The Oligarchy's 'Solution'
for the Euro: World War III
by Helga Zepp-LaRouche
Dec. 3—The only and absolute priority for any person capable of thinking clearly is the existential question: how to prevent the danger of global thermonuclear war, at this very advanced stage. The problem in Germany, and most other Western nations, is that the media are reporting next to nothing about the acute danger at hand, and that neither Chancellor Angela Merkel nor any of the speakers in the ensuing parliamentary debate Dec. 2 said even a single word about the danger. And therefore, the majority of the populace is totally in the dark. World War could break out at any time—that's how close we are to the edge!
Neither the actions taken by the Syrian government in certain cities against the foreign-encouraged and in part foreign-instigated rebellion, nor the supposed construction of nuclear rockets by the Iranian government are the spark plugs for the acute war danger, but rather, the fact that the trans-Atlantic financial system—including the Euro-experiment—is disintegrating. Of course, the forces flooding the markets with liquidity, in order to delay further Lehman-style bankruptcies of the big banks (see Economics lead), know very well that such hyperinflationary measures can have but a short-lived effect.
For this reason, on the level of the oligarchical elite, the decision has been made for some time, to solve the problem with the time-tested method of previous collapsing empires: a war into which a "coalition of the willing" at last draws in the unwilling as well. An old method. Only this time, the price would be World War III.
Russia and China Know
The myriad puppets in the media and in politics, now engaged in the propaganda campaign against Syria and Iran, have apparently neglected to adequately take into account the rather hard-to-miss fact, which Russia and China have long realized, that it is they themselves, not Syria or Iran, which are the actual targets in this confrontation.
Thus, both nations have drawn a clear red line around Syria and Iran, which dare not be crossed, if an escalation leading to World War III is to be prevented. Maj. Gen. Zhang Zhaozhong of the National Defense University in Beijing chose exactly this formulation, as reported by Chinese television broadcasts, in warning that China would not hesitate to defend Iran, even if this meant World War III.
Further warnings were published in China Daily, which wrote that a military intervention against Syria, whereby the United States and its NATO partners employ the model of the Libyan War, is becoming ever more possible, as seen against the backdrop of open threats of violence against Syria from Washington and Paris, as well as the positioning of a U.S. aircraft carrier off the Syrian coast (see Strategy). Were Syria to be attacked, the article reads, then retaliatory attacks by Syria's ally Iran could not be ruled out, and Syria, thus driven into a corner, would probably react with an attack on Israel, which would threaten to lead to a further escalation of conflict in the region.
It is because of these same threatened consequences, that the attempted heavy sanctioning, and the indictment of Syria at the International Criminal Court, which was debated in an emergency session of the UN Human Rights Council, was denounced as an unacceptable pretext for military intervention by both Russia and China.
Russia has sent warships to the Syrian port of Tartus; the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov is on its way to Syrian waters (and thus, in the direct vicinity of the U.S. deployments in the area), and has also helped Syria install supersonic Yachont rockets, which would be used in defense of the Syrian coastline. All of these elements together are a clear message from the Russians, that a military intervention against Syria will not go unanswered, in what is an unmistakeable attempt on their part to avoid war.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov laid out the Russian position at a meeting with ambassadors of Arab nations, and accused some of Syria's neighbors of providing weapons to the rebels, and aiming these at the Syrian armed forces. In addition, Russian media are reporting on scenarios, whereby an attack against Syria is being prepared from Saudi territory.
War Has Already Begun
In reality, the war on Iran has already begun. One example is the explosion in the city of Isfahan, where a factory producing uranium fluoride gas appears to have been blown up. This gas is used in centrifuges to enrich uranium. The Iranian government has denied that the explosion took place, but the Times of London reported that video recordings and witness accounts confirm that the second such explosion in the space of a month has taken place. This has fed speculation that Iranian military and nuclear facilities are already being attacked by foreign agents.
Just two weeks ago, a bomb explosion near Tehran killed 30 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command, including the head of Iran's missile research program, Gen. Hassan Moghadam. These events—ignored by the Western media—are the context for the storming of the British Embassy in Tehran, by Iranian students. In Germany, only the weekly news magazine Stern has warned that the West's playing with fire could lead to war.
Considering, in the context of the installation of the European Missile Defense System in Eastern Europe, that Russian President Dmitri Medvedev has activated missile warning systems in Kaliningrad; the stance China has taken in reaction to the "stark strategy of confrontation" displayed by President Obama during his recent trip to Asia; and the statement by Chinese military officers, that China would militarily repulse any attempt to impinge upon its vital interests—then it should be clear to everyone how explosive the situation is.
And, as U.S. Gen. Wesley Clark (ret.) explains in his book Winning Modern Wars, the strategy against Libya, Syria, and Iran is the product of plans the Pentagon has had in place since the 1990s, and therefore has nothing to do with today's "rebels."
The world today stands on the edge of World War III, which, very likely, no one would survive to investigate afterwards how it came about. One thing is definitely clear: Europe cannot afford to be drawn into another farce such as the "humanitarian" intervention in Libya. Were an attack on Syria or Iran to eventuate, the bells would definitely begin to toll for the death of civilization.
Addressing the Real Crisis
The acute danger of war can only be overcome, if the actual reason for it—the breakdown-crisis of the trans-Atlantic financial system—is dealt with. When the point has been reached at which the only way the central banks can prevent new Lehman-style bankruptcies, is by flooding the markets with massive amounts of liquidity—just to set off a day of euphoria, as happened last week—then clearly the end of the road has been reached.
The Eurozone is falling apart, and unfortunately, all the scenarios being officially circulated totally fail to get to the root of the problem. Chancellor Merkel has stated her intent to use the EU summit on Dec. 9 to establish a fiscal union, including "the right to impose drastic measures" against budgetary sinners. This would be an act of suicide, intended to sacrifice the real economy and living standards to the advantage of an overwhelmingly virtual banking system.
Whatever Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy end up thrashing out between them at their meeting Dec. 5, the smaller Euro member-states already view the "Merkozy" duo with distrust. And the banks are threatening in advance, that either a comprehensive fiscal union is established, or else there will be a real bank run after Dec. 9.
Meanwhile, banks, regulators, and export firms, such as travel host TUI, the Swiss firm Roche, and the world's largest electronic derivatives trading platform ICAP, have announced that they have been running scenarios for months, for the seamless transition of trading in euros and dollars, to the Greek drachma and other national currencies.
Unfortunately, one cannot expect that those at the EU summit will have the intelligence to carry out the only possible solution. But here it is nonetheless:
It must be conceded: The euro was a faulty construct from the very beginning, because it was created to fulfill the ideological aim of forcing a reunited Germany into the straitjacket of EU integration, and thereby weaken it economically, which it has succeeded in doing. The German economy did not gain from the euro, but only the multinational export companies which profited, while the internal market—i.e., the buying power and the social safety net of the Mittelstand (small and medium-size) firms—suffered under it.
Economic booms in the weaker countries turned out to be monetarist bubbles, and their bursting has led to unemployment rates among youth of up to 50%. The attempt to force all of Europe into a "debt brake" (zero deficit) and "drastic measures" to impose austerity, would be to repeat the errors of the austerity undertaken by German Chancellor Brüning in the early 1930s, and the effects would be just as catastrophic. General poverty, frustration, and social upheaval would be the mildest consequences. And nothing would be offered to counter the danger of war.
So governments must revoke the euro, in favor of returning currency and budget policy to the sovereign control of the relevant governments. Further bailouts for "systemic" banks are a way to perpetuate high-risk speculation; therefore, a Glass-Steagall-style separation of banks must be introduced, under which only commercial banks enjoy guarantees by the government. Investment banks and the various assortment of other vehicles must do without any access to the deposit accounts of average citizens, and undergo bankruptcy proceedings if necessary.
A new credit system must issue comprehensive lines of credit for investment in projects that increase the productivity of the real economy, as set forth in the principles of physical economy, and thereby create productive full employment. This is the only way to create the kind of wealth in society, with which pensions, savings accounts, and other legitimate obligations in the financial system can be serviced. Were the currently threatened hyperinflation to take hold, all these categories of assets would be lost.
A new credit system has to be established, in order to realize multi-national projects amongst sovereign republics over timespans of 50-100 years, which include a Marshall Plan for the development of the southern European nations; industrialization of Africa; and the expansion of the Eurasian Land-Bridge.
The nations of Europe would present this concept to the United States, Russia, China, India, and other nations as a statement of intent to cooperate for real peace in the 21st Century.
Therefore, an alternative does exist! Do your part to make it reality!
Translated from German.