodi, the President of the European Commission and the former Prime Minister of Italy.

Just a few days before, on March 14, the Italian Security Services had warned that terrorism would reemerge soon in Italy, targetting particularly labor officials. (The last Red Brigades victim, killed in May 1999, was Sergio d'Antona, a key consultant to the CGIL trade union.)

A day earlier, on March 18, Belgian politician Alain van der Biest was murdered; and on March 21, Spain was hit with terror when a Socialist Party politician, Juan Priede Perez, was shot dead in the Basque province of Guipuzcoa, killed by two members of the Basque terrorist/separatist ETA. Perez was the third Socialist Party official murdered by ETA in the past month. In addition, two Socialist youth leaders have been injured by ETA letter bombs in recent weeks.

El Pais also reported that on March 21, a spectacular fire engulfed the office of the Spanish representative to the EU in Brussels; Spain is currently holding the EU Presidency, and has just been hosting the EU summit in Barcelona. The six-story building housing the Spanish representative in Brussels, was destroyed in the fire; one Belgian policemen died, and two were badly injured.

These incidents may point to the beginning of a "strategy of tension" campaign directed against Europe, whose aim may be to intimidate and paralyze European politics at a moment when Europe could be articulating a firm opposition, and clear alternative, to the Anglo-American war plans.

Italian Official Warns: Terror Resurgence in Balkans

Italian Defense Minister Antonio Martino stated March 19 that a new wave of terrorism could emerge in the Balkans, targetting the multinational military contingents deployed there. Martino noted that out of 10,000 Italian troops engaged in foreign missions, 8,400 are in the Balkans, in particular in Macedonia.

To Understand Huntington, Consider Hitler and Schmitt

The only way to understand Samuel Huntington is to read Adolf Hitler and Nazi legal theorist Carl Schmitt, said Dr. Arno Gruen in his remarks to a March 16-17 conference on the "Kampf um Kulturen" ("Clash over Cultures"), at the Evangelical Academy in Tutzing, Bavaria. Gruen, veteran psychiatrist in Zurich, stunned the audience when, raising Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" writings, he affirmed that the only way to comprehend the Harvard professor, is by going back to the writings and speeches of Hitler and Schmitt.

Dr. Gruen stressed that the critical issue, was the "creation of an enemy." Whereas Hitler created enemies on the basis of "genetic" parameters, Huntington does so on the basis of "culture," he charged. In both cases, there is the belief that one cannot have an identity without having a "hate object," and there is the submerging of "individuality" in a mass that becomes this object of hate. The main difference between Hitler and Huntington, he argued, is that the latter is more "abstract."

Dr. Gruen added that more insight can be gained by looking at the ideas of "Nazi ideologue Carl Schmitt," who insisted that "knowing the enemy, is the first step toward self-consciousness." Although Gruen didn't elaborate this in his speech, it is well-documented that Schmitt came to this notion, in significant part, through his adaptation of the ideas of Friedrich Nietzsche.

RUSSIA AND EASTERN EUROPE NEWS DIGEST

Leading Russian Daily Forecasts Fall of 'American Empire'

In a lengthy article on March 19, the widely read Russian daily Pravda targetted the emerging "Roman Empire" mentality in Washington, with a stress on the conclusion that a new imperial United States would go down the same way as the Roman Empire, or worse. Parallel coverage in the Chinese People's Liberation Army daily paper, which argued that the purpose in the leaking of the Nuclear Posture Review (see UNITED STATES), was to psychologically intimidate the world's nations, led Lyndon LaRouche to note that some circles are beginning to understand aspects of what's going on in Washington, D.C.

After noting that the U.S. government is permitting the physical infrastructure and living standards of the average American to deteriorate, Pravda says: "As America wages World War III agains its 21st-century barbarians--the Taliban and al-Qaeda (the Visigoths and Huns?)--in a war that well could see the use of nuclear weapons, the American Empire seems doomed to duplicate the concluding events of 476 AD."

The article goes on to quote from the CIA's World Fact Book 2001, as warning that "long-term problems [for the United States] include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical costs of an aging population, sizeable trade deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups." Widespread poverty is one of the big domestic problems of the United States, and the collapse of infrastructure is another, the article noted, referencing the March 2001 survey by the American Society of Civil Engineers, as saying that "America has been seriously underinvesting in its infrastructure for decades."

"Historians will write that the American Empire, in its final days, experienced many of the phenomena that plagued the Roman Empire," claims Pravda. "Roman senators formed their own wealthy class of landowners who rarely attended Senate meetings but enjoyed the privileges of their office. Consider that most U.S. Senators and Representatives spend most of their time outside of Washington, D.C. soliciting contributions from corporations." The Enron links deep into the Bush Administration exemplify that, according to the Pravda article, which concluded by likening John Ashcroft's fundamentalist madness (shown, according to Pravda, by his morning prayer breakfast sessions), to the state of mind of the mad Roman Emperor Nero, who played his lyre while Rome burned in fires he had set. Nero "would have found comfort and friendship in such a bizarre behavior" as Ashcroft's, Pravda asserts.

The quotes come from the English-language website of Pravda.ru.

More Signs of Russian Resistance to WTO

Speaking on the eve of the latest round of talks in Geneva on Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organization, Maxim Medvedkov, Russia' chief trade negotiator and Deputy Economics Minister, said his country will keep high import duties to protect domestic car and aircraft manufacturers, but will open up its banking and insurance sector, and lower agriculture subsidies.

"We understand that we have to pay a price for [WTO] accession, but our partners understand that we'll never pay a price that would be too high for our people and for our industry," he said.

On March 21, Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov went so far as to say, "I do not exclude that we will need to take temporary protectionist measures" to help the auto industry. The Cabinet meeting held that day heard Minister of Industry, Science and Technology Ilya Klebanov present a proposal for new tariffs on foreign car imports, which calls for a 25% tariff, over three years, on foreign cars up to seven years old; followed by a 35% tariff for the next five years, and then a reduction of the tariff by 5% per year.

Putin Turns Attention to Economic and Scientific Policy

On March 15, Russian President Vladimir Putin met with Russian Communist Party head Gennadi Zyuganov, together with a group of his political associates who are economists: Dr. Sergei Glazyev, who chairs the State Duma's Committee on Economic Policy; Yuri Maslyukov, who was First Deputy Prime Minister under Yevgeni Primakov and now chairs the Duma's Committee on Industry; and Academicians Nikolai Petrakov and Dmitri Lvov. (The Duma is the lower house of the Russian Parliament.)

According to a report in Novyye Izvestiya of March 21, Putin agreed with the economists that earnings from the exploitation of Russia's natural resources should benefit the nation, not just the companies that control their extraction and export. This was the topic raised by Academician Lvov, during Glazyev's June 29, 2001 hearings on the defense of the national economy during a worldwide economic crash, after Lyndon LaRouche's keynote testimony at those hearings. It was then taken up in depth in LaRouche's essay, "What Is 'Primitive Accumulation'?" (EIR, Aug. 17, 2001). Putin asked the economists to draft legislative initiatives to "enable him to solve this problem."

Sergei Glazyev presented the President with the left political bloc's "alternative socio-economic program," which includes a discussion of the implications of Russia's joining the World Trade Organization. According to a bulletin on his website, Glazyev termed the discussion "constructive," adding that the proposals handed to Putin emphasize a state industrial investment policy, among other development priorities for the Russian economy.

Then, on March 20, Putin spoke to a joint session of the Security Council, the Presidium of the State Council, and his recently commissioned Council on Science and Advanced Technologies, on the question of a national policy for science. The new Council presented a draft "Basic Principles of Scientific and Technological Policy," which Putin welcomed as shifting the discussion of this vital policy area to a higher level than the lip-service it has received in government decrees during the past decade. Putin said, "The choice of a path for the development of our country's science is a choice of the prospects we have as a nation."

Judging by Putin's speech to the meeting, the discussion went into detail on frontier areas of research, the organization of science, and the relationship of science to the economy. Putin complained that "these days, everybody advocates the pathway of innovation, but nothing has actually been done." He also pointed up real constraints, such as the attrition of scientific manpower. Since 1991, Putin said, Russia has lost half its scientific personnel, who have either emigrated, or turned to other work in order to survive.

These discussions occur in the context of the broad recognition of the fact that the revival which the Russian economy began in late 1998, has run its course, and that new measures must be taken to avert new disasters.

Central Asian Republics Hit by Unrest

A protest rally in support of an imprisoned opposition member of the national Parliament, and other factors of dissent, led to violent clashes between a mass of up to 5,000 and police forces in Kerben, in the Ak-Suysky district of Kyrgyzstan, on March 18, according to RIA Novosti. Fifty policemen and 10 protesters were wounded, and five protesters shot dead, in the riot.

The protest rally called for the release of Parliament member Azimbek Beknazarov, whose investigations into embezzlement in government agencies led to his arrest by the government in January. It should be added that the recent American political and financial support for the Kyrgyz leadership has not made the latter more popular among the population--which, even if one takes into account aspects of targetted destabilization of the Kyrgyz government, may explain the explosion of rage and violence, during the rally. The government had to rush in reinforcements from other parts of the country, to regain control in Kerben.

A similarly unstable situation is reported from Uzbekistan, where the food supply for sizeable parts of the population is not guaranteed. In a spectacular move, the U.S. on March 20 okayed $20 million for emergency rice aid to Uzbekistan, doing so with explicit reference to the fact that the Uzbek government is a crucial ally of the Americans in Central Asia these days.

Russian Defense Minister States Some Clear Truths

Sergei Ivanov, the Defense Minister of Russia, successfully navigated Tim Russert's "Meet the Press" television program on March 17, by evading the host's confrontational traps, and telling a few shocking truths. Putting on a good deal of charm, and speaking in English, Ivanov reported that he was optimistic about strategic weapons talks between the U.S. and Russia, and chose not to pick any arguments with Bush Administration policy.

But when asked by Russert about U.S. "progress" in Afghanistan, he was more blunt. First, he indicated that the "successes" there were the result of a coalition effort, including help from the Russians. Second, he stated, contrary to the nonsense coming from many press sources, that, as Soviet experience had shown, it would take years for the networks of the Taliban and al-Qaeda to be cleared up.

On Iraq, Ivanov took the approach that, before talking of confrontation, the international community should determine the facts: i.e., whether Saddam Hussein actually had weapons of mass destruction, or not. Then the course of action could be chosen. On Iran, the Defense Minister stressed that Russia was only participating in one project, the Bushehr nuclear plant, and that this was under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision. There is absolutely no danger of fissile material having been sold, or otherwise smuggled, out of Russia, he insisted.

AFRICA NEWS DIGEST

Blair Kicks Zimbabwe Out of Commonwealth for a Year

British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the British establishment are in a fit of rage over the recent election in Zimbabwe, in which President Robert Mugabe defeated British-backed opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai. Refusing to accept the sovereignty of Zimbabwe, and of its election process, Blair has gone on a rampage, succeeding in suspending Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth for one year--having armtwisted Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria, and Thabo Mbeki of South Africa to go along with the suspension, albeit without much enthusiasm. Unfortunately, the U.S. State Department, as is so often the case regarding Africa, has followed Britain's lead and joined the chorus of condemnation of Zimbabwe.

Both Obasanjo and Mbeki expressed their desire to continue working with the Mugabe government, which they recognize as legitimate, and to support Mugabe's controversial land reform policy. Great pressure was applied to force the two Presidents to accept the Commonwealth suspension, most especially the threat by Blair to cut off funds for Mbeki's and Obabsanjo's cherished "New Partnership for Africa's Development" (NEPAD). This ill-fated initiative, also backed by Presidents Abdelaziz Bouteflika of Algeria and Abdoulaye of Senegal, is nothing but another attempt by the dying Western financial system to extend its "free-trade/globalization" reach into Africa.

Essentially, Blair told the leaders of South Africa and Nigeria, that NEPAD would be dead in the water at the upcoming meeting of the Group of Eight (U.S., Britain, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, plus Russia), unless they went along with the Zimbabwe suspension. It is the adoption of the axioms of free trade by African leaders themselves, which is their weakness, and which allows them to be vulnerable to Blair's blackmail.

The one-year suspension of Zimbabwe, which is largely symbolic, was orchestrated for Prince Charles, and Blair, to enable them to save face after their tirades against the Commonwealth nations for not condemning in advance the Presidential election of Mugabe--despite the fact that the Organization of Africa Unity (OAU), SADC Ministerial Task Force, and numerous other nations, including Nigeria and South Africa, have accepted the election results.

SPLA Chairman John Garang in D.C., Blasts Sudan Government

John Garang, the chairman of the SPLA rebel movement in southern Sudan, arrived in Washington, D.C. recently and, at a March 15 luncheon, repeatedly labelled the government of Sudan in Khartoum, the "Taliban" of Africa.

Garang and his delegation will be in the U.S. for about three weeks, after spending time in London, where Garang met with Clare Short, Minister of Overseas Development, and Foreign Minister Jack Straw.

At the March 15 luncheon in Washington, Garang reported that he had met with Secretary of State Colin Powell that morning and was going to the White House that afternoon. His accompanying delegation of about dozen included Steve Wondu, the SPLA representative in the U.S., and Riek Machar, to whom Garang deferred at various points in his remarks. Congressman Donald Payne (D-N.J.), the leading advocate on Capitol Hill for the destruction of Sudan as a nation, appeared at the luncheon for ten minutes to show his support.

Garang's line was that Khartoum was frightened by the response of the Bush Administration to the Sept. 11 attacks, "afraid that they might be treated like the Taliban," and that since then they have been trying to find a way to accommodate the Bush Administration. Clearly Garang et al. are afraid that there is some type of rapprochement between the Khartoum government and the U.S., although Garang said he had "full support" from Powell.

Garang also claimed that the SPLA was working on a three-track approach to peace in Sudan: 1) a negotiated political settlement, which would lead to a "new" Sudan not controlled by the "Islamic" regime; 2) a confederated agreement for an interim period, during which the NDA (the almost-defunct National Democratic Alliance) would be built up as an alternative to the NIF (the National Islamic Front); and 3) "peace through development" for the south of the country, investing in infrastructure for the area controlled by the SPLA, which he claims has a population of 10 million.

Garang said that Sudan's improved relations with the U.S. were basically a sham, that the Khartoum government has not changed, and that they are part of al-Qaeda--and should be treated like the Taliban. He claimed that the Khartoum government still supports Osama bin Laden, who stayed with Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustapha Ismail when he was in Sudan years ago. Garang said that later that afternoon, he would tell the White House that the Khartoum government was a "regime of genocide, a threat to the Sudanese people, Africa, and the Middle East."

However, an aide to Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif) said, with disappointment, that President Bush will not allow introduction of any measures that would prevent oil companies working with Sudan, from raising capital in the U.S. markets.

Gen. Tommy Franks claims Al-Qaeda Presence in Somalia

According to UN Integrated Regional Information Networks of March 19, Gen. Tommy Franks, head of the U.S. Central Command, continued his tour of the Horn of Africa over the weekend of March 15-17, with visits to Ethiopia and Djibouti. Before arriving in Ethiopia, Franks visited Eritrea and Kenya for talks with top officials on "combatting terror."

In an interview with BBC in Ethiopia, he said: "We have known of links to al-Qaeda in and through Somalia for a considerable period of time." He added that he could not go into specifics, but the U.S. "will not take off the table the possibility of action against countries of concern."

"We are interested in states where there is a history of terrorist networks, training operations and that sort of thing...."

The General stressed that the U.S. has strong relations with Eritrea, Djibouti, Kenya, and Ethiopia, and said they are "very much a part" of the international coalition against terrorism.

ASIA NEWS DIGEST

Afghan War Becomes the Quagmire LaRouche Predicted

From the outset of the Afghanistan campaign, EIR founder Lyndon LaRouche emphasized that this military action would only worsen things in the region, and turn into a quagmire. Anyone who had looked at the history of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979-89) would know that the apparent "victory" of the U.S. forces, achieved by massive bombing and followed by the Taliban/al-Qaeda forces melting away into the environment, would be a pyrrhic one, and followed by a re-emergence of guerrilla war, at latest by spring.

The current upsurge in attacks against U.S. and other troops in Afghanistan, more than illustrates that LaRouche was right.

Even CIA Director George Tenet, and DIA Director Vice-Admiral Thomas R. Wilson, in their testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee March 20, anticipated an increase in "insurgency-type warfare," and anticipated "ongoing power struggles" among the Afghans. Tenet admitted that many al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters get away, saying, "There are many, many points of exit that people in small numbers can get out. We're frustrated that people did get away."

In a column on WorldNetDaily.com, published March 19, noted military columnist Col. (ret.) David Hackworth expressed the same evaluation. "The Vietnam War and the current shootout in Afghanistan have a lot in common--killer terrain, nightmare weather, a determined, irregular foe with years of combat experience. A deadly enough mix without U.S. generals who don't understand guerrilla warfare," wrote Hackworth.

Hackworth says that the first big conventional fight in Afghanistan showed that U.S. troops weren't conditioned for mountain warfare, and were prepared neither to face the conditions they found, nor "to face some of the toughest fighters in the world employing the same timeworn tactics they used to defeat the Soviets and the Brits." When U.S. helicopter gunships came to the rescue, they lost all their ships to enemy fire. "The generals, from the jovial Tommy Franks down to the two-star on the ground, didn't get much right until they shrewdly declared victory and hauled butt away from the bomb craters and their plan that went awry.

"The generals had envisioned sealing the enemy inside a noose and then pounding him with bombs, a tactic that seldom worked in Vietnam and didn't work in Afghanistan this time around," Hackworth says, adding that, "Firepower's never the answer unless battle-ready soldiers are deployed smartly to back it up." He also notes that U.S. intelligence was bad, and that the U.S. should not have relied on its Afghan allies, "who left us in the lurch."

"Amazing that none of the brass seems to have bothered to dust off copies of the Soviet-Afghan after-action reports," Hackworth concludes. "In Vietnam, we were also too arrogant to learn from those who failed before us--in that instance, the French. I hope our generals learn fast and get it right in future battles."

Financial Times Pinpoints Taliban/al-Qaeda Tactics

Following the announcement that 1,700 fresh British troops are to be deployed in Afghanistan, the Financial Times of March 19 reported how the Taliban and the al-Qaeda are using the same tactics as the mujahideen used against the Russians, to devastating effect. The FT writes:

"It is now clear that when the Taliban fled Kabul, the Afghan capital, and Kandahar ... thousands of Afghan fighters, and the al-Qaeda fighters who are mostly non-Afghan, fled to the mountains. This was a tactic that the Russians struggled unsuccessfully to deal with in their 10-year struggle to defeat the mujahideen in the 1980s."

Charles Heyman, editor of Jane's World Armies, said 10,000 fighters may have slipped into the mountains. "They will take a hell of a lot of sifting. but if Afghanistan is going to be stable, they've got to be sifted."

'A Freezing Wind' in U.S.-China Relations

That is how the Peoples Daily of March 20 characterized the way in which U.S.-Chinese relations are developing, referencing their evaluation that U.S. actions, particularly on relations with Taiwan, "run counter to the spirit and principles of the three joint communiques between China and the United States."

The degree of tension is indicated by the fact that China has made formal representations of protest to U.S. Ambassador Clark T. Randt three times, since March 7 of this year. These protests concerned both the "leak" of the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review, and the provocative meeting held between U.S. government officials, led by U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and the Taiwan Defense Minister, at a recent conference in Florida.

"People cannot but ask: To where does the U.S. side intend to lead China-U.S. relations?" Vice Foreign Minister Li Zhao-XingLi was quoted as saying in the March 18 China Daily. There are reports that the U.S. is considering allowing another Taiwanese defense official to visit, and could agree to a tour by former President Lee Teng-hui. While China has never interfered in U.S. internal affairs and has not done anything to harm the American people, "At the same time, we must let the handful of political paranoids know that the Chinese people will never yield to any outside intimidation," Li said.

In light of these tensions, China will almost certainly cancel the planned visit of its Navy to the United States later this year, according to the military-linked Global Times on March 19. It has been confirmed that Chinese ships will not dock at Portsmouth Navy Yard, as previously planned.

U.S. Calls for Multilateral Military Exercise in Philippines--Targetting China

In a move further confirming the warning from Lyndon LaRouche, on a Feb. 16 international webcast, that the U.S. military deployment into live combat situations in the southern Philippines was part of a broader policy of encircling China with U.S. military troops and bases, Philippines National Security Adviser Roilo Golez reported on March 22 that the government is studying what "framework" to use for merging the forthcoming Philippine-U.S. Balikatan 02-2 military exercise in Central Luzon, with a larger exercise involving several other countries, as the United States has requested. Golez described the proposed "Team Challenge" multinational exercise as "a possibility and a good measure to promote regional harmony," according to the Philippines Inquirer, the leading establishment newspaper in the country.

Golez, who has worked closely with anti-China members in the U.S. Congress, said that the exercises would "not be targetted at any particular country." However, other unnamed officials told the Inquirer that the target was China. One official said the exercise was "a counterfoil to the supposed threat posed by China in the region. This would involve invasion scenarios, with China as the aggressor-nation, and responses to a strong China move in the disputed Spratlys territory."

Golez, in 2000, arranged for Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), who is still fighting the Vietnam War, to fly over the contested islands, and discussed a confrontation with China in exchange for used U.S. weapons.

In a letter to Philippines National Security Advisor Angelo Reyes dated Feb. 27, Gen. Diomedio Villanueva, Armed Forces chief of staff, said the United States also wanted to "invite multinational planning augmentation team (MPAT) observers from Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, Singapore, and Thailand." China, of course, is not on the list, in keeping with U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's refusal to allow Chinese observers at any U.S. military exercises.

Of note is the fact that Villanueva also said the U.S. had requested that Korean and Japanese planes "provide lift support to fly U.S. troops and equipment into and out of the country." The effort to draw those two nations into the expanding war policies pursued by the U.S. also reflects the fact, as stated this week by the Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command, Adm. Dennis Blair, to the House Armed Services Committee, that the U.S. military is below-strength, physically, for handling any new operations in the Pacific.

The Balikatan 02-2, scheduled to start next month, will have as many as 2,665 U.S. troops. Ten other U.S.-Filipino "exercises" have been announced for the rest of the year.

The Inquirer reported that political leaders from all sides of the political spectrum are increasingly concerned that "the United States wanted to make the Philippines a staging ground for greater military presence in the Asian region.... The administration may keep referring to year-round war games as 'training exercises,' but this won't disguise the fact that the U.S. military presence is acquiring some permanence."

Communal Tensions in India Are Simmering, Red Hot

Three of the Indian government's coalition parties have called for a ban on the Hindu fundamentalist groups Vishwa Hindu Parish (VHP) and Bajrang Dal, which have been provoking the recent tensions over the building of a Hindu temple on the former site of a Muslim mosque (destroyed by Hindus in the 1990s) in Ayodhya.

The coalition National Democratic Alliance, which is led by Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is made up of 16 parties. The three NDA partners calling for the ban--the Trinamool Congress, Samata Party, and Janata Dal (United)--made their demand in the lower house of the Indian Parliament, the Lok Sabha, on March 18. Both VHP and Bajrang Dal, the two groups for which the ban is sought, were involved in the recent anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat state; both are also part of the BJP, but they have little relation with Prime Minister Vajpayee.

Expressing concern over the groups' role in recent days' violence, D.P. Yadav (Janata Dal-United) said, "Fundamentalism in any form should not be allowed in the country and organizations like Bajrang Dal and the VHP should be banned."

Since the NDA has a very slim majority in the Parliament, any serious demand by any of the coalition members becomes a matter of great concern to the Prime Minister. So far, Prime Minister Vajpayee has not responded. But it is likely that he is feeling the heat. Making it more difficult to resolve the crisis is the fact that India's economic situation has fallen short of expectations, and has led the Prime Minister to say that he will have to take some "unpopular" decisions soon.

U.S. Actions Signal New Troubles with North Korea

Hundreds of thousands of U.S. and South Korean troops on March 21 began their biggest simulated conflict against North Korea since the 1950-1953 Korean War. The lack of a formal treaty to end that conflict has left the Korean peninsula as the world's last Cold War frontier, with nearly 2 million troops combat-ready along the frontier between North and South Korea.

North Korea angrily denounced the exercise as a war provocation.

The maneuver began the day after President Bush announced that he would not certify to Congress that North Korea is in compliance with the 1994 nuclear agreement designed to freeze its nuclear weapons program.

Before the announcement, which had been strongly lobbied for by Bush Administration Arms Control chief John Bolton, Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, advised the Administration that North Korea's performance should be certified unless there is current, credible evidence that the country has breached the terms of the agreement. The most recent testimony from the Administration was that North Korea was in compliance.

THIS WEEK IN HISTORY

March 25-March 31, 1933

This is the week that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced two landmark pieces of emergency legislation: first, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA), and second, the Securities Bill of 1933. Both were baby steps toward the policies of protecting the general welfare which FDR's Administration ultimately fashioned, in that they inserted the Federal government into the process of providing emergency relief (in the case of the FERA), and of supervising the banking industry (in the case of the Securities Act), without providing any enforceable standards, or entitlements.

The FERA was devised to address the fact that local governments had literally run out of money to aid the unemployed, and the destitute. It was intended to provide a pool of money—$500 million, to be precise—that could be disbursed in relief grants to states. In addition, it gave the Federal Relief Administrator, who would be New York's Henry Hopkins, broad supervisory power over the states' use of the grants—a provision that caused a total uproar among those who were still crazy enough to think that the Federal government didn't have to take charge of bringing the country out of depression.

The FERA funds were divided into two types. Half was to be disbursed to states as matching funds, with $1 being given out for every $3 of state money spent for relief during the preceding three months. This was a rather limited form of aid since, obviously, the poorer states would have spent less money for relief, and therefore would be eligible for less in matching funds. The other half was available to be given out wherever the states were unable to meet the requirement of $3 for $1.

FERA spent money for all kinds of necessities—food, clothing, fuel, shelter, and medicine. Administrator Hopkins, who went on to run job-creation programs later in the Roosevelt Administrations (which he greatly preferred), said: "We can only say that out of every dollar entrusted to us for lessening of distress, the maximum amount humanly possible was put into the people's hands. The money, spent honestly and with constant remembrance of its purpose, bought more of courage than it ever bought of goods."

The FERA passed the U.S. Senate in 10 days, and the House over several weeks, going into effect after the President signed it on May 12.

On March 29, Roosevelt sent to Congress his bill for the regulation of the sale of investment securities in interstate commerce. In his message to Congress, Roosevelt continued his attack on the corrupt financial practices of the private banking houses and securities brokerages, as well as the commercial banks, which dealt in securities. The message, which met with virulent attacks by the banking community, said:

"Of course, the Federal Government cannot and should not take any action which might be construed as approving or guaranteeing that newly issued securities are sound in the sense that their value will be maintained so that the properties which they represent will earn profit. There is, however, an obligation upon us to insist that every issue of new securities to be sold in interstate commerce shall be accompanied by full publicity and information, and that no essentially important element attending the issue shall be concealed from the buying public. This proposal adds to the ancient rule of caveat emptor, the further doctrine 'let the seller also beware.' It puts the burden of telling the whole truth on the seller. It should give impetus to honest dealing in securities and thereby bring back public confidence."

The bill introduced in accordance with this message, was called the Thompson Bill, and it was introduced a few days later. It gave the Federal Trade Commission power to supervise issues of new securities, required each new stock issue to be accompanied by a statement of relevant financial information, and made company directors civilly and criminally liable for misrepresentation.

The political climate was favorable to the introduction of this bill, because, from January on, the Congress had been sponsoring hearings on corruption in the banking sector, in particular an investigation of the New York commercial banks. Roosevelt has approved the Senate Banking Committee's hiring as its special counsel Ferdinand Pecora, a fiery New York former District Attorney who had a reputation for fearlessness. Pecora stated that it was his belief that usury was a sin. While an Assistant District Attorney, Pecora had earned the wrath of both Tammany Hall and Wall Street for his probes of bank corruption and rackets, and was passed over. In 1930, he was told that his services were no longer needed, and he went into private practice.

In the opening hearings on the commercial bankers, Pecora had established that some of the most powerful bankers, such as Charles Mitchell of National City, and Albert Wiggin of Chase, had lied to their shareholders, had manipulated stocks for their own benefit, and had made and taken profits beyond anything reasonable, without so much as blushing. Pecora had refused to allow them to be vague or evasive, and with his questioning, often made them look ridiculous. The public, led by Roosevelt's speech on "the moneychangers" who had destroyed the nation for their profit, now had some concrete "evidence" to sink its teeth into.

In early March, Pecora fired off a series of detailed and embarrassing questions about the operations of the House of Morgan and its relationship to other banks, corporations, and "clients," which its counsel, former Democratic Party 1924 Presidential candidate and former Ambassador to Great Britain John W. Davis, declared to be outrageous. But Morgan was forced ultimately to answer the questions, and then to submit to hearings in May and June.

Pecora and his staff spent most of the months of February, March, and April in New York, working from early morning until 6 at night in the offices of J.P. Morgan and Company, pouring over its records of financial dealings since the war (World War I).

In this climate, the President was able to provide enough pressure on the Senate and the House of Representatives to pass this first step toward banking regulation. It was a "done deal" by the end of May.

All rights reserved © 2002 EIRNS

top of page

home page