E.I.R.STRATEGIC ALERT
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
Volume 35, No. 4, January 28, 2021
WEF at Davos: The Push Is on
for the Deadly “Great Reset”
Our news service EIR and the Schiller Institute will soon publish a devastating exposé of the so-called “Green Deal” scheme, which will also feature the counter-strategy needed to defeat it, consisting of financing high-technology economic development worldwide.
Such an initiative is urgently needed as an antidote to the plans pushed this week by the World Economic Forum at its five-day online conference from Jan. 25-29. Given the tremen dous backlash that has built worldwide against the forum’s “Great Reset”, WEF leaders now prefer to talk of “stakehold er capitalism” and “environmental good governance”, but the goal is the same: zero carbon emissions, deindustrialization, and slashing living standards, carried out under a virtual dic tatorship of the world’s major central banks.
A leading voice of the Malthusian movement is, and has been from the start, Prince Charles: Just two weeks ago, he released a Terra Carta for Nature, People and Planet. He states unabashedly that humanity “has caused has caused im
mense destruction to the planet that sustains us”-- and goes on to attack human creativity throughout the 18 pages. His idea of a “sustainable” economy involves the end of what he calls “scientific agriculture” as well as the phase-out of fossil fuels by imposing prohibitive taxes on their use. His “Earth Charter” has already been backed by Bank of America, HSBC, and BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager (cf. SAS 1, 2/21).
While this reflects the approach promoted by Klaus Schwab and his allies in the financial world, some world leaders who are speaking at the Davos week are firmly opposed to it. On the opening day, Chinese President Xi Jinping gave a speech, in which he stressed the need for global economic develop
ment.
He correctly emphasized that to make the development “sustainable”, China would not impose austerity on its popu lation, but rather rely on “science, technology and innovation” as the “key engine for human progress”. Indeed, human soci ety has never progressed by banning technology and return ing to “Mother Earth”, but by breaking through apparent limits on resources thanks to new scientific and technological discoveries.
Will Americans Submit to the “New Fascism”? Even as Joe Biden was calling for national unity in his Inau guration speech on Jan. 20, his allies in Congress and the Democratic Party, and backers in government agencies and the media, were calling for a scorched earth policy against his opponents, which include the more than 74 million who voted for Donald Trump. Biden has signed more than 30 Execu tive Orders in three days, most of which cancel actions taken by his predecessor in the White House. At the same time, there is an effort to demonize Trump and his supporters, including through adopting harsh measures which the Schiller Institute’s founder Helga Zepp LaRouche characterized as a “New Fascism.”
On Jan. 13, seven days before the end of his presidency, Donald Trump was impeached by the U.S. House of Repre sentatives for the second time, on one single count of “incite ment of insurrection” (cf. SAS 3/21). This was passed on to the Senate on Jan. 25, and a trial is scheduled to begin there in mid-February -- even though he is no longer President! He, his family, and his business interests are threatened with multiple civil suits and possibly criminal charges, in an attempt to ban him from political life. His social media accounts at Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other outlets have been can celed, to keep him from reaching out to his supporters. This censorship feeds into the warnings by “mainstream media” of an impending insurrection run by “domestic terrorists” sup porting Trump (cf. below).
What is behind this is not fear of a terrorist assault on America -- which would be far more likely to come from FBI deployment of provocateurs than from disgruntled Trump supporters – but to provide pretexts for even more brutal emergency measures. The powers behind the new presidency recognize that the majority of Americans, including many who voted for Joe Biden, are unlikely to tolerate a return to the pre-Trump “normal” – that is, to the endless wars begun by the Bush and Obama-Biden administrations, and the brutal austerity regime which will come from Biden’s support for the global “Green New Deal.” Among the first Executive Orders issued by Biden, he reinstated the United States in the Paris Climate Accord and he canceled the Keystone XL pipeline, a project designed to transport crude oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.
In strategic terms, the first official phone call made by De fense Secretary Lloyd Austin was to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, to assure him that the U.S. was back on board after four years of tumultuous relations. Among the “challenges” discussed were China’s power, Russia’s expan sionist policy, and the threat of terrorism. As for the “endless war” policy, one day after Biden’s inauguration, U.S. troops were moved back into northeast Syria, after they had been withdrawn by orders of Trump. Given the toll such wars and aggresion have taken on the U.S. in lost lives and wasted money, as well as the real terror threat internationally, it can be expected that the polarization in America, which Biden claimed he intends to overcome in his Inaugural address, will only grow.
Biden Administration Moves
to Launch “War on Domestic Terrorism” Developments following the alleged “insurrection” in Wash ington on Jan. 6 make clear that if the violence was not directly provoked by the ominous “deep state”, it has at the very least been used to drastically curtail free speech and crack down on any opposition deemed dangerous. Just one day after the inauguration of Joe Biden as President of the United States, the new White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed that the Biden Administration is prepared to counter “with resolve” the threat of “domestic violent extremism” (which she abbreviates to DVE). The term itself augurs consequences similar to the lawless “war on terrorism” launched after the attacks of September 11, 2001.
In addition to growing, arbitrary censorship imposed by the Big Tech monopolies, retaliatory measures have been taken against Trump supporters (including some Congressmen), such as banning them from using Visa credit card services or holding bank accounts, not to mention losing their jobs. Deutsche Bank, Signature Bank of New York and Professional Bank of Florida all announced last week that they would cut all future services to Donald Trump and his companies, and other banks are set to follow suit!
Is it exaggerated to talk of a “new fascism”? Well, consider the language used by John Brennan, Obama’s former direc tor of the CIA, during a Jan. 20 interview with MSNBC. He promised that the Biden Administration would act “in laser light fashion” to uncover insurgency movements in the United States, that “bring together an unholy alliance frequently of religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.” Law enforcement, he explained, as well as “intelligence and even defense officials are doing everything possible to root out what seems to be a very, very serious, and insidious threat to our democracy and our re
public.”
Not to be outdone by the former CIA chief turned CNN analyst, former FBI director James Comey told told Austra lian ABC one day later, that “the Republican Party has to be burned to the ground, in some form or fashion.” He further stated that the Republican Party “doesn’t stand for anything that is valuable to our country.” (Unity, anyone?)
In other words, such eminent representatives of the “intel ligence community”, after failing for four long years to topple the consummate outsider Donald Trump, are now determined to prevent any future challenge to their power from him or his followers. For former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, this offensive is “a very dangerous undermining of our civil lib
erties, our freedoms in our Constitution, and a targeting of almost half the country.”
Investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald, who has ruth lessly exposed crimes by the U.S. government, has blasted Silicon Valley’s “orgy of censorship”, the policing of speech, and the repeated accusations of “sedition,” “treason,” and “terrorism” against members of Congress and citizens. This, Greenwald warns, is all driven by a radical expansion of the meaning of “incitement to violence,” accompanied by the in sinuation that “anyone questioning any of this must, by virtue of these doubts, harbor sympathy for the Terrorists and their neo-Nazi, white supremacist ideology.”
EU Taxonomy Rules Exposed
as a “Green Bubble”
Last December, the European Commission presented the draft text of its “Taxonomy regulations”, i.e., a classification of eco nomic activities, products and materials based on their CO2 footprint. At that point, at the latest, its destructive nature became clear even for those who support current climate poli cies. The 233 pages-long report is a manifesto for deindustri alization – not so surprising considering that it was drafted by the financial industry. Indeed, the Technical Expert Group of Sustainable Finance is composed of financial institutions, NGOs and other organizations, all commited to creating a new financial bubble by diverting hundreds of billions from pro ductive into unproductive investments.
Luckily, some governments in the EU are waking up to the insanity of the Green Transition. Thus, the Commission had to postpone publication of its “taxonomy” rules due to op position from 10 member states. Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia all signed a paper objecting to the exclusion of natural gas from the list of “transition fuels” and calling for “the possibility of using hydrogen from various energy sourc es.” Facing a possible veto, the European Commission backed down, and the above demands were included in the European Council conclusions of Dec. 10-11.
Even the greeniest government in Europe, located in Berlin, found the taxonomy rules quite dangerous. An independent study commissioned by Germany’s Environment Ministry con cluded that only 1% of blue chip companies listed on the DAX stock exchange would be considered “sustainable”, if the Com mission’s taxonomy draft were applied in its current form. The percentage rose to 2% for the French CAC 40 and the Euro Stoxx 50 indices. Without a change in the classification of companies, the taxonomy risks creating a “green bubble” that would see investors rushing to buy stocks in only those few firms considered truly “sustainable” under EU rules, the study suggested.
The EU’s Insane Rush into E-Mobility: The Case of Germany
As the automotive sector is responsible for 28% of green house emissions, the EU’s Green Deal aims at replacing all ve hicles with internal combustion engines, with electric vehicles (EVs). Such an ambitious goal, besides being based on the false assumption that it will help mitigate climate change, will be impossible to achieve. Efforts to do so will only result in an industrial, financial and social catastrophe.
The President of Toyota Motors for one, has strongly criti cized those politicians who support a full conversion to EVs.
EIR STRATEGIC ALERT 2 WEEKLY NEWSLETTER n° 4 / 2021
Akio Toyoda warned last Dec. 17 that if all cars in Japan were running on electric power, the country would run out of elec tricity by the summer. The infrastructure needed to support a fleet consisting entirely of EVs, he said, would cost Japan the equivalent of $135 to $358 billion. Moreover, since Japan gets most of its power from burning coal and natural gas, Toyoda pointed out that “the more EVs we build, the worse the carbon dioxide gets.”
Applying the figures projected by Akio Toyoda for Japan to the European Union, the infrastructure needed to support a 100% fleet of electric battery vehicles would cost Europe between $476 billion and $1.234 trillion. Even supposing that the funds to do so could be generated either by slashing national budget items such as health, school, pensions etc. or by massively increasing government debt, a full conversion to EVs is hardly feasible technically.
Let’s take the intermediate goal set by the European Union of reducing CO2 emissions by 55% by the year 2030. Now let’s imagine that this figure is applied to the motor vehicle sector in Germany, by replacing 55% of the current total of 63 million motor vehicles with EVs. Some 35 million EVs would have to be sold in the next decade, giving an average of 3.5 million per year. Currently, 63,321 EVs are sold per year in Germany, or about 1.75% of the 3.6 million vehicles sold in 2019.
At the current rate, EU targets for 2030 will not be achieved before 50 years, and the 2050 target (zero carbon) before 100 years! To reach the 2030 target, annual sales of EVs would have to increase by 5,500%!
What about the costs of increasing electricity production to be able to fuel all those cars? Assuming an annual consump tion of about 3 Mwh per EV on average, Germany would need to produce an additional 11-12 TWh of electricity per year. Assuming it must come from “renewables”, as the EU insists, one would have to build one giant windmill per year for every 2000 EVs sold for the next ten years. However, the German and the European electricity grid has already become so dependent on “renewables” that it is highly unstable and has nearly collapsed in the past (cf. SAS 2/2021).
A New Spate of Geopolitical Attacks on Nord Stream 2
Shortly before the underwater pipeline-laying operations for the final section of the Nord Stream 2 project between Rus sia and northern Germany, the U.S. Congress announced new and harsh sanctions against companies involved both in build ing the pipeline and in operating it upon completion. Although the standard narrative of the project’s adversaries is to claim that it’s only a German-Russian project, the fact of the mat ter is that it involves companies from 12 different European countries, and investments already made of more than 10 billion euros.
The Navalny case has now been used as a pretext to de mand that new sanctions against Russia specifically target the gas pipeline as well. As spokesman for the hard line in the U.S. is Sen. Ted Cruz, one of the key authors of the original Con gressional sanctions resolutions against the project. He claims that the natural gas exports are just a tool of the Kremlin to to gain control over Europe and undermine NATO. (But does not mention that the U.S. is eager to sell its own gas to Europe in the place of Russia.) As for the new U.S. President Joe Biden, his proposed Secretary of State Anthony Blinken told the Sen
ate last week that the new administration would use “every persuasive tool” it has to stop the project.
The majority of the European Parliament is the same wave length having voted a resolution on Jan. 22, demanding politi cal pressure be put on the German government to intervene against the project. The resolution, however, is non-binding. It is also likely that the German “Fridays for Future” move ment will join the campaign against the project, on grounds that natural gas is unacceptable as an energy source in the era of “renewables”. The governments of both Poland and Ukraine are fiercely opposed to the pipeline, and accuse Rus sia of building a pipeline under the Baltic Sea in order to avoid the traditional land-based transit lines going through their countries, as retaliation for their “Russia-critical” views.
This is not the first time such geopolitical arm-twisting has been applied to the German government. So far, it has re fused to interfere with a project of private industry aimed at securing the energy supply of Germany and other European countries, but has also avoided any clear support. Echoing the anti-Russia narrative heard in Kiev, it insists that the gas transit lines through Ukraine must also be maintained.
It is interesting to note that Armin Laschet, the new party chairman of the German CDU and a potential chancellor can didate of the latter for the national elections in September (cf. SAS 3/21), reiterated his earlier-stated view that since there is no linkage between the Navalny case and the Nord Stream 2, no new sanctions related to that issue are justi fied. Those statements, however, came before the hype in the West over the alleged repression of demonstrators in Russia on Jan. 23.
The Monkey Wrench in the Iranian Nuclear Deal Governments and analysts should be aware of a certain level of sophistry surrounding the discussion on the Biden Admin istration resurrecting the Iran “nuclear deal”, i.e, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The monkey wrench which was thrown in by the Trump Administration, on the urging of British and Israeli interests, was to demand that any renegotiation of the deal include the Iranian “ballistic missile” program – an unacceptable condition for Tehran. Another is sue added to the heap was Iran’s intervention against ISIS and other terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq, presented by the West as an attempt to expand Iran’s influence throughout all of West Asia.
Yes, Iran does have strategic interests in Iraq, Syria, Leba non, Yemen and other countries, which it views as a secu rity buffer zone against attempts to launch a regime change. These issues could be negotiated separately. Such is the mes sage put out by Iranian leaders since it became clear that Joe Biden would become the next U.S. President.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who was instru mental in designing and pushing the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and is currently advising many governments in the region, is leading the charge in favor of changing the metrics of the deal with Iran. In a Feb. 2020 seminar at the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, Blair urged Iran to “enter into new com mitments”, including on ballistic missiles and destabilizing ac tivities in the region.
Joe Biden has come out with the same line. In an op-ed in CNN published in September, he wrote that America will help Israel “defend itself against Iran and its proxies. We will continue to use targeted sanctions against Iran’s human rights
EIR STRATEGIC ALERT n°4 / 2021 WEEKLY NEWSLETTER 3
abuses, its support for terrorism and ballistic missile pro gram.” French Foreign Minister Le Drian for his part has just asserted that “tough discussions will be needed over ballistic proliferation and Iran’s destabilization of its neighbors in the region.”
In response, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani stated that the “missiles program and regional issues have nothing to do with the nuclear issue”, and there is only one JCPOA that has been agreed upon, and “either everyone commits to it or they don’t”. Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has made clear that Tehran can only accept a return to the 2015 agreement, with the lifting of all sanctions imposed by the Trump Administration.
It has to be admitted that the JCPOA was the best guaran tee for the international community to ensure that Iran would not have the capability to develop a nuclear weapon, although Tehran had denied any intention to do so.
After Decades of Warfare, Railways Offer Afghanistan Opportunites to Develop While peace is slowing developing in war-torn Afghanistan, re gional powers are moving to integrate the country into regional railway networks and into the Belt and Road Initiative. Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, India and China are all lending a hand in the effort. Once completed, Afghanistan’s rail way network will make the country a transport hub between Central Asia and the Arabian Sea, and enable the exploitation of the country’s immense iron, copper and other mineral resourc es. The lack of infrastructure together with overall insecurity have severely hindered mining activities until now.
* On Dec. 2, a trial freight train delivered more than 400 tons of cement from Khaf in Iran to Rozanak in Afghanistan’s Herat province on the very first railway linking the two coun tries. The 140 km stretch is the first part of the 225 km line that will continue to Herat, and link Afghanistan’s third larg est city to the extensive Iranian network and its international connections.
* Iran is building a new railway between its Port of Cha bahar on the Gulf of Oman northward to Zehedan on the border with Afghanistan. From there, it should extend on to Delaram, in south-western Afghanistan, giving the country ac cess to the open seas, in particular for the export of its rich mineral resources.
* Leaders of Pakistan and Uzbekistan signed a joint letter on Dec. 29 seeking a $4.8 bn loan from international financial institutions for a Trans-Afghan railway project linking the two countries via Afghanistan. The line is to run from Mazar-e
Sharif in northern Afghanistan, which is already connected by rail with neighboring Uzbekistan down to Kabul, and then on to Peshawar, in Pakistan, which is connected to the Pakistani port of Karachi by a railway which is now being upgraded. The Asian Development Bank had expressed interest in pro
viding loans for the project, which would also give Afghani stan direct access to the Pakistan-China Economic Corridor and the Pakistani port of Gwadar.
*On Jan. 14, a 30 km railway segment was inaugurated between two towns in northern Afghanistan, Aquina, which is directly on the border with Turkmenistan with which it has a rail connection, and Andkhoy. The first train carrying oil products, mineral fertilizers, and crop products from Turk
menistan left Aqina on the same day. The new section forms
part of the project to build a railway linking Turkmenistan and Tajikistan via Afghanistan. That line could eventually be extended to the border with Kyrgyzstan, and to China.
A new border crossing between Iran and Pakistan was opened on Dec. 19, which will facilitate communications be tween the Iranian port of Chabahar and the new Pakistani port of Gwadar.
COVID-19 Vaccines: The Battle Continues on Lifting Patents for Poor Countries In October 2020, the governments of India, South Africa, and eight other countries appealed to the World Trade Organi zation to encourage all countries to lift enforcement of any patents or other intellectual property rights (IP) related to COVID-19 diagnostics, drugs and vaccines for the duration of the pandemic. The waiver of some of the requirements of international trade agreements, they argued, would allow generic manufacturers to immediately make more affordable versions of these products. Their call was supported by Doc tors Without Borders.
But as of Jan. 20, 2021, the WTO has still delayed making a decision. Wealthier countries, such as France, Germany, the U.K., Japan and the U.S., are oppposed to the IP waiver, since they have effectively monopolized the access to the life-saving vaccines.
The Times of India reported, “The proposal seeking waiver of intellectual property (IP) on COVID-19 drugs and vaccines has huge implications for developing countries which are find ing it tough to access life-saving COVID-19 vaccines. Rich countries have cut huge deals ... posing a serious risk to equi table access for the world’s poorest and most vulnerable”.
Because of current trade restrictions, South Africa is obliged to pay the Serum Institute of India (SII) $5.25 per dose for 1.5 million shots of AstraZeneca’s coronavirus vaccine, more than double the price paid by the European Union ($2.50). AstraZeneca’s vaccine is considered to be preferable for Af
rican countries, since it does not have to be stored at ultra low temperatures like other vaccines, which are unavailable to these nations, due to the lack of modern infrastructure.
WHO Director Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus strongly denounced the companies that have deliberately driven up prices of the vaccines, and “prioritized regulatory approval in rich countries where the profits are highest”. He stressed the urgent need to vaccinate health workers and elder populations in developing countries. “It is not just a moral imperative, but a strategic and economic imperative”, he said.
One example clearly illustrates the problem: Oxford Univer sity had promised in Spring 2020 to donate the rights of its promising COVID-19 vaccine to any drug-maker, only to later sell it to AstraZeneca, making millions of dollars in the deal.
E.I.R. STRATEGIC ALERT www.eir.de
Published by: E.I.R.GmbH, Bahnstr. 4, 65205 Wiesbaden Tel.: 0611/73650, Fax: 0611/9740935, Email: info@eir.com Verantwortl. f. d. Inhalt: Dean Andromidas, Claudio Celani Subscription: EUR 3000/ ISSN 0936-7527
© E.I.R. GmbH Alle Rechte vorbehalten, auch die des Nachdrucks von Auszügen, derphotomechanischen Wiedergabe und der Übersetzung, Printed in Germany
EIR STRATEGIC ALERT 4 WEEKLY NEWSLETTER n°4 / 2021
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου