Subscribe to EIR Online
This editorial appears in the March 26, 2010 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

Russia: What Comes Next?

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

[PDF version of this editorial]

The Executive Intelligence Review is a journal of what is, systemically, strategic planning, rather than the edifying commentary which lounge lizards would prefer. Therefore, the presently onrushing world conflict, is to be recognized as an inseparable part of that same, presently continuing strategic history of the world as a whole, since that ouster of Germany's Chancellor Bismarck, which set two so-called "World Wars" and much more into motion, up to this present moment.

As I explain this point in other locations, all those who are, actually historians, rather than merely chroniclers, look at each present point in real history as I do, not from the past, but, a view of the present as being efficiently controlled from what can be estimated as an approaching critical point in the intended future. Thus, we have the relevant contrast between the confused, impotent outlook expressed by the romantic, reborn, statistically Keynesian follies of New York's Paul Krugman, as to be contrasted currently with the shamelessness expressed currently in Foreign Affairs and kindred locations, by Harvard's Scotsman Niall Campbell Ferguson.

Prize-winning liberal Paul Krugman dwells, in a dream-world of silly statistics, in contrast to a more realistically unpleasant Scotsman, Niall Campbell Ferguson. Ferguson, like Boito's creation of the soliloquy of Otello's Iago from Otello, expresses the true spirit of a very wicked world, a world of characters out of the spirit of the perpetual evil which Shakespeare revealed, to similar effect, in the perpetual evil which is the world of Macbeth. It is a world of a clever Devil who is looking toward yesterday from tomorrow, looking toward intended, awful years, yet to come.

For that reason, here, in the March 13 international webcast, "The Ides of March 2010," I created an EIR setting of that production which features the inclusion of crucial elements of contributor Rachel Douglas's detailed documentation on the subject of the presently continuing, "Trojan Horse" role of British-directed asset Anatoli Chubais and his confederates, such as Mikhail Gorbachov, which was to have been seen now as an echo of an evil already under way already during the early through closing years of the 1980s, and beyond.

That case, of those circles of Gorbachov, Chubais, et al., then, as now, presents us here with a view of the same kind of evil seen among those exact-same British agents from the 1980s, an evil which was to become the crescendo of treasonous economic rape of Russia since even before the advent of the actual break-up of the former Soviet Union.

Against that backdrop, British strategist Ferguson's writings, present an echo of the immediate future, for the world of today, an echo of what the British intelligence services of the 1980s have done to wreck both Russia and the economies of western and central continental Europe since the imposition of the "Euro" policy of the trio of Britain's Margaret Thatcher, France's President Fran├žois Mitterrand, and the U.S.A.'s President George H.W. Bush, during 1990 and beyond.

On that account, Ferguson's forecasting, with all its included flaws, is useful in the respect that he presents a credible representation of a British imperialist's foresight into what the ruling oligarchy of the Inter-Alpha combination threatens to do to the immediate future of the world, especially the Trans-Atlantic world, as during the course of the weeks and months presently coming upon us now. Any treatments of the problems of Russia at this moment, are to be recognized as problems to be understood as being chiefly products of the state of mind of the British imperialism perceived by such wits as Ferguson today.

The question to be posed, must therefore be: To what Hell, and where, is Ferguson's perceived forecast for the presently onrushing conflict, intended to lead the bringing down of the world upon us all today?

What Ferguson's efforts represent, should be summed up here in the following terms.

Although the British imperialists pretend that they actually believe in the version of history and strategy which they have copied from both their creator, Paolo Sarpi, and his lying prophet Adam Smith, actually, the class of actually competent British imperialist policy-shapers, like Boito's Iago, believe in a fully witting, evil God. Adam Smith's work was written to confuse the befuddled silly wits of their credulous believers. It is by inducing the hapless to believe Sarpi's fable, that those in the Delphic tradition of high priest Plutarch, delude the believers in Liberalism, such as our befuddled Paul Krugman, into assisting in the destruction of their own nation.

So, it is the essence of the strategic study presented as the main feature of this edition of EIR, "The Ides of March," that Ferguson's portrait of the future he presents set before us, has a certain, authentically prophetic resonance, coinciding with a certain, crucial, central strategic feature contained within that webcast.

I emphasize that treatment of the subject of the crucial quality of the strategic impact which new developments inside Russia will have, and that for a long time to come, on the immediate future's fate of the planet as a whole.

However, it must be understood, that Ferguson does not disclose an estimate of the choice of strategic doctrine to be adopted by the British empire; rather, he presents the nature of the situation now being created as a product of British imperial intention, without specifying the actual intention itself.

What remains to be seen, is the choice of strategic options which the British empire would select as an optional strategy under a condition of world affairs such as that which H.G. Wells follower Ferguson presents today. To find the truth of the matter, consider how, the stated British facts of the matter lie. In any case, British policy is likely to attempt to create the impression of British strategic intention's reliance upon an intended double-envelopment, a belief intended for dumb leading Americans to believe, whereas, actually, a triple envelopment is intended. Those details, however, are for another day.

Back to top