In this issue:

Flash! 'Full Steam Ahead for the Economic New Deal'

Italy Will Propose Mediterranean Development Bank

European Investment Bank Head Welcomes 'New Deal' Perspective

French Defense Minister Warns Rumsfeld on Defense Firms

Neo-Con Perle Throws His Considerable Weight Around in Berlin

EU Resolution Asks Iran To Sign Further Nuclear Protocol

French, German Politicians Reject Confrontation with Iran

Long Outreach of LaRouche's Battle vs. the Straussians

Blair Government Slammed for Falsifying Intelligence

Tony Blair's 'Profumo' Moment

Clare Short's Shakespearean Moment

From Volume 2, Issue Number 25 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published June 24, 2003

Western European News Digest

Flash! 'Full Steam Ahead for the Economic New Deal'

That was the headline of La Gazzetta di Parma June 21, reporting on the European Union summit in Thessaloniki, Greece. Although the final communiqué is not yet ready, sources in the EU Presidency reported that a mandate has been given to the Italian EU Presidency, which starts July 1, to go ahead with the "New Deal" plan. The Gazzetta di Parma has an excerpt from the draft communiqué: The Italian Presidency is invited "to carry out the New Deal for growth through an initiative in cooperation with the European Investment Bank, to sustain growth and integration thanks to an increase of global investments and the participation of the private sector in the Trans-European Networks (TENs) and in the main R&D projects."

Italy Will Propose Mediterranean Development Bank

During its term as President of the European Union, Italy intends to propose "Euromed Fund," which was repeatedly raised by Italian government representatives during the "Euro-Mediterranean" Conference organized by the Milan Chamber of Commerce, June 16-17. Much emphasis was placed on Italy's role in fostering development for the region. See this week's INDEPTH for a report, and for background on Lyndon LaRouche's role in these developments.

European Investment Bank Head Welcomes 'New Deal' Perspective

France's Liberation reported June 17 that Philippe Maystadt, the current head of the European Investment Bank, declared that the European initiative to relaunch growth in Europe, is "welcome," because "it will relaunch infrastructure," and have an "impact on the conjunctural evolution" in Europe. Maystadt addressed these remarks to the European Parliament. Liberation added that the Greek Minister of Finance also supported the need for those investments, even though he added that they should be "realistic" and the budgets "viable."

French Defense Minister Warns Rumsfeld on Defense Firms

In an interview published by Le Monde June 15/16, Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie reviewed some of the conflicts with the U.S. Chicken hawks. She asked whether "by opposing 'old Europe' to 'young Europe,' aren't the Americans, speaking through Donald Rumsfeld, playing on our divisions?"

She responded: "The American Defense Secretary believes that the United States is the only military, economic, and financial world power. We don't share this vision. The American military, on the contrary, find that sharing tasks among allies is to their advantage. They appreciate the work accomplished by the French military in certain theaters of operation, such as that of our pilots in Afghanistan.... During the period of Franco-American tensions, relations between our services remained perfect. Our cooperation programs on nuclear simulation or intelligence, still function in an exemplary fashion."

Another touchy question she was asked: "American investment funds were particularly active in the recent period toward Europe's defense industry, is that a problem?" Alliot-Marie responded: "It is totally normal that Americans win certain European contracts. Those are the basic rules of competition. It is up to us to be better and more active.

"On the contrary, I'm very worried about the attempts and the risks of capital takeover of companies linked to European defense. I have ordered a study on this subject." ... "The Germans are presently preparing a bill on control by foreign investors. I have asked French industrialists to be more vigilant when making decisions in the period ahead, on the risks of technological and strategic dependency."

Neo-Con Perle Throws His Considerable Weight Around in Berlin

Within his first 24 hours of arriving in Berlin June 17 for the Aspen Institute Berlin conference, American neo-con figure Richard Perle issued a warning to Iran, threatened North Korea, and demanded that Germany rein in France.

Perle explicitly threatened North Korea's nuclear technology complex, declaring: "That which the Israelis did against Osirak in 1981, we could do against Yong Byon in 2003.... It would be easy, in technical and military terms: All of a sudden, Yong Byon would be a hole in the ground."

In an interview with the Tagesspiegel daily, Perle also attacked Iran, but claiming that "no concrete military master plan" exists against the Iranians, but pressure for a regime change would be kept up: "A small, corrupt and brutal clique of mullahs has usurped power in Iran. It is resisting all reforms, it is shutting down newspapers and suppressing freedom of speech."

In the same interview, Perle said, "[Chancellor] Schroeder is not Germany," and that CDU opposition leader "Angela Merkel has a rather different viewpoint." The "young democracies of Europe—Poland, Czechia, Hungary, or the Baltic states—would never allow themselves to be taken in by Schroeder's attack on the nation which is the leading nation of the Western World."

EU Resolution Asks Iran To Sign Further Nuclear Protocol

European Union foreign ministers concluded their session in Brussels June 16 with a resolution voicing concern about Iran's nuclear program, but avoiding any harsh words on the issue. The foreign ministers call for "full and unconditional transparency of the nuclear activities of Iran," clearly indicating that the EU wishes to distance itself from anything along the lines of the "Iran is next for regime change" stance of the U.S. neo-cons.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi stated that a solution would be worked out with the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, on the basis of full respect of "mutual concerns on either side." The latest IAEA report was not seen as a "dead end" in Tehran, but rather as a basis for the start of a new round of talks. Iran does insist, however, on a package deal that would see Tehran sign that additional protocol with the IAEA, in return for a lifting of U.S. economic sanctions against Iran, and with full access for Iran to modern Western technologies in the civilian nuclear sector.

French, German Politicians Reject Confrontation with Iran

Politicians in both countries reject U.S. threats of regime change in Iran; meanwhile, both countries have taken action to shut down operations of the anti-Tehran Mujaheddin Khalq organization.

Some 1,300 French police raided offices and private residences of the anti-Tehran movement of the Mujaheddin Kalq group (MKO), arresting 165 people and holding 158 for questioning and seizing $1 million in hundred dollar bills, along with computer and transmission equipment. Police shut down the European headquarters of the MKO near Paris and 13 offices. In Germany, police arrested some 50 MKO supporters who had stormed and ransacked the Hamburg consulate of Iran. (The MKO is also listed as a terrorist group by the United States.)

In Germany, leaders of all established political parties denounced any confrontationist approach vis-à-vis Iran, including Friedbert Pflueger, the CDU politician who is otherwise firmly supportive of the Bush Administration.

Pflueger, who just returned from a two-day visit to Tehran, said in a DLF radio interview that 1) he had noticed none of the "big protest rallies" the media speak of, while he was there; 2) there is no such thing as a pre-revolutionary situation in Iran, and Western politicians were well-advised to calm down; 3) confrontation with Iran would be counterproductive, play into the hands of the hardliners in Tehran, and weaken the reformers who are the favored discussion partners of Europe.

Long Outreach of LaRouche's Battle vs. the Straussians

A leading British strategist who spent the last few months in Australia happily reported that he had run into Lyndon LaRouche's associates at Melbourne University. He quickly dropped his usual formal facade, declaring, "I was really struck by this. I saw them about once a week, and I can tell you, they were getting quite a bit of excited interest." He was tickled pink, by meeting "LaRouche down under."

When told that Australia is the latest place where a slander has been written against LaRouche, on the "Leo Strauss matter," following previous slanders in the Wall Street Journal and Neue Zuercher Zeitung, he responded, "Look, what is this whole thing about Leo Strauss about? Tell me about it." He said he found the LaRouche movement's work on this "extremely interesting indeed. It gives me a sense that there is some kind of intellectual coherence, behind what seems to me to be just incoherence from this Administration."

Briefed on LaRouche's trip to Turkey, and the "Impeach Cheney" mobilization, he said, "This move against Cheney is very nice, it is absolutely what is needed now."

Blair Government Slammed for Falsifying Intelligence

Former British Cabinet members Robin Cook and Clare Short testified in public hearings June 17, called by the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee. Prime Minister Tony Blair is refusing to testify before this Committee, but will be presenting evidence to the Intelligence and Security Committee, whose members were appointed by him, and would report to him.

Cook, who resigned as Leader of the House of Commons in protest against the Iraq war, and who was once Blair's Foreign Secretary, told the Committee: "I fear the fundamental problem is that instead of using intelligence as evidence on which to base a decision about policy, we used intelligence as the basis on which to justify a policy on which we had already settled." He said it was a "grievous error" to launch a war on such a basis.

Cook further said he believed that Saddam "did not have an immediate threat capability" in the run-up to the war, and he doubted whether investigators would find evidence of substantial chemical and biological arms programs in Iraq, asserting, "Such weapons require substantial industrial plant and a large workforce. It is inconceivable that both could have been kept concealed for the two months we have been in occupation of Iraq."

Nonetheless, Cook is still holding onto the view that Blair acted in "good faith," but was somehow misled.

Tony Blair's 'Profumo' Moment

A leading British political-strategic insider told EIR June 17, that primarily because of the "Iraqi WMD" flap, "Blair is on the downward path. He might be around for some time. But remember the words recited by a leading British parliamentarian in the early 1960s, when the Harold Macmillan government was reeling because of the Profumo scandal. He said—I believe it comes from a Robert Browning poem—'This is no longer the bright confident morning.' The same applies now to Blair."

Clare Short's Shakespearean Moment

A closer reading of the June 17 testimony by former British International Development Secretary Clare Short to the House of Commons Select Foreign Affairs Committee, indicates that it was much more ironically biting, and damaging, to Tony Blair, then it first seemed from wire reports.

Short evidently lifted the core part of her speech from William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, from the famous funeral oration by Mark Anthony (III:2). In that speech, which begins with the words, "Friends, Romans and countrymen," Mark Anthony turns the tables on Brutus and the co-conspirators who murdered Julius Caesar, by constantly, and ironically, referring to Brutus as "honorable." By the end of the oration, the Roman mob, which had initially expressed its love for Brutus, was whipped up into a frenzy, ready to hang him.

In her testimony, Short charged that Blair and "his close entourage" had used "a series of half-truths, exaggerations, reassurances that were not the case, to get us into conflict by the spring." She revealed that she had seen raw intelligence reports, and was briefed repeatedly by MI6 and the Defence Intelligence Staff before the war, and that there was no indication of any alarm about Iraqi weapons.

Short said: "I believe that the Prime Minister must have concluded that it was honorable and desirable to back the U.S., in going for military action in Iraq, and therefore, it was honorable for him to persuade us through various ruses and ways to get us there—so for him, I think it was an honorable deception."

No educated Briton—and there are still many, despite the Blair government's efforts to eliminate Shakespeare from the education curriculum—listening to, or reading this testimony, could miss the point.

The London Independent's lead article June 18, covering the testimony of Short and Robin Cook, was headlined, "Exposed: Blair, Iraq and the Great Deception." A Times editorial-page cartoon shows Short and Cook preparing their testimony, with the caption, "Weapons of Blair Destruction." Underneath it, an acerbic op-ed by writer Simon Jenkins was entitled, "This Parody of a Banana Republic Led by a Monkey."

All rights reserved © 2003 EIRNS