This article appears in the January 25, 2019 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
German Establishment Pledges Fealty to the Failed British Empire
The following article, translated from German, was written for the German weekly newspaper Neue Solidarität.
Jan. 18—If further proof were needed that German neoliberal leaders still think like the proconsuls of an occupied country, read the letter to the editor in the London Times by so-called “top German political, business, and political leaders,” in which they wish “from the bottom of their hearts,” that the British stay in the EU. And this at a time when even the Economist is discussing how the total cul-de-sac into which the British establishment has maneuvered itself with its policies proves only one thing—that the British leadership model is “disintegrating.”
“Britain is governed by a self-involved clique that rewards group membership above competence and self-confidence above expertise. This chumocracy has finally met its Waterloo,” proclaimed the Economist on December 22 in its “Bagehot” column. And the historically pro-British New York Times spoke even more sharply of the “malign incompetence of the British ruling class”: The current fiasco of British politics is compared to the worldwide application of the brutal power of the Empire by the pitifully incompetent elites in the days of Lord Louis Mountbatten. For his part, former London Mayor Ken Livingston concluded, “Brexit or not, things will get worse unless neoliberalism is brought to end.”
At a moment when these house organs of the sinking British Empire are giving vent to voices which at least describe the symptoms of the failure of the imperial model, the obsequiousness of the so-called German leaders is simply shameful. The letter to the London Times states that while the signers respect the Brexit decision, “the British should know that we do not consider any decision irreversible. Our door will always be open. Europe is our home.” They will miss the United Kingdom and its traditions. “That’s why the British should know: from the bottom of our hearts we want them to stay.”
The letter is signed by CDU chairwoman Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, SPD chairwoman Andrea Nahles, Green chairpersons Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck, German Industry Association head Dieter Kempf, German Chambers of Commerce and Industry president Eric Schweitzer, and trade-union confederation head Reiner Hoffmann, among others.
Note that this declaration of submission to the British Empire comes at a time when various non-mainstream media and behind-the-scenes debates are addressing an unprecedented scandal: The British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), the British intelligence services, NATO, Facebook, and various other institutions are involved in a gigantic information war against Russia and China, but also in the manipulation of domestic political processes in all Western countries. The so-called “Institute for Statecraft” and the “Integrity Initiative” influence public perception through so-called “clusters” of journalists, academics, researchers and military agents, and make psychological warfare appear like normal journalism. The aim of these British intelligence operations is to systematically build an enemy image of Russia and China, against which the West’s “model of liberal democracy” must be defended.
What Free Press?
It says everything about the state of the supposedly free press in Germany, that so far not a single mainstream publication has reported on this scandal. These British institutions are the ringleaders behind the “Russiagate” scandal against President Trump; they are actively involved in trying to drive an elected U.S. President out of office with the help of large-scale intelligence operations. While in the U.S., more and more former judges, military personnel and Trump supporters are openly speaking of a “British coup,” the official reporting in Germany is 100 percent defined by the perspective of the instigator of this coup d’état! In other words, we are a banana republic in Germany, not subject to Washington—that was demonstrated by the reaction to the election of Trump—but to the British Empire!
To name but a few examples in the United States, former Washington, D.C. prosecutor Joseph diGenova identified the role of the British intelligence service in an interview with radio station WMAL on October 15 of last year: “British MI6 conducted illegal electronic surveillance on U.S. citizens at the request of the FBI and [then CIA Director John] Brennan. That’s how they found out [that former Trump campaign adviser George] Papadopoulos was not interested in Hillary’s emails or anything else. Illegal spying by the Brits. That’s why the Brits are going crazy . . . When you stretch out to work with foreign governments—read ‘collude’—to spy on an American citizen, that really opens up an entirely different can of worms. It opens up a huge criminal liability on the part of American intelligence officials, especially Brennan.”
Former Trump presidential campaign activist George Papadopoulos has described in detail how the British and Australian intelligence agencies tried to recruit him for the sabotage of the Trump election campaign. Respected analyst Pat Lang featured a guest commentary on his blog on the theme of the British conspiracy with the Obama administration’s secret services: “Did British Intelligence Try to Destroy the Trump Presidency?” Republican Senator Rand Paul is one of those who is making the same accusation, and even the Washington Post, a leading organ of the Anglo-American establishment, has admitted that the notorious Christopher Steele, on whose fabricated dossier the whole Russiagate affair was based, was guided by former MI6 chief, Sir Richard Dearlove.
Since it can be assumed that it is well-known to these “German leaders” that this scandal is ultimately the reason for the unprecedented polarization in the U.S. between Trump supporters and opponents, one can only interpret their “wholehearted” appeal in the Times, as clear partisanship in favor of the London putschists and their methods. Foreign observers now consider Germany as the last unwavering bastion of the neoliberal system. In France, the yellow-vest movement has become the voice of the resistance to this policy, which reserves all the advantages for banks and speculators, but tends to impoverish the majority of the population. In almost all Eastern and Southern European countries, for some time now, there has been a reorientation towards a policy of economic growth, as a result of cooperation with China’s New Silk Road.
We Can Choose Another Way
In a demonstration of extraordinary chutzpah, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker admitted at a Jan. 15 ceremony marking the twentieth anniversary of the euro’s introduction, that the brutal austerity imposed on Greece by the troika (the European Commission, European Central Bank, and International Monetary Fund) was a mistake! He said that during the debt crisis there was “an unthinking austerity policy,” but blamed it on the IMF. The institutions did not show enough solidarity with Greece during the critical period, he added! Well, whether the Greeks—whose economy and standard of living were slashed by a third by this austerity policy of the troika—can buy a slice of bread with Juncker’s warm words is doubtful. How about compensation instead, for which Juncker, Lagarde, Draghi and Co. would be personally liable?
This neoliberal attitude is reflected in the fact that the German government evidently observed, for many years, how the “cum-ex” (a tax fraud scheme discovered in 2017) and “cum-cum” (a type of trade that allows foreign investors to avoid a German withholding tax on dividends) deals had inflicted a presumed 55-billion euro loss on European taxpayers. The Berlin government didn’t inform EU partners like Denmark until 2016, even though the cum-ex deals had been known for years. Small wonder that Deutsche Bank was probably also deeply involved in this scandal.
The Tories in Britain, the Hillary Democrats in the United States, the Junckers and Draghis, and the German establishment have one thing in common: They are incapable of recognizing that their political model does not correspond to the interests of the population.
Meanwhile, China has succeeded in sprouting a cotton plant on the far side of the moon. We can choose another way.