Skip to content

Category Archives: World War 3

China Responds to Hagel on U.S. Military Threats

| 0 comments

Aug. 15, 2014 (LPAC)–{People’s Daily}, China’s government paper, responded to U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’ attack on China for not following “international rules.”  Hagel was in Australia solidifying the stationing of U.S. troops and war ships and planes at Australian bases.

{People’s Daily} writes: “Who is breaking international rules, China or the U.S.?” It reviews U.S. backing for Japan scrapping its Constitutional no-war policy; declaring the contested Senkaku/Diaoyu islands to be within the U.S. nuclear umbrella (while claiming the United States doesn’t take sides in territorial disputes); the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) with the Philippines, in breach of the Philippines Constitution, allowing massive U.S. military deployments across that nation; and the 25-year military pact with Australia.

It concludes on the U.S. ring around China: “It is clear that the U.S. is strengthening relations with Japan and Australia as part of a strategic positioning.  The move is obviously intended to interfere with China’s progress.”

Obama’s Failed Asia Trip: Nothing Left But War

| 0 comments

This article appears in the May 2, 2014 of Executive Intelligence Review.

PDF version

Obama’s Failed Asia Trip: Nothing Left But War  

by Mike Billington

April 28—President Barack Obama will return from his April 22-29 Asia tour tomorrow, having failed to accomplish any of the objectives that were spelled out on the eve of his four-nation excursion. He failed to arm- twist the Japanese into significant economic conces- sions aimed at pushing ahead with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free-trade scheme; he failed to get Japan to sign off on new American sanctions against Russia; and he failed in his efforts to bridge the con- flicts between Japan and South Korea, two key Asian nations which are part of the Obama scheme to build a containment alliance against China.
According to several Asian officials, both Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and South Korean Presi- dent Park Geun-Hye were well aware of President Obama’s sinking support back home, the building Democratic Party revolt against his failed policies, and most of all, his defeat in attempting to push through Congressional fast-track authorization for the TPP. In short, Obama’s domestic meltdown is impacting his shrinking global credibility, and widespread news cov- erage in the U.S. of his failures in Asia will drive his further political demise.
Lyndon LaRouche, Obama’s leading domestic critic, noted, over the weekend of April 26-27, that Obama’s Asia failures, combined with the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to call Washington’s bluff over the Ukraine conflict, have ac- celerated the prospects of Obama being dumped. “This does not mean that Obama is finished, but it does mean that the preconditions are now apparent for his early demise,” LaRouche told colleagues.
Having turned American policy in Ukraine over to Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (a former employee of Dick Cheney, and wife of rabid neocon Robert Kagan), who proceeded to finance and support neo-Nazi thugs in a coup against the elected govern- ment of Ukraine, and provoke a confrontation with Russia, President Obama has now carried out a tour of Asia under the direction of his National Security Advi- sor Susan Rice, the British-trained expert on imperial regime change, pushing forward the timetable for a thermonuclear confrontation with China on behalf of Wall Street and the City of London.
There are two prongs to Obama’s confrontation with China. One is economic, in the form of the TPP, which aims to impose supranational dictates which pre- vent sovereign control of a nation’s trade and produc- tive processes. The TPP is also directly aimed at the isolation of China, to restrain its crucial and expanding role in the extraordinary growth taking place in East and Southeast Asia, even while the West is in a terminal breakdown crisis.
From the standpoint of the intended economic war- fare, Obama failed totally, and instead, was told by Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia that they had no in- terest in committing economic suicide.
But on the second prong—the buildup of an expanding U.S. military presence in Asia along China’s borders, centered on Japan, the Phil- ippines, and Australia, thereby creating the capacity to impose Obama’s currently operative first-strike policy known as Air-Sea Battle— on this front, Obama was quite successful, if success is measured according to the British Empire’s commit- ment to global war and de- population.
Storm Over Asia
Even before landing in
Tokyo April 23, Obama con-
ducted a written interview
(almost certainly drafted by
Susan Rice) with the Yomiuri Shimbun, which broke from the official U.S. doctrine that Washington does not take sides in territorial disputes, and from its intentional ambiguity in regard to U.S. military commitments over the current heated conflict between Japan and China over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea, by declaring that: “The policy of the United States is clear—the Senkaku Islands are administered by Japan and therefore fall within the scope of Article 5 of the U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Secu- rity.”
Thus any conflict over the contested islands, whether provoked by Japan or China, or even by the U.S., will serve as a justification for U.S. military operations against China.
China responded immediately. Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang reported that China had issued a “solemn representation” to both the American and Jap- anese ambassadors in Beijing, saying: “We urge the United States and Japan to give up the Cold War mind- set, earnestly respect the interests and concerns of other countries in the region, and refrain from further distur- bances to regional peace and stability.”
The head of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, Wu Xinbo, wrote an op-ed in the New York Times, saying that the U.S. has been a “desta- bilizing force” in the dispute between China and Japan, and noting that the U.S. created the problem in the first place, in 1971, by turning administrative control over the islands to Japan, rather than returning them to China as called for in the 1945 Potsdam Declaration, which specified that all territories seized by Imperial Japan (the islands were absorbed by Japan in its 1895 war with China) be returned to the original sovereign.
Wu went on to denounce Obama’s backing of Abe’s effort to reinterpret the country’s post-World War II pacifist Constitution (drafted in collaboration with Gen. Douglas MacArthur), in order to end Japan’s self-im- posed ban on foreign military operations. In fact, Obama praised Abe’s militarization plans during their joint press conference on April 24, saying that he “en- thusiastically welcomed Japan’s desire to play a greater role in upholding international security . . . including by reviewing existing limits on the exercise of collective self-defense,” a euphemism for the right to conduct of- fensive warfare in support of the U.S.
Wu’s Times op-ed concluded: “These policies sug- gest that the United States, while claiming to be neutral, not only supports the Japanese position over the is- lands, but, more importantly, prods Japan to be more aggressive toward China.”
In the Obama-Abe press conference, when AP asked Abe about his December visit to the Yasukuni Shrine (which glorifies the Japanese role in World War II and honors Japanese war criminals, along with other sol- diers), Abe unabashedly defended his visit, despite the obvious fact that this is one of the most provocative acts a Japanese leader can take in regard to the painful memories in China and Korea of the war crimes committed during the Japanese occupation. Although the Obama government, and most Japan institutions, condemned Abe’s visit to the Yasukuni Shrine at the time, as an un- welcome provocation, Obama made no objection during the press conference—a tacit approval under diplomatic protocol.
Although not reported in the world press, Japanese sources told EIR that Susan Rice also tried to strong- arm Abe to join in the next round of sanctions against Russia. Japan had earlier given verbal support to the sanctions imposed by the U.S. and EU after the Crimea referendum in favor of secession, and Russia’s annex- ation of its former territory, but Japan refused to impose any sanctions of its own, conscious of the cru- cial relationship between Japan and Russia in regard to the development of the Eurasian Far East, as well as the need to settle outstanding territorial issues. The source reported that on this issue, Abe refused to ca- pitulate.
Philippines: One Big U.S. Military Base
Today, just hours before Obama’s arrival in Manila April 27, Philippines Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin and U.S. Ambassador to the Philippines Philip Goldberg signed an Enhanced Defense Cooperation agreement, which has essentially turned the Philippines into a massive U.S. military base, with ground, air, and sea-based capacities at multiple basing sites, and with ample storage facilities. That this is intended to serve as a primary base of operations for a war on China is quite openly acknowledged by all sides.
Obama, in a joint press conference with Philippines President Noynoy Aquino, described the agreement as “a terrific opportunity for us to work with the Philip- pines to make sure that our navies, our air forces are coordinated, to make sure that there’s information- sharing to allow us to respond to new threats, and to work with other countries—ASEAN countries, Austra- lia, Japan.” The Philippines has essentially no air force or navy, so the intention is clear.
The irony of this move by Presidents Obama and Aquino, is that the Constitution of the Philippines ex- plicitly forbids the basing of any foreign military forces on its sovereign territory. No one is fooled by the sub- terfuge that the U.S. bases are not bases at all, but only “guest facilities” within existing Philippine military bases, and that the soldiers, military aircraft, and warships are merely “rotating guests,” despite the fact that they will be stationed at permanent, newly constructed, U.S.-run facilities. President Aquino announced that he will not seek Congressional approval for the agree- ment—yet another breach of the Philippine Constitu- tion.
The deal was barely reached in time for Obama’s visit, since the U.S. has insisted that Filipinos would be forbidden access to the “guest facilities” within their own Philippine military bases, which was simply too much for many leading Filipinos to swallow, especially within the military.
Although the details of the agreement have not been released—and may never be—it is reported in the press that the agreement will allow the base commanders from the Philippines military to have access to the U.S. facilities. How that will play out is not certain.
President Aquino’s election was based primarily on the fact that he is the son of former President Cory Aquino, who was placed in office in 1986 by the U.S.- run coup against the Philippines’ last nationalist leader, Ferdinand Marcos. Cory Aquino dutifully followed the dictates of then-Secretary of State George Shultz and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz to shut down the completed nuclear power plant built under Marcos (the first such nuclear facility in Southeast Asia), threw out the rice self-sufficiency policy of the Marcos government, and closed the 11 industrial development programs initiated by Marcos—a process which turned the nation into an impoverished hell-hole, which has only gotten worse each year since then. Now, it has been essentially re- colonized and turned into potential cannon fodder in a rapidly approaching U.S. thermonuclear war against China and Russia.
Korea Rejects Anti-China Posture
Obama’s brief visit to South Korea April 25-26 was intended to consolidate an effort begun in the Hague in March, on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit, where Obama strong-armed the Korean President to meet with him and Prime Minister Abe. Relations be- tween Japan and South Korea have been extremely tense over Abe’s attempts to roll back earlier Japanese apologies for crimes committed during the Second World War, and the nearly half-century of Korean colo- nization by Japan. Obama and his neocon backers have tried desperately to drag South Korea away from its in- creasingly strong relations with China, and to ally with the U.S. and Japan against both China and North Korea. The meeting in the Hague accomplished little, and Obama’s visit to Seoul (thankfully) accomplished even less.
Only days before Obama’s arrival April 25, Presi- dent Park held a 40-minute phone call with Chinese President Xi Jinping, discussing Obama’s coming visit, as well as the North Korean issue. While calling on China to encourage North Korea not to carry out its threatened fourth test of a nuclear weapon, Park also discussed the necessary positive solution to the North Korea problem—regionwide development projects en- gaging the North in a mutually beneficial program for peace through development.
Even more of a poke in the eye to Obama, Presi- dent Park deployed the head of the Korea Railway Corporation (KORAIL), Choi Yeon-hye, to Pyong- yang, traveling by rail from Beijing, to attend a meet- ing of the Organization for Cooperation between Rail- ways, an annual meeting of Eurasian countries dedicated to expanding international rail develop- ment. Explicitly on the agenda: cooperation among Russia, China, South Korea, and North Korea on con- necting South Korea to the Trans-Siberian Railway by restoring the long-dormant rail connections through North Korea.
When Obama spoke to the press with President Park, he ignored her efforts to forge a feasible solution to the Korea crisis, repeating instead his usual belligerent demand that Pyongyang give up its nuclear weapons program, with nothing of- fered in return. Obama stated the obvious—that North Korea is the most isolated country in the world—and that more sanctions would be imposed if it did not submit.
While it is true that North Korea is isolated, Obama himself is increasingly iso- lated from most of the world outside of the trans-Atlantic nations, and from a growing number of sane leaders in the U.S. as well. Amb. Stephen Bosworth, a distin- guished senior U.S. diplomat, who played a leading role in the successful peace process among the U.S., South Korea, and North Korea, reached under Presi- dent Bill Clinton in 1994-95 (the General Framework, sabotaged by Dick Cheney in 2002), and who was ap- pointed as Special Representative to North Korea (2009-11) by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, spoke in Washington on April 24, the same day that Obama was in Seoul, on the crisis in North Korea. Asked by EIR to comment on Obama’s threats to Pyongyang, contrasted with the development efforts being dis- cussed among Russia, China, and the two Koreas, Bo- sworth did not hide his disgust with Obama’s current confrontational approach:
“I believe strongly that by focusing as exclusively on the nuclear issue as we are now, we’re ignoring long-term considerations that are of great importance. I come back to the question that was raised about rail- ways between South Korea, North Korea, Russia, etc. And there was an allusion in there to the flow of natural gas, perhaps, along the Korean Peninsula. My view is that in the longer term, starting now, the best way to deal with North Korea is not to focus just on their nu- clear capability, although that is obviously a grave con- cern, but to focus on what I think is the underlying problem of great seriousness, which is the inherent weakness of North Korea. And as long as they are as weak as they are, and perceive that they’re as weak as they are, in their calculus, the only way of dealing with that is to be able to pose a threat to the other countries in the region. And my answer to that would be, all right, let’s tie them into a meaningful network of regional economic engagements. If you could tie them in through their own self-interest into a network involving the flow of natural gas down from Russia into the Korean Peninsula, I think the benefits from that in the medium and longer term could be quite substantial, because it would give them a stake in sta- bility. And now they really don’t have a stake in sta- bility.”
If Obama were not owned by Wall Street, such words of wisdom might have an impact.
Malaysia—Another Rejection
Obama’s one-day visit to Malaysia April 26-27— the first by a U.S. President since Lyndon Johnson’s visit in 1966—was reduced to a public relations ploy, since it was already clearly understood that Malaysia was not about to capitulate to U.S. demands regarding the TPP. Therefore, the visit was dominated by an amorphous agreement to upgrade diplomatic ties to a comprehensive partnership, while the media empha- sized that relations are “Oh, so much better” than under the long reign of Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, who in fact defended Malaysian sovereignty, and still plays a key role from his retirement in defending the nation.1
The most important part of the Malaysia visit was not entrusted to Obama, but was handled directly by his controller, British agent Susan Rice, together with Rice’s cohort Daniel Russel, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs. Rice and Russel met with the leading British-Saudi agent in Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim, together with Anwar’s opposition party co-leaders, after Obama left Malaysia. According to the Malaysia Chronicle, Anwar “suggested the United States create a Working Group on governance and human rights that included representatives from civil society and opposition as one critical way to strengthen the comprehensive partnership announced during President Obamas visit.” This would indeed be music to the ears of Rice, who helped dispense the $5 billion allocated by the U.S. to set up the anti-Russian (and pro-neo-Nazi) NGOs in Ukraine over the past years.
While the opposition leaders whined that the cur- rent government stole the last election, and that “Anwar Ibrahim should be the rightful Prime Minister of Ma- laysia right now,” the core of the meeting clearly took place in the unrecorded 20-minute private discussion between Rice and Anwar after the larger meeting. Under discussion there was likely the proposal which Anwar, who is the head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Malaysia, presented in an op-ed to the Washington Post on April 26, as Obama was arriving in Kuala Lumpur. Anwar argued that Southeast Asia needs its own “Arab Spring.” This would unleash the radical ji- hadists across Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philip- pines, to destroy these nations as the Middle East has been destroyed by the British/Obama backing of al- Qaeda-linked opposition to secular governments there.
Indeed, Anwar has been funded, and worked closely with, the Saudi sponsors of Islamic jihadists throughout his career, which will fit in nicely with Susan Rice’s support for al-Qaeda in Libya and Syria, and for neo- Nazis in Ukraine.
Only Solution—Impeach Obama
LaRouche noted recently that Obama is finished— hated by the U.S. citizenry for multiple crimes against the Constitution and the livelihood of the people, and no longer tolerable to his Wall Street and British Empire sponsors, as he has failed to implement their instruc- tions to force Russia to back down to the NATO on- slaught in Ukraine, and has now failed in his instruc- tions to force the economic suicide of the TPP down the throats of the Asian nations. The preconditions of Obama’s impeachment are now in place—to take his finger off the button, to stop his bail-out and bail-in of the bankrupt Wall Street banks, and to allow the launch- ing of America’s cooperation with the Eurasian nations in vast economic and infrastructural development proj- ects.
His Asia trip demonstrates that his oft-promoted “pivot to Asia” offers nothing of benefit to the people of the United States, nor those of Asia, but is simply a mo- bilization for a war which, together with the simultane- ous push for war on Russia, would mean extinction of civilization. His removal from office is urgent.
mobeir@aol.com

Obama’s Nazi Coup and War Plans Detailed on Two Philippine Radio Shows

| 0 comments

March 8 (LPAC)–Two prominent Philippine radio shows featured EIR’s Mike Billington this week, with detailed analysis of Obama’s drive for thermonuclear war, using their nazi coup in Ukraine as an excuse.

Manny Topacio, on the government’s PBS radio station in Manila interviewed Billington last Thursday, after having played excerpts from Lyndon LaRouche’s Alex Jones show on several of his earlier programs, emphasizing the urgency of impeaching Obama to stop the war.

Butch Valdes, head of the Philippine LaRouche Society, hosted Billington Sunday evening on his weekly show on the nationwide Radio Mindanao station, discussing the war drive and the financial collapse. Butch’s audience is quite familiar with Kesha Rogers, who has appeared twice on Butch’s program, so the victory in Texas was featured, as well as the need for the Philippine people to contact their friends and relatives in the U.S. to support her campaign, not only in Texas, but nationwide, for the impeachment of the madman in the White House, to stop the global warfare now threatened against Russia and China.

LaRouche’s Warning Spreads in Mobilization to Stop Thermonuclear War

| 0 comments

Feb. 7, 2014 (LPAC)–Several reports on the mobilization to stop the war of thermonuclear extermination came in on Feb. 7; these are about directly getting out LaRouche’s warnings, and, in the case of Pat Buchanan, his second article in as many days warning against the provocations against Russia and China.

— TV personality Roseanne Barr tweeted out to 230,000 twitter followers today, “Why is the U.S. backing Nazis in Ukraine?”

— BEFOREITSNEWS, a populist website, ran a posting by Susan Duclos, who runs the Wake Up America website, which includes the full LPAC Policy committee show of Feb. 3.

Duclos commented: “At the February 3, 2014 LPAC Policy Committee meeting with guests from around the world, Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche makes a chilling prediction that due to the US deliberately provoking Russia into a response, a thermo nuclear mutual extermination will be kicked off in March 2014.

“LaRouche also predicts the official declaration by the Queen will happen in March.

“LaRouche’s commentary comes at the beginning of the video below and is something everybody needs to hear and listen to in order to prepare themselves accordingly in case this prediction, based on strategic intelligence, comes true.”

— At the University of Washington (state), Amb. Thomas Pickering spoke on foreign policy, Feb. 6, and two LPAC organizers, including former Congressional candidate Dave Christie, intervened, leading to more than 100 participants eagerly grabbing leaflets after the meeting. Here is a short summary:

“There were largely students and faculty in the audience. Pickering’s speech went through all the hot spots on the planet and the danger of a financial crisis. He called on the Fed, saying that all the money printing is not the right thing to do. Dave got to ask the first question, saying that in 1914, 100 years ago, there was a financial collapse and it blew up. Now this is the same thing and it’s blowing up, that you [Pickering] forgot to mention Ukraine, the most important hotspot. Dave then read the Medvedev quote on how regional wars can lead to nuclear war.

“Pickering punted on certain things. But then said `I would hope that there wouldn’t be a nuclear war, but I can’t just put it aside, because someone foolish could come along.’ Doug from Seattle got to ask a question later and brought up the Nazi protesters in Ukraine. Pickering then said, `Well, there are neo-fascists who support Putin too.’ Doug then told him, `Look let’s be clear, Putin doesn’t support neo-fascists but Obama does!’ Dave commented that he had never seen so many people come up to take leaflets after an intervention.

— On Feb. 7, former White House speechwriter Pat Buchanan wrote an article, “Staying out of other people’s wars,” in which he directly warns of nuclear war. Talking of five global hotspots that could rapidly turn into war, he says, one of these, “North Korea is warning that should the annual U.S.-South Korean military exercises go forward in March, it could mean war, possibly nuclear war.” Neither North Korea nor the others–Iran, China-Japan tensions, Philippines and Syria–involve U.S. national security interests. He emphasizes that “the possibility of America being dragged into a new war is growing,” and quotes Henry Kissinger at the Munich Wehrkunde conference saying that Asia today “is like 19th-century Europe, where military conflict is not ruled out.”

Obama’s Boy Aquino in The Philippines Adds to War Hysteria; Compares China to Hitler

| 0 comments

Feb. 5, 2014 (LPAC)–In a top-of-the-fold {New York Times} story, Philippine President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino consulted his history crib sheet, compared China to Hitler, and called for international support.

The Times reports that Aquino called “for nations around the world to do more to support the Philippines in resisting China’s assertive claims to the seas near his country, drawing a comparison to the West’s failure to support Czechoslovakia against Hitler’s demands for Czech land in 1938. Like Czechoslovakia, the Philippines faces demands to surrender territory piecemeal to a much stronger foreign power and needs more robust foreign support for the rule of international law if it is to resist, President Aquino said in a 90-minute interview.”

“At what point do you say, ‘Enough is enough’?’ said Aquino. “Well, the world has to say it — remember that the Sudetenland was given in an attempt to appease Hitler to prevent World War II.”

The {Times} compares Aquino’s outpouring with that of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s Davos comments when he noted last month that Britain and Germany went to war in 1914 even though they had close economic ties.

The {Times}, of course, presents the Philippines’ territorial claims as unassailable because, as has become commonplace, they define China’s legitimate claims to be only those set when China was besieged by the combined forces of British, European, and Japanese colonialism.

Aquino and the {Times} are clearly playing with fire. The article notes how weak and impotent the Philippines’ military is — “the last flight by a Philippine fighter jet was in 2005”, but only a spark is needed to start the largest fire if the kindling has been laid.

{Xinhua}, the Chinese news agency, ridiculed Aquino’s NY Times rant:

“Aquino … has never been a great candidate for a wise statesman in the region. But his latest reported attack against China, in which he senselessly compared his northern neighbor to the Nazi Germany, exposed his true color as an amateurish politician who was ignorant both of history and reality.”

More significantly, China again offered its hand to that troubled country: “The Philippines itself is an example that shows how Chinese neighbors can benefit greatly from expanding trade and investment ties with Beijing. Instead of coming up with lame historical comparisons, a professional and mature Philippine leader could do more good to his country by seeking to resolve the territorial disputes with China through dialogue and consultation. After all, the Philippines can enjoy even greater benefits from a peaceful and prosperous China when bilateral relations are anchored by steady hands.”