In this issue:

Blair Echoes Ignatieff's Soft-Imperialist Line in Speech to Diplomats

Growing Anti-War Rebellion Among Labour MPs

European Leaders Reaffirm Commitment to War Prevention

German Social Dems' New 'Mittelstand Offensive' Doesn't Meet the Need

Last-Minute Settlement To Avert Public-Sector Strike in Germany

German Chancellor Targetted by Media Psychological Warfare Campaign

Key Ministry Posts in Poland Shuffled

From Volume 2, Issue Number 2 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published Jan. 13, 2003

WESTERN EUROPEAN NEWS DIGEST

Blair Echoes Ignatieff's Soft-Imperialist Line in Speech to Diplomats

According to the London Guardian of Jan. 8, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in his speech to the extraordinary gathering of British ambassadors in London on Jan. 7, echoed the "new [Anglo-American] imperium" line put forward recently in the New York Times magazine by Michael Ignatieff. Blair presented his vision of Britain's "place in the world," as the "unifier around a consensus" as to what the "new world order" should be. Blair began by reviewing Britain's role in the past, as an imperial power in the 19th century, and, after that, as a great power through World War II.

Blair listed Britain's strengths: "Part of the EU; and G-8; permanent member of the UN Security Council; the closest ally of the U.S.; our brilliant armed forces; membership of NATO; the reach given by our past; the Commonwealth; the links with Japan, China, Russia and ties of history with virtually every nation in Asia and Latin America; our diplomacy—I do believe our foreign service is the best there is; our language."

He went on to identify the threats facing the globalized world: "It means that the world today has one overriding common interest: to make progress with order; to ensure that change is accompanied by stability. The common threat is chaos. That threat can come from terrorism, producing a train of events that pits nations against each other. It can come through irresponsible and repressive states gaining access to WMD (weapons of mass destruction). It can come through the world splitting into rival poles of power; the U.S. in one corner; anti-U.S. forces in another. It can come from pent-up feelings of injustice and alienation, from the divisions between the world's richer and its poorer nations."

After the Berlin Wall came down, there was a call for a new world order. "But a new order presumes a new consensus. It presumes a shared agenda and a global partnership to do it." Britain is "to play a role as a unifier around a consensus for achieving both our goals and those of the wider world." In this, Britain should be guided by principles of foreign policy: "First, we should remain the closest ally of the U.S., and as allies influence them to continue broadening their agenda.... [I]t is massively in our self-interest to remain close allies." Britain should broaden the U.S.'s agenda, to include the Middle East peace process, global poverty, global warming, the importance of the UN.

This doesn't mean Britain will blindly follow the U.S. lead—for instance, into war: "I would never commit British troops to a war I thought was wrong or unnecessary ... the price of influence is that we do not leave the U.S. to face the tricky issues alone...." North Korea is such an issue, and the Iraq crisis should not detract from it. The real danger is that WMD end up in terrorists' hands.

As for the immediate crisis: "When as with Iraq, the international community through the UN makes a demand on a regime to disarm itself of WMD and that regime refuses, that regime threatens us. It may be uncomfortable, there will be the usual plethora of conspiracy theories about it; but unless the world takes a stand on this issue of WMD and sends out a clear signal, we will rue the consequences of our weakness. America should not be forced to take this issue on alone. We should all be part of it. Of course, it should go through the UN—that was our wish and what the U.S. did. But if the will of the UN is breached, then the will should be enforced."

Other foreign policy principles enunciated by Blair include: Britain's becoming part of Europe all the way; engaging with Russia, China, and India, because of their economic potential; reaching out to the Muslim world, and so forth.

Blair stressed the need for a soft approach: "Our history is a strength, provided we lose any lingering traces of imperial arrogance and recognize countries will only work with us as equals. But that said, working with us is what many want and probably more than any other former colonial power, our empire left much affection as well as deep problems to be overcome."

Growing Anti-War Rebellion Among Labour MPs

There is a growing rebellion among British Labour Party MPs against Prime Minister Blair's enthusiastic support for a new Iraq war, and there are forecasts that as many as 100 MPs could rebel against Blair, and that junior ministers could resign, if a war is begun without backing from the United Nations, the Guardian reported Jan. 9.

The paper reported that MPs are demanding proof from Blair, that Iraq does indeed have weapons of mass destruction capabilities. There are also warnings, that the last time Britain went to war politically divided internally, in Suez in 1956, it "ended in disaster," and the government of Prime Minister Anthony Eden fell.

One "influential moderate" Labour figure, unnamed, told the Guardian: "The mood has hardened over Christmas. Labour MPs don't trust George Bush, and wonder why Tony is so close to him. And the weapons inspectors haven't found anything. With a new UN resolution, war is manageable, but if Tony wants to do anything without UN support, there will be serious mega-trouble."

The paper added that Labour MP Tam Dalyell, the longest-serving member of the House of Commons (whose open letter to Blair was published by EIR last week), failed to win support for an emergency debate on the Iraq war, but 150 MPs stayed behind to hear his plea, which indicates a significant level of support for his view.

Also interesting, is that the lead "Letter to the Editor" in the Times of London Jan. 9 was from Field Marshal Sir John Stanier, a former top military adviser to the Royal Family whom Dalyell cites favorably in his open letter to Blair. In the Times, Stanier wrote that he supports Dalyell's opposition to a war in Iraq; that the world is faced with pressing problems, like AIDS, drugs, poverty, and so on, and that the "unilateral" Bush Administration focus on Iraq, will only make international terrorism worse.

European Leaders Reaffirm Commitment to War Prevention

In separate statements Jan. 10, French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, Greek Prime Minister Kostandinos Simitis, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, and the EU's chief foreign policy coordinator, former NATO Secretary General Javier Solana, all declared that they were "working for the prevention of [an Iraq] war."

The issue came up in a "private" meeting (with wives) of the German Chancellor and the British Prime Minister in Hanover Jan. 11. Schroeder will also confer with French President Jacques Chirac in Paris on Jan. 14, and with Raffarin in Berlin on Jan. 16.

The opposition against war is also rapidly spreading among traditionally pro-American Christian Democrats in Germany: In a spectacular statement Jan. 10, leading CSU politician Peter Gauweiler said that for a Christian Democrat, the choice between "Bush and the Pope" was clear: a war of religions would be the consequence of this Iraq war, as the Pontiff has said. Gauweiler's position also has the support of other leading CSU members, including former Developing Sector Relations Minister Carl-Eduard Spranger.

German Social Dems' New 'Mittelstand Offensive' Doesn't Meet the Need

At their meeting in Wiesbaden Jan. 6, the extended party executive of German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's Social Democratic Party approved the "offensive for the Mittelstand" paper prepared by Economics Minister Wolfgang Clement.

Making no reference to the disastrous general situation created by the ongoing world economic depression, the initiative neither proposes measures that would really improve the special situation of the productive Mittelstand (the small and medium-sized businesses that form the basis of the German economy)—like the creation of a mobilization package for infrastructure investments in the range of several tens of billions euros annually.

The paper does state, however, that the Mittelstand is the core of the German economy, with one-third of exported goods produced, with 20 million Germans employed and 80% of apprentices trained in Mittelstand companies.

Most of the initiative consists of tiny steps, such as tax cuts for miniscule firms with less than 17,500 euros annual income, deregulation of the professional diploma required under existing laws to establish and lead a crafts shop, and the like.

The better part of the initiative is the reference to the newly created Mittelstand Bank, as a crucial lender of credits to smaller and medium-sized firms; the promise to increase support for firms engaged abroad, in terms of loans and export credit guarantees. If linked to productive investment projects, in Germany and abroad, this could have a positive impact.

All in all, the SPD still needs an economic program worthy of the name.

Last-Minute Settlement To Avert Public-Sector Strike in Germany

An agreement arrived at in extended talks in Potsdam Jan.9, will avert the threat of a nationwide strike of German public-sector workers by giving them a wage increase by 2.4% now, and two more increases of 1% each in 2004. The agreement is valid for two years, from Jan. 1, 2003. The original demand made by the public-sector and services union "ver.di" was for an increase of 3%.

The Grand Wage Commission of ver.di already approved the agreement, whereas it is still contested among some of the public-sector employers. It is generally expected, though, that the agreement will be ratified by both sides, and that the big strike will be called off.

With the strike averted, a crucial flank of political destabilization of the German government has been neutralized. Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is said to have put pressure on both sides, especially the public-sector employers, behind the scenes, to settle the conflict.

German Chancellor Targetted by Media Psychological Warfare Campaign

A media campaign against German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder began shortly before Christmas, with a report in the Maerkische Oder-Zeitung daily alleging that Schroeder and his wife Doris were in a profound marital crisis, having to do with Schroeder's frequent habit of not coming home.

Against that, the Schroeders launched legal action. Then, Britain's Mail on Sunday ran a story on Jan. 5, based on interviews with Hillu Schroeder, an ex-wife of the Chancellor's, who made a number of sarcastic and embittered remarks on Schroeder's style and character, adding, when asked by the Mail, that if rumors about another extramarital affair of Schroeder were true, it would be the end not only of his present marriage, but of his career. The Mail added that rumors have it that Schroeder is having an affair with a leading German television personality.

Schroeder authorized a lawyer to move legally against the Mail, but the British tabloid is sticking to its story, claiming it is based on sound evidence.

An editorial in the Times of London Jan. 9 provided more evidence that a destabilization campaign is targetting Schroeder. The editorial, headlined, "Germany Falling," is no less nasty than the previous media pieces.

Starting off from the EU Commission's ultimatum to the German government to balance the budget by May 21, the Times added the threat of a national public-sector strike (since resolved, see above) and commented that "senior figures in [Schroeder's] Social Democratic Party (SPD) are asking how and when he can be replaced."

"Herr Schroeder is being squeezed on all sides now, largely because of his failure to chart a clear course. He is having to modify Germany's opposition to war on Iraq, because of the need to rebuild relations with America," the Times wrote. The party and Germany "need leadership to save the SPD from defeat in Hesse and Lower Saxony," the paper continued. "If Herr Schroeder cannot provide this guidance, the party should dump him for its own sake and for the future of Germany."

Key Ministry Posts in Poland Shuffled

While the Polish government is preparing for a referendum to be held some time this spring on Poland's entry into the European Union (EU), the second Cabinet shuffle in six months has occurred. (In the first, last July, the Finance, Justice, and Cultural Ministers were replaced.)

This time, Economics Minister Jacek Piechota and Treasury Minister Wieslaw Kaczmarek have been sacked, to be replaced with candidates who are supposed to give the privatization policy a bigger boost. Especially Treasury Minister Kaczmarek was not well liked in economics circles. His task since 2001 had been to privatize state companies, but there were complaints that he didn't go far enough, and had put much of the privatization process on hold, leading (according to monetarist logic) to a significant drop in the state revenues desperately needed to cover Poland's huge budget deficit.

The new Treasury Minister is Slawomir Cytrycki, who is said to be very loyal to President Aleksander Kwasniewski. The new Economics Minister is Jerzy Hausner, who is also Labor Minister. In addition, a new Minister, Lech Nikolski, with special portfolio, was installed. His task will be to coordinate the campaign for the upcoming EU referendum.

At the same time, a supposed bribery scandal is being launched against Prime Minister Miller. It is not clear to what extent President Kwasniewski (who has a close relationship to President Bush) is involved in the scandal. Allegations have been raised by the daily Gazeta Wyborcza, according to which a leading film producer, Lew Rywin, was involved in a $17.5-million bribe to lobby the government for more media-friendly laws. Prime Minister Miller has dismissed the allegations as "grotesque" and false.

All rights reserved © 2002 EIRNS