Crucial events are taking place across Europe now in the fight against the countdown to war with Russia, and as the bankrupt euro system heads towards a breakup.
The major European nations’ governments have clearly turned, in fear of all-out nuclear war, against the insane U.S./British/NATO plans to arm Ukraine, the Baltics, Poland to fight Russia.
But at the same time, the head of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker of Luxembourg, has just issued a call for “a European army to defend Europe’s values against Russian aggression.” A leader of Vladimir Putin’s party in the Duma responded immediately and with total clarity:
“In the nuclear age, extra armies do not provide any additional security; but they can surely play a provocative role.”
Let the British profess that they will not take part — they have no forces of their own left to put in such an army! Juncker’s suicidal proposal nonetheless falls directly into the British-Obama trap defined several weeks ago by Lyndon LaRouche:
The idea that NATO can go all the way to threaten and provoke war with Russia and China to stop the BRICS, and that this nuclear war will somehow be “limited” to the destruction of Eurasia, letting the U.S. and U.K. “win.” And the Russian response again is crystal clear: In the nuclear age, war has no winners or surviving nations.
So the provocations to war, including the attempt to frame up Putin with the murder of Boris Nemtsov, continue.
But at the same time we are finding stronger and stronger tendencies to break out of the bankrupt euro system all over Europe, as Mr. LaRouche’s co-thinkers in Europe discussed Monday by conference call. These tendencies now exist in nearly every country; they are stronger in Italy, for example, than in Greece.
The critical factor, in only a minority of such groupings, is the turn to the BRICS-allied nations as the “win-win” alternative to both collapse and war. This is found precisely among those leaders who have signed or seriously discussed the Schiller Institute’s international petition for U.S. and Europe to take the BRICS path of war-avoidance.
The very powerful statements on the BRICS alternative from a Spanish industry-oriented group and from the Euro-China Forum, and the republication of both Lyndon LaRouche’s statements on the Nemtsov murder, are leading indications of what is really leading the way. The growth and development alternative to the euro’s bankruptcy, for nations such as Greece or Italy, only take life when they turn to the BRICS.
China in recent days has pronounced the Silk Road Economic Belts the focus of its entire foreign policy. Its foreign minister has also set the highest targets for economic cooperation with Russia and with India — which itself, is planning to triple the rate of growth of its nuclear power sector.
U.S. citizens are not spectators in this battle: It is the Obama White House and its Valkyries like Victoria Nuland and Samantha Power which is driving toward war with Russia, and ultimately China. Remove Obama, and the direct offer to the U.S. by China’s President Xi, for cooperative credit for worldwide scientific and infrastructure progress, can be accepted and carried out.
During his March 7 press conference, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi was asked by Russia’s RT news agency if the sanctions against Russia would affect China’s relationship with Russia. He said:
“The Chinese-Russia relationship is not dictated by international vicissitudes and does not target any third party. As comprehensive strategic partners of coordination, we have a good relationship for supporting each other…. Practical cooperation between China and Russia is based on mutual need, seeks win-win results, and has enormous internal impetus and room for expansion. This year, our practical cooperation is expected to deliver a series of new results. For example, we will work hard to lift two-way trade to $100 billion. We will sign an agreement to work on the Silk Road Economic Belt and begin relevant cooperation.”
He stated, “We will start strategic cooperation on the development of Russia’s Far Eastern region,” working together in the fields of oil and gas and nuclear, and on high-speed rail. Both China and Russia are among the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Wang said, and they would “continue to carry out strategic coordination and cooperation to maintain international peace and security.”
Both countries are holding commemorations this year for the 70th anniversary of the World War II victory over fascism.
In reply to a question from Press Trust of India (PTI) on Chinese-Indian relations, Wang was also optimistic.
“Mr. Deng Xiaoping once said that unless China and India are developed, there will be no Asian century. China is prepared to work with India to implement the important agreement reached by our leaders. The Chinese ‘dragon’ and the Indian ‘elephant’ should join each other in a duet to work for the early revitalization of two oriental civilizations, the common prosperity of two emerging markets and the amicable coexistence of two large neighbors.”
Wang also said that the difficult border issues would also ultimately be resolved.
“The dispute has been contained. At the moment, the boundary negotiation is in the process of building up small positive developments. It is like climbing a mountain. The going is tough and that is only because we are on the way up. This is all the more reason that we should do more to strengthen China-India cooperation, so that we can enable and facilitate the settlement of the boundary question.”
Russia responded quickly and firmly today to EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s proposal to create a Common European Army, made March 8.
Juncker, in comments to Germany’s Welt am Sonntag, claimed that, “A common army of Europeans would give Russia the clear impression that we are serious with the defense of European values,” further stating that this would seal Europe’s destiny:
“Before I thought that one no longer had to justify Europe but I have understood that there is a necessity for this. Europe has lost enormously in reputation, in foreign policy one doesn’t take us too seriously.”
Russians were not at all confused about what kind of a “destiny” Juncker was speaking of. In comments reported by TASS, first deputy chairman of the United Russia faction in the State Duma Frants Klintsevich stated that:
Juncker’s proposal was quickly dismissed by Britain, with Cameron claiming that the Conservatives would “never support” the idea, because, “defense is a national, not an EU responsibility.” U.K. Independence Party (UKIP) spokesman Mike Hookem stated that:
“A European army would be a tragedy for the U.K. We have all seen the utter mess the EU has made of the economy, how can we even think of trusting them with its defense?”
In Germany, Die Linke spokeswoman Christine Buchholz told the Berlin daily Tagesspiegel that:
“Juncker’s proposal is definitely aimed against Russia … the EU needs a peaceful foreign policy and disarmament.”
However, the anti-Russian proposal of Juncker got quick support from Germany’s Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen. Quoted by the London Financial Times, Von der Leyen — who has devoted much of her career to this idea — went even further, saying:
“I think that the Bundeswehr [German Armed Forces] would also be prepared, in certain circumstances, to put units under the control of another nation. This interweaving of armies with a view to also have a European army one day, in my opinion, is the future.”