Why is it that U.S. nuclear war exercises are good, as we are told they are “to secure our freedoms”, but Russian exercises are described as a prelude to invade another country? Who has invaded more countries in recent years, the combined U.S./NATO forces, or Russia and China? Which alliance has used false flags as an excuse for war, organized Color Revolutions to carry out coups, and imposed sanctions to punish innocent civilians? The lying narratives must stop! The Schiller Institute will hold a joint event with the Russian International Affairs Council on Feb. 10 to discuss a solution to the crisis in Afghanistan. Join us: https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/2022/02/07/seminar-the-humanitarian-crisis-in-afghanistan-toward-a-long-term-solution/
by Helga Zepp-LaRouche · February 6, 2022
“A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” the five nuclear powers and permanent members of the UN Security Council affirmed in a joint statement on Jan. 3 of this year. Since the use of nuclear weapons always involves the risk of using the entire nuclear arsenal, a percentage of which is enough to cause the extinction of the human species, the confirmation of this fundamental insight should actually have practical implications for the military strategy of all nuclear powers.
Notwithstanding this joint statement, in the last week of January, the U.S. Strategic Command launched the Global Lightning exercise, designed to test the readiness of U.S. nuclear forces.
Although this was a so-called “routine” maneuver integrated this year with the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command and thus aimed at a possible confrontation with China, in the context of heightened tensions between Russia and the United States and NATO, it can be seen as just another—but perhaps the most dangerous—element in the way that the West is playing with fire with respect to Russia and China.
The timing of the maneuver coincided with hitherto unproven allegations by the United States and UK that Russia was planning a military attack on Ukraine between late January and mid-February, which the Russian government has repeatedly denied. The nuclear command-and-control exercise is based on the U.S. Strategic Command’s current nuclear war plan. Hans M. Kristensen, Director of the Nuclear Information Project of the Federation of American Scientists, was able, under the Freedom of Information Act, to obtain the cover page of this plan, entitled Stratcom Conplan 0810-12, Strategic Deterrence and Force Deployment, Change 1. Kristensen, one of the most competent specialists in the field of nuclear strategy and weapons, explained to Newsweek that the Global Lightning exercise does not simply assume a nuclear first strike by one side or the other, but an extended nuclear war that will continue after the first exchange of strikes.
Even though the individual components of this new war plan, which has been operational since April 30, 2019, are subject to the highest levels of secrecy, the outlines of this conception emerge. The assumption is that the United States and NATO would be able to survive a nuclear first strike by Russia or China, then retaliate, absorb further attacks, retaliate again, etc., in an ongoing military confrontation. This nuclear war plan includes not only nuclear weapons but various other lethal systems such as missile defense systems, directed energy weapons such as electromagnetic pulse weapons and lasers, cyberattacks, and Space Force attacks from space. Who would be able to survive such a prolonged nuclear war? The few people who can nest in deep underground bunkers? It makes the morbid fantasies of Dr. Strangelove look like a child’s birthday party.
Last year’s Global Lightning maneuvers in April 2021 focused on a potential conflict with Russia; this year it was devoted to a possible confrontation with China. The Pentagon’s various strategy papers since 2017 had increasingly defined Russia and China as geopolitical rivals and adversaries, replacing the fight against global terrorism with great-power competition as a strategic priority. At the same time, the modernization of the nuclear triad begun by the Obama Administration continued and the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons was increasingly lowered by the stationing of low-yield warheads on Trident submarines, among other things.
The Strategic Conflict
Although there was little official comment, President Putin’s March 1, 2018 announcement was about Russia’s new nuclear systems. These included the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle (launched from an ICBM, it travels at 20 times the speed of sound and boasts excellent maneuverability that renders the American missile defense system essentially obsolete;” the hypersonic aeroballistic missile Kinzhal; as well as nuclear-powered cruise missiles, fast underwater drones and laser weapons—a shock to the western military establishment. Meanwhile, China has also developed its own hypersonic missiles with infrared homing technology, a capability that the American military may not have for two to three years. American satellite imagery has also located about 300 missile silos under construction in scattered locations across China, some of which may remain empty, but others would have nuclear missiles in a state of “launch on warning” to forestall a disarming surprise attack.
This is broadly the strategic background against which Putin presented two treaties to the United States and NATO on Dec. 17, demanding that they be legally binding: no further eastward expansion of NATO, and no offensive weapon systems stationed on Russia’s borders; plus guarantees that Ukraine would not be admitted to NATO.
Unlike many trans-Atlantic politicians and media outlets, Gen. Harald Kujat, the former Inspector General of the German Armed Forces, believes that the gathering of some 120,000 Russian troops near the Ukrainian border—some of them, however, hundreds of kilometers away—is not indicative of an impending attack on Ukraine, but that Russia wants to demonstrate strength with this threatening backdrop in order to force negotiations with the U.S.A. and NATO on an equal footing.
So far, the United States and NATO have refused to make any commitments on Putin’s key demands, and appear only willing to make what Russia considers secondary commitments on new disarmament talks. Putin has announced “military-technical measures” in the event of a definitive refusal. In view of the fact that the stationing of potentially offensive weapon systems in the vicinity of the Russian borders in connection with NATO’s eastward enlargement—this includes, for example, the Aegis missile defense system stationed in Poland and Romania—created a situation for Russia comparable to the stationing of Soviet missiles in Cuba, the question arises as to what these “measures” might look like.
The American Russia expert Gilbert Doctorow suspects that they could include the stationing of nuclear-armed SS-26 Iskander-M short-range missiles in Belarus and Kaliningrad in order to threaten the NATO front-line states and eastern Germany in return. He further suspects Russia may plant sea-launched hypersonic Zircon nuclear-armed cruise missiles off the coast of Washington, D.C., which Russian experts have previously said could destroy the American capital so quickly the President would not have time to board Air Force One to escape. Theoretically, the Zirkon hypersonic missiles could, of course, also be used anywhere on the seven seas and are very difficult for conventional air defense to detect and intercept in view of their velocity—nine times the speed of sound—and maneuverability in flight.
So it is only logical that the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock on Jan. 20, 2022 showed only 100 seconds to midnight. That’s only about a minute and a half until the nuclear apocalypse. Even though, since the escalation of the Ukraine crisis, after a deep sleep of almost 40 years, the anti-war movement has issued a whole series of appeals, public calls and open letters—most recently from 100 organizations in the U.S.A. demanding that President Biden de-escalate the tensions with Russia—the enormous extent of the threat has by no means penetrated the public consciousness.
Uncertainty about the Causes
But even among most Westerners who recognize the imminent danger, there is a lack of clarity about the underlying causes of the existential danger to human existence. They are to be found, on the one hand, in the systemic character of the crisis of the neoliberal financial system, which has now entered its hyperinflationary final phase; and on the other hand, in the claim of the financial establishment in the City of London, Wall Street and Silicon Valley to a unipolar world in which only the power interests of this establishment determine what shall happen in the “rules-based order.”
The dilemma now arises from an opposing dynamic. Since the paradigm shift of August 1971, prophetically recognized by Lyndon LaRouche—when Nixon effectively ended the Bretton Woods system by abolishing fixed exchange rates and thus paving the way for speculative profit maximization—there has been an increasing shift in the trans-Atlantic world away from investments in the productive physical economy and towards speculation in increasingly exotic derivative-based financial products, of which the most recent folly is “shifting the trillions” into the Green New Deal.
From the standpoint of the physical economy this policy—of making investments in industries with the lowest possible energy-flux density—ultimately represents an extensive destruction of capital, just like investments in the military production of weapon systems and the army. The fact that this effect is usually not recognized has to do with the confusion about monetary values, money vs. real wealth, and the illusion that the share values of listed companies say something about the productivity of the economy. Of course, it is in the interest of the yacht-owning billionaires, some of whom have long since acquired condominiums in deep-seated bunkers in Australia and elsewhere, that the bubble economy be sustained for as long as possible, even as the proportion of the population that is impoverished continues to increase, and the middle class shrinks.
When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991 and the trans-Atlantic establishment, despite all warnings—for example from Pope John Paul II—succumbed to the fantasy of having “won” the Cold War, and interpreted the “end of history” to mean that the whole world must now subject itself to the neoliberal rules-based order, there was no longer any need to keep any promises made to Russia not to expand NATO eastward. The whole spectrum of instruments for cementing the unipolar world was used: regime change, either through color revolutions or “humanitarian” wars against all governments that held other values. Victoria Nuland publicly boasted that the State Department had spent $5 billion on NGOs in Ukraine alone, which initially led to the 2004 “Orange Revolution.” When President Yanukovych refused to join the EU Association Agreement in late 2013, not least because the EU is fully linked to NATO in terms of treaties and security, the not-so-democratic side of the rules-based order came to the fore in the form of the Nazi Maidan coup of February 2014. This did not result in any annexation of Crimea by Putin, but rather a referendum by the people of Crimea, who wanted to withdraw from Kiev’s fascist policies. Even then, Putin stated that the West was actually concerned with containing Russia and that, if not in Ukraine, they would have found another excuse for doing so.
The decisive hardening towards Russia and China became visible, in 2017 at the latest, in the changed language in the security doctrines of the Pentagon and the characterization of these two countries as “enemies” and “autocracies.” While the Western institutions initially reacted to the announcement of the New Silk Road by Xi Jinping in September 2013 with an extensive blackout for an amazing four years, these institutions have now reacted to this largest infrastructure project in human history as if it were an existential threat—namely to the unipolar world!
Virtually all sanctions that have been imposed anywhere in the world unilaterally, i.e., without UN Security Council resolutions, ultimately had the chief purpose of preventing China’s economic rise and Russia’s regaining the status of world player.
The transcript of the Jan. 25 background press briefing by two unnamed White House officials shockingly reveals this intention. They present a whole spectrum of “serious economic measures”—starting at the highest level of escalation—to thwart Putin’s strategic ambitions to industrialize his economy, by denying him access to all modern, advanced technologies, such as AI, quantum-computers, and any technology related to defense or aerospace, to prevent him from “diversifying” the economy beyond exporting oil and gas. The objective is the atrophy of the Russian economy.
This policy, formulated in incredibly brutal language, is nothing more than a continuation of Jeffrey Sachs’ so-called “shock therapy” of the 1990s, which had the explicit aim of reducing Russia from the status of a superpower at the time of the Soviet Union to that of a commodity-exporting Third World country. That policy was then, as it is now, a declaration of war—the only difference being that Putin is not a pathetic figure like Boris Yeltsin, pampered by the West for geopolitical motives, but a brilliant strategist who knows how to defend Russia’s interests.
The no less hateful tirades against China, which can be heard today from court scribblers of the Empire, as well as from former Maoists of the SDS era who have now risen to top positions in the Green Party, cannot change the outstanding success of the Chinese economy, which recorded a growth rate of over 8% in 2021 despite coronavirus. China has done more for human rights than any country of the so-called Western community of values, lifting 850 million people out of poverty domestically— including the Uyghurs, who now enjoy vastly better living standards and faster-than-average population growth—and offering many developing countries for the first time the chance to overcome poverty.
The silence of the same circles on the largest of all humanitarian catastrophes, triggered by Western sanctions in Afghanistan, in which one million children are starving and a total of 24 million people are at risk of dying this Winter, seals their complete discrediting.
Joint Statement by Putin and Xi
If various authors have warned that the campaigns against Russia and China could lead to even closer ties between these two countries, then rest assured that this is exactly what has now happened during Putin’s visit to the Olympic Games in China. However, there is an urgent need to remove the ideological spectacles and recognize the extraordinary opportunity presented for the whole world by the joint declaration of Presidents Putin and Xi in this extremely dangerous world situation.
The 16-page document entitled, “Joint Declaration of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on International Relations Entering a New Era and Global Sustainable Development,” calls for replacing geopolitical confrontation with economic cooperation as the basis for a common security policy. Both nations are calling on NATO to refrain from further expansion plans, to move beyond Cold War thinking, and to enshrine the long-term security guarantees that Russia is demanding. The role of international organizations such as the G20, BRICS, APEC and ASEAN should be strengthened, they say. Russia will cooperate in realizing China’s proposed “Global Development Initiative” and emphasizes the importance of the concept of the “community of a common destiny for mankind.”
Let’s think back to the hundred seconds before midnight on the doomsday clock: Who can deny that we are an indivisible community of destiny? In recent weeks, more level-headed voices have spoken out in favor of a new pan-European security architecture including Russia and Ukraine, which could be enshrined in a new Helsinki agreement. However, in view of the complexity of the world situation, the threat to world peace affecting all states, and the inseparability of the security of all, it is necessary to go beyond Helsinki and create an international security architecture that encompasses the security interests of all states on Earth.
This architecture must be based on the principles of the Peace of Westphalia; i.e., it must guarantee the interests of all states and, above all, their right to economic and cultural development. The maintenance of world peace presupposes a total and definitive renunciation of Malthusian politics, and requires undivided access to the achievements of scientific and technological advance for all nations. This new order— the prerequisite for the survival of the human species—requires a new paradigm of thought that must draw upon the best traditions of all cultures at the highest humanistic level.
We have a choice: Either we keep the clock ticking until the last of the hundred seconds has struck, and then there will be no one left to comment on the result; or, we can remember that we are the only known creative species in the universe, and shape our common future together.
zepp-larouche@eir.de
Further reading:
Franco-German call on France to Leave NATO and Bolster P5
Invitation – Schiller Institute International Online Conference
The desperation evident in the succession of increasingly blatant lies, coming from Anglo-American spokesmen about an impending Russian invasion of Ukraine, demonstrates that they know their attempt to dictate the shape of the post-Cold War world is reaching an end. Each day, a new fabrication is produced, while in the background, a new Russian-China alliance has been cemented, caling for a new global security architecture which protects the interests of people in all nations. The issue of war or peace has never been so clear — can the Anglo-American war drive be stopped?
The ability of the Empire to keep the world on a course of war and depression depends on their ability to control the narrative, through intense psychological warfare. Their most important weapon in this is to promote the belief in the “Magic of Money”, to seduce otherwise intelligent people to seek personal security, rather than to mobilize to defend the Common Good. Join us to mobilize to bring down the Empire of the Mind, and replace it with the principles of the American System of physical economics, as developed by Lyndon LaRouche in his Four Economic Laws.
Russian Envoy Warns of Explosions in Afghanistan if Economic Aid Not Sent
Feb. 2 (EIRNS)—Members of the “Extended Troika” —Russia, China, Pakistan and the U.S. — a diplomatic format set up to coordinate policy on Afghanistan, are currently working out the date for their next meeting, which should take place before the end of February, Russian Special Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan and Director of the Foreign Ministry’s Second Asia Department, Zamir Kabulov, told TASS news agency on Jan. 31. He also reported that a number of other nations, including Japan, are preparing to reopen their embassies in Kabul, which will help gradually normalize the situation in Afghanistan, while laying the groundwork for restoring ties between the country’s new leadership and other countries, he noted.
Russia is focusing its efforts on “completion of the inter-Afghan peace process” (which requires, for one, an “ethnically-balanced government,” Kabulov said), as well as how the international community can participate “in the inclusive post-conflict rehabilitation” of Afghanistan. To help foster the peace process, Russia would be happy to host talks in Moscow between representatives of the Taliban government and domestic opposition forces, should they wish to do so, the envoy told TASS.
There are reports that such talks did begin. A source “close to the Resistance Front” —the Tajik-Afghani force led by Ahmad Massoud— told Afghanistan’s Tolo News yesterday that Russia had mediated a meeting recently in Moscow between Massoud and the First Deputy Prime Minister of the Taliban government, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. The meeting remains unconfirmed, however; there is “no official information … about the trip of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar to any country,” a government press spokesman told Tolo News.
Massoud did meet with acting Afghan Foreign Minister Mutaqqui in Tehran a few weeks ago, a meeting which Kabulov told TASS had “ended inconclusively.” But in Kabulov’s view, “nevertheless, the very instance of such a meeting inspires optimism. It was an indication that the Taliban authorities have given serious thought to making the new government more balanced in ethnic and political terms.”
But without economic aid, Afghanistan could blow up, he warned. Terrorism declined sharply when the Taliban first came in, he told TASS. “However, in autumn, with no money in Afghanistan, the Taliban’s counter-terrorist potential began to falter, and terrorists of all kinds began to reappear.” There is a lull in terrorism now, because of winter, but come Spring, he warned, the “probability” of “large-scale resistance” cannot be ruled out. Kabulov cited the potential for inter-ethnic conflict, “which is fraught with active armed actions,” and insisted: “It is important for the Taliban movement and the international community right now to take utmost efforts primarily to stabilize the social and economic situation inside the country.”
Ostausschuss Chairman Calls for Helsinki 2, Economic Cooperation With Russia
Feb. 2 (EIRNS)–Oliver Hermes, chairman of the Ostausschuss, the German industry’s association for trade with the East, issued an urgent appeal on Feb. 1 to de-escalate the crisis and instead negotiate solutions for the Ukraine problem centered on economic cooperation.
“The specter of war is haunting Europe. In numerous media, but also on the part of politicians, a Russian invasion of Ukraine is literally being conjured up and talked about, as if the `hawks’ on all sides had only been waiting for this opportunity for years… The danger of a massive confrontation between Russia and NATO is undoubtedly greater these days than it has been in 30 years. In addition to the terrible human suffering, a war in Eastern Europe would set back our entire continent and with it the European economy by decades. That is why all sides should try to de-escalate the situation and cool things down. Military muscle-flexing in Eastern Europe is not the way to achieve this.
“The economy can also play its part in de-escalation. Business cannot replace politics, but it can use its specific channels of dialogue. The Committee on Eastern European Economic Relations is celebrating its 70th birthday this year. Beyond our economic function, we have always seen ourselves as `bridge builders,’ contributing to political and social understanding and reconciliation with a region where Germany caused unimaginable harm in the 20th century. The result of our efforts is close economic relations with Ukraine and Russia that have grown over decades. Reliable business partners have become friends in the process. German companies are responsible for around 280,000 employees in Russia alone. Through their work, they lay the foundation for trust and mutual recognition at all levels — from management positions to employees in plants and offices – on a daily basis. This is the long-standing, hard-earned basis for peaceful and successful cooperation in the future. People, not states, build trust.
“Conversely, anyone who questions economic relations with Russia should consider what opportunities for talks and influence Germany still has without economic relations with Russia. Burning these bridges altogether would not make our world any safer. Incidentally, the majority of German citizens would like to see closer cooperation between the EU and Russia: in a representative Forsa survey commissioned by the Committee on Eastern European Economic Relations, two out of three Germans (62 percent) were in favor of more intensive relations between the EU and Russia…
“Foreign trade is only one aspect of our economic relations: Russia is the largest market in our immediate neighborhood and an important investment location. Because of the country’s importance, German companies have already established local and regional value chains to serve customer needs not only in Russia itself, but also in other markets in the Eurasian Economic Union and the rest of Central Asia that can be easily accessed from Russia. And not least because of the German exit from nuclear and coal, dependency on gas supplies from Russia, which is already 40 percent, will even increase in the medium term, Hermes notes.
“The globally-oriented German economy is fundamentally opposed to any form of decoupling. Not only in trade, energy and finance, but also in the security sector, we need European `coupling,’ that is, a pan-European security architecture including Russia and Ukraine…
“We now need a Helsinki 2.0, and jointly overcoming the consequences of Corona through new medicines and medical technology would be an important approach. Initiatives on digitization and on training and education for skilled workers already exist, but they could be more closely networked. The same applies to the agricultural sector — Ukraine and Russia are record wheat producers and rely heavily on German agricultural technology. Above all, however, the topic of energy has linked Germany, Russia and Ukraine for over 50 years. Turning existing energy relations into a trilateral climate partnership is therefore a logical and overdue step. It is time for a conference on security and climate cooperation in Europe – preferably again in Helsinki.”
Russia Helping Hungary to Build Rail Link to Ukraine
Feb. 2 (EIRNS)–President Vladimir Putin informed Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban during their joint press conference after meeting in Moscow yesterday, that he had confirmed that Russian Railways could provide $2 billion in additional funding to help finance the construction of railway line V0, the Hungarian bypass around Budapest that is to connect Hungary’s border with Ukraine to the border with Austria—a key connection for Hungary intention to become a key center for Belt and Road cargo coming from China, through Russia, into Europe.
The project was a major point of discussion between the two Presidents. As Orban reported, “Hungary made a big investment in the construction of a terminal on its border with Ukraine. This cutting-edge terminal is capable of reloading goods from trucks much faster than any other facility of this kind. This is a tremendous opportunity. We discussed the formation of a Russia-Hungary joint venture on shipments … [which] will improve the Hungarian economy and will allow us to use Hungary’s good geographical location. It is suitable for transport routes, pipes, roads and railways.”
The “Railfreight” site summarized the project on January 31st: “Hungary is moving fast to gain its position as a transit country on the New Silk Road. In Fenyestlitke, a city close to the border with Ukraine in the Záhony region, a state-of-the-art terminal is currently under construction and expected to be operative in April….
The role of Hungary on the Eurasian corridor has been acknowledged by Russia and Austria. In December, the three countries formed a joint venture that will take the role of freight forwarder and logistics provider on the New Silk Road. The partnership consists of Russian Railways Holding, CER Cargo Holding (Hungary) and Rail Cargo Group (Austria).
The focus of the newly formed team will be on cargo transportation from Chinese provinces to South Europe and Balkan countries, through Russia and Hungary and backwards. The route via Ukraine will be of particular importance, as this route serves that particular part of Europe on the Eurasian corridor. (For more information and details see: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67690, and https://www.railfreight.com/beltandroad/2022/01/31/russia-sides-with-hungary-in-building-budapest-bypass/, and https://www.railfreight.com/specials/2021/10/15/hungary-back-on-the-map-with-replenished-border-area.)
President Putin yesterday called out the War Hawks, who claim they are concerned with “protecting Ukraine’s sovereignty.” They are using this narrative, he said, as an excuse to draw Russia into an armed conflict, “to hamper Russia’s development.” A memo released by the White House last week actually stated this as the intention of the new sanctions regime they are drafting. Driving the war talk is not Russian military deployments, but the deepening panic that the Great Reset is in trouble, in large part because Russia and China will not surrender their sovereignty to a global dictatorship of central banks!
Russian President Putin yesterday issued a public statement on the response of the U.S. and NATO to his demand for security guarantees. He said that “the fundamental Russian concerns were ignored.”
Meanwhile, the Brits threaten tougher sanctions, against anyone doing business with Russia! There is further confirmation of the European Union’s war on people, in a report on how Green policy will reduce food production in many crops between 10% to 30%. This will drive up food prices further for more wealthy Europeans, but take food off the table for up to 400 million people in poorer countries, which will have to export their food to EU countries. Watch the Schiller Institute video, “Why Are Farmers NOT Allowed to Produce Food?”
As war mongering loonies from U.S. and U.K. intelligence and diplomatic circles keep foaming at the mouth about Russia’s “invasion plans”, saner voices are being heard. Even Ukraine’s President Zelensky doubts U.S. intelligence reports of an imminent invasion, which has made him a target for the War Hawks who ran the 2014 Maidan regime change coup, as inadvertently revealed in an article in the {Washington Post}. With nuclear war as a real possibility if the war hawks are not stopped, it is time to place them in an asylum, and let diplomacy take over.