7/29/2019 cv7n8_web

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cv7n8web 1/4

The New Citizen Oct/Nov/Dec 2012 Page 1

The engine driving the seem-ingly inexorable escalation

towards thermonuclear war isthe accelerating collapse o theLondon-centred global nan-cial system. The United Statesunder Presidents George W.Bush and Barack Obama has poured an estimated $29 tril-lion into bailing out the pri-vate banks worldwide since2008, augmented by resourc-es rom European and other nations, including Australia— all to no avail. Now, the U.S.Federal Reserve and the Eu-ropean Central Bank (ECB)have announced a new, massive bailout, to be accompanied byeven more deadly enorcemento austerity measures that havealready made death and unem- ployment rates soar in Greece,Portugal and Spain, most vis-ibly. The policy is: “Kill the population to save the banks!”

Make no mistake: “Greece”is coming to Australia. Evensuch British-owned mouth- pieces as climate-change guruRoss Garnaut now state open-ly that the living standard o average Australians will soon plummet.

The present collapse and slide towards nuclear war isneither normal nor inevita- ble. It is solely the result o the British Crown’s ruthlessenorcement o ree trade, de-regulation, privatisation, radi-cal environmentalism, and oth-er orms o globalist looting.These policies are specicallyendorsed, throughout his writ-ings, by that pious “anti-war”crusader Hugh White and oth-er London and Wall St. assets.(The Oxord-trained White ex- plicitly argues that econom-ic growth, such as China’s,causes war.) The new bailouts

known as the Fed’s QuantitativeEasing 3 (QE3) and the ECB’sEuropean Stability Mechanismwill only worsen the situation,threatening to unleash a world-wide hyperinfation worse thanthat o Weimar Germany in

1923, when prices doubled ev-ery our days.

But there is a way out, or  both this nation and the world!It is to dump the London/WallSt. globalist system and re- place it with a community o 

sovereign nation-states whichreclaim their sovereign pow-ers o credit-creation rom the“too-big-to-ail” private banks,and deploy such credit individ-ually and jointly to build greatinrastructure projects; to con-quer outer space; and to collab-orate on other urgent “commonaims o mankind”, such as nd-ing a deence o Earth againstotherwise inevitable devasta-tion by asteroids and comets,as has happened repeatedly inthe past (see page 4). 

For these sweeping chang-es to happen, to avoid a cata-clysm o nancial collapse, nu-clear war, or both, you person-ally must act , along with your ellow citizens.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:1) Call your MP and PM Gil-

lard and demand that Australia pull out o its alliance with the

Anglo-American orces whoseclear intent is to launch nucle-ar war against China and Rus-sia. Write letters to the editor and get on talkback radio withthat demand.

2) Take extra copies o this paper and spread them every-where, particularly to mem- bers o the military and their amilies.

3) Demand that your MP and local councillor endorse the “De-velop or Die” resolution on page4. Our nation must enact theGlass-Steagall banking reormand other measures speciied there as the alternative to war.

4) Join the Citizens ElectoralCouncil. Don’t be a sel-deluded,suicidal ool: you do know, don’tyou, in your heart o hearts, thateach and all o the “other par-ties” have pushed the policieswhich have brought us to theedge o doom?

26 October 2012—“An Anglo-American-led thermonuclear  bombardment … against lead-ing nations o Asia includingRussia and China: this danger now exists, or at least as long asa London-controlled U.S. Presi-dent Barack Obama remains asPresident o the United States o America.” (U.S. statesman Lyn-don LaRouche, “Stop the Nucle-ar Holocaust!”, Dec. 2011.)

Did you think we were exag-gerating, i you read that ront- page quotation in the June/July2012 New Citizen? That issue,eaturing the report “AustraliaPrepares or World War: Tragedy,or Just Plain Farce?” as part o our overview o today’s global show-down, circulated in 250,000 copies.

In less than hal a year, thethreat to your survival—to thesurvival o every nation, and o mankind—has become evenmore perilous. Listen to lead-ing military and political ig-

ures rom the two world powerswhich have the greatest arsenalso nuclear weapons, the United States and Russia.

In New York to address theUnited Nations General Assem- bly, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov appeared 25 Sept.on the American TV interviewshow hosted by Charlie Rose,who asked him about the “ArabSpring” process o unrest and re-gime change in Southwest Asia.Said Lavrov, “I think we are nowin the Arab Autumn. … I hopeit’s not going to nuclear winter.”The termnuclear winter reers toone o the worst-case scenariosor utter devastation o the plan-et in an exchange o thermonu-clear barrages.

A week later at the 4 Oct.

opening plenary session o theRhodes Forum-Dialogue o Civ-ilizations, held in Greece, that or-ganisation’s chairman Vladimir Yakunin, who is also the presi-dent o Russian Railways and aclose ally o President Vladimir Putin, warned about the escalat-ing crises around the world: “Fi-ty years ater the brutal CubanMissiles Crisis, we may againwitness the very same kind o development o events.”

On this month’s anniversaryo that 1962 U.S.-Soviet show-down, newly released papersrom the archive o U.S. Presi-dent John F. Kennedy’s broth-er Robert F. Kennedy, who ne-gotiated with the Soviet Ambas-sador to deuse the crisis, drovehome how close the world cameto nuclear war. One documentwas a drat speech JFK mighthave given ater a U.S. bombingo the Soviet missile sites in Cu- ba—a scenario urged on Kenne-

dy by his military advisers. Then,as repeatedly in the 1950s whensenior U.S. military ocers had  pushed President Dwight Eisen-hower to attack the Soviet Unionmilitarily, such nuclear “brinks-manship” could have led withinhours to a spiral o escalation toglobal nuclear holocaust.

American Patriots WarnObama Could Provoke War

In the USA, LaRouche is cur-rently putting the danger o sucha rapid escalation to thermonu-clear war, still today, ront and centre in a series o ve weeklyLaRouchePAC webcasts beorethe U.S. election.

His warnings were echoed during a dramatic press con-

erence, convened 21 Sept. by

Congressman Walter Jones (Re- publican o North Carolina), atwhich prominent military g-ures warned that i Congressdid not reassert its Constitution-al power over declaring war, theObama Administration was like-ly to provoke a new, devastatingconfict in the short term. Jones’sown House Concurrent Resolu-tion 107, which states that anyPresident who ails to obtainCongressional authorisation be-ore entering war will be subjectto impeachment, was motivated  by Obama’s unilateral decisionto bomb Libya last year.

Lt. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson(ret.), ormer chie o sta to Sec-retary o State Colin Powell, ex- pounded during the press con-erence on the danger that anynew war, particularly againstIran, could lead to a thermonu-clear conrontation between theUSA and Russia, and the extinc-tion o civilisation. Drawing on

a recent study by U.S. ormer military, diplomatic and intelli-gence ocials on the implica-tions o an Israeli attack on Iran,Col. Wilkerson said that “regimechange” in that country would re-quire “10 years, 500,000 troops,and $3 trillion,” and, yes, it could spread to a clash between NATOand Russia, as the imposition o a NATO no-fy zone over Syriaalso might.

Likewise ormer U.S. Secre-tary o Deense Robert Gates,speaking 3 Oct. in Norolk, Vir-ginia, warned that a U.S. or Is-raeli strike against Iran’s nucle-ar acilities not only would ail towipe out Iran’s nuclear program, but could “prove catastrophic,haunting us or generations in

that part o the world.”

On 7 Oct. the Russian newsservice RIA Novosti highlight-ed Schiller Institute ounder Hel-

ga Zepp-LaRouche’s stark wordson the imminent danger o nu-clear war, delivered at the clos-ing session o the Rhodes Forum.She put a point on the above-cit-ed Russian and American warn-ings, as Novosti reported: “‘Weare on the brink o nuclear war’… warned Helga LaRouche.This is indicated, in her opinion, by the aggravation o the situa-tion on the Turkish-Syrian bor-der, the ever greater number o U.S. aircrat carriers in the west-ern Pacic Ocean, NATO’s cre-ation o a nuclear [ballistic mis-sile deence] shield, the policyo regime-change that led to the bombing o Iraq, and the threatsagainst Iran.”

Here in Australia, ormer 

Prime Minister Malcolm Fras-

er and Pro. Richard Tanter havenow added their voices to this in-ternational chorus o warnings

against pursuing wars that can become a nuclear holocaust(seepage 2). It is exceedingly impor-tant that such Australian opposi-tion to these plans grow louder and more eective, as the plans,and propaganda or them, arestepped up. Featured in this is-sue(page 3) is new research intoAustralia’s deep involvement inthe war danger, with dossierson ormer Deputy Secretary o Deence or Strategy and Intel-ligence Hugh White and chair-man o the Parliament’s JointStanding Committee on ForeignAairs, Deence and Trade Mi-chael Danby.

Publicly, White is the onewho dons the mask o an eru-dite, oh-so-reasonable strategic

thinker, racing against the clock 

to avoid a looming thermonu-clear conrontation between theUSA and Australia, and China.

In reality, in and out o Austra-lia’s most sensitive intelligenceand deence posts over the pasttwo decades, probably no onehas done more than the Oxord-trained White to promotesuch ashowdown.

For his part, Danby, who isalso chairman o the Parliamen-tary Friendship Group with theUnited States, not only wild-ly denounced Malcolm Fraser’swarning as spreading “hysteria”, but has long clamoured or war against Syria and Iran and or re-gime change in China.

The Clock is Ticking…As Zepp-LaRouche warned at

Rhodes, there are multiple poten-tial triggers or world war. Each

For More Information:

CONTACT US

1800 636 432PO Box 376

Coburg Vic 3058Web:www.cecaust.com.au

Email:cec@cecaust.com.au

Vol 7 No 8 Oct/Nov/Dec 2012 $2.00 (inc GST) Print Post: 30601/00002

Join Lyndon LaRouche, Malcolm Fraser to promote peace;expose Hugh White, Michael Danby and the push for war!

Act Now! Stop Nuclear War!

The Way Out

Citizens Electoral Council leader Craig Isherwood (right), with CEC ResearchDirector Robert Barwick on The CEC Report , the weekly television show broad-cast on Community TV in three states. Found on digital channel 44, The CEC Report is broadcast by “C31” Melbourne, “31 Digital” Br isbane, and “44 Adelaide”as well as on the CEC’s website, http://www.cecaust.com.au .

Continued page 2

Though recently posing as a peacemaker, ormer Deputy Secretary o Deence Hugh White has crusaded over the pasttwo decades or a massive Australian arms buildup—part o a planned Anglo-American thermonuclear showdown withChina and Russia.

7/29/2019 cv7n8_web

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cv7n8web 2/4

Page 2 The New Citizen Oct/Nov/Dec 2012

S peaking to Melbourne Uni-versity’s Asialink centre on

25 Sept., ormer Prime Minis-ter Malcolm Fraser sounded thesame clear warning as issued bythe Citizens Electoral Coun-cil and U.S. statesman LyndonLaRouche a year ago: that the present direction o U.S. and Australian deence policy is to-wards the unthinkable—nuclear 

war. Fraser was ollowed at theevent, on the subject o “Aus-tralia-US Relations in the AsianCentury”, by nuclear weaponsexpert Pro. Richard Tanter, or-mer Senior Consultant to theAustralian Deence College’sCentre or Deence and Strate-gic Studies, who presented aneven more sober analysis.

Mr Fraser’s careully-rea-soned warning was met withoutbursts o denial in major Australian media, typied byan editorial statement in Mur-doch’s The Australian that “Fra-ser should be dismissed”.

Fraser situated his warning inthe context o global strategicdevelopments since the 1989all o the Berlin Wall, which

he recalled as an opportunity or global economic developmentto build a “airer and more justworld”. Instead, he lamented,that opportunity was “brushed aside”. NATO “behaved as i 

the Cold War was still on” and aggressively encroached onRussia’s sphere o infuence.

“In so doing, the West de-stroyed the opportunity o  building a cooperative partner-ship with Russia”, Fraser said.“This was compounded by ur-ther mistakes when PresidentBush 2nd started talking o anti- ballistic missile sites in Poland 

and a radar site in the Czech Re- public. The public mantra wasthat these anti-ballistic mis-sile sites would be a protectionagainst Iran. It was one o those public lies which only the mostanatic would believe. It was o course, directed at Russia.”

“Containment”Fraser’s analysis parallels

that o Lyndon LaRouche and the CEC, who have repeated-ly exposed that America’s ag-gressive oreign policy, under British direction, is aimed ul-timately at two targets: Russiaand China. Towards China, Fra-ser said, the U.S. is pursuing “A policy o containment”, whichincludes: “More use o naval a-

cilities in the Philippines, Sin-gapore and potentially Vietnam;troops based in Darwin; moreuse o air orce acilities, sur-veillance and communicationsacilities and military exercising

in Australia; spy planes based inCocos Island; Stirling Harbour  perhaps to become a home baseor an Indian Ocean aircrat car-rier taskorce, and strategic dis-cussions with India.”

He added, “We should alsonote the recent report published  by the [Washington] Centreor Strategic and InternationalStudies which eeds o a close

relationship with the United States Deense Department. Itmay not be American policyyet, but the CSIS report pointsclearly to the direction o pol-icy. It is worth looking at theextracts concerning Australia.They are written as though weare a strategic colony, taken or granted, total support or what-ever the United States may do.

“They suggest an entire Ma-rine Air-Ground Task Forcewhich will be based in Darwin.Arrangements will also need to be made so that marines could  be moved in high speed vesselsand including appropriate navalacilities. America clearly ex- pects us to pay part o the costo the marines already agreed 

and also or the other elementsthat they intend to locate in Dar-win. The wording o the reportmakes it quite clear that suchdiscussions have begun. TheAustralian Government should 

 be required to be open and hon-est about its intentions.”

(Another idea mooted in theCSIS report is having a U.S. air-crat carrier base at HMAS Stir-ling near Perth, which would escalate tensions with Chinaeven more. Deence Minister Stephen Smith recently denied that this was on the agenda, butSmith has repeatedly lied on

the subject o the U.S. military presence in Australia.)

Continuing, Fraser sternlycriticised Australia’s present bi- partisan attitude o mindlesslyaccommodating U.S. war plans.“President Obama’s inappropri-ate speech in the Australian Par-liament last November implied that Australia was ully in sup- port o American militarisationo the Western Pacic and the policies o containment whichthis involves”, he said. “I our Government and Opposition in-deed take that view, they serveAustralia’s interests very bad-ly indeed. … The AustralianGovernment, especially the De-ence Minister says there areno American bases on Austra-

lia soil and there will not be.This is straight political spin o the worst kind because it is de-signed to deceive Australianson matters o peace and war.We certainly have both United 

States and joint bases in Aus-tralia, even i technically theyare under Australian control. …

“Australia has under this La- bor Government and with ap- parent consent o the Coalition, become the southern bastion o America’s re-arming in the West-ern Pacic and Southeast Asia.This is an extraordinary conse-quence o Australian Govern-

ment ineptitude and o military planning, which might recogniseAmerica’s interest, but pays littleaccount o our own. …”

 Noting that the U.S. would ind a conventional militaryconfict against China very di-cult, Fraser then zeroed in onthe overriding danger o nucle-ar war. He warned, “Any use o nuclear weapons between theUnited States and China would  be a global humanitarian catas-trophe, and any armed confict between nuclear-armed pow-ers risks nuclear escalation. Soconfict—and provocation thatmight lead to it—must be pre-vented at all costs.”

To this end, the ormer primeminister urged a major rethink 

o Australia’s oreign policy.“We must urgently re-establishthe reality o independence inour own policies”, he stressed.“We should also make it clear that United States’ communica-tions and other acilities on Aus-tralian soil will not be used or targeting or triggering or acili-tating use o nuclear weapons o any kind.”

The Public Has aRight to Know

Proessor Tanter then deliv-ered his chilling ollow-up toFraser’s speech, detailing theextent to which Australia is al-ready a major target in a poten-tial nuclear exchange between

the USA and China. “The JointDeence Facility Pine Gap out-side Alice Springs remains themost important US intelligence base outside the US itsel”, hereported. “In the secret appen-dix to the 2009 Deence WhitePaper, the Deence Departmentconrmed it knows Pine Gap,the eyes and ears o the US mil-itary, is a high priority target inthe event o US-China war.”

The proessor called or thegovernment to be held account-able or this deence policy:“We need to ask the Australiangovernment questions and keep pursuing rational and responsi- ble answers beyond spin—and contempt—or the public’s ca- pacity to decide its view on the

 basis o comprehensive and re-liable inormation.”

Pro. Tanter listed some inci-sive questions or the Australiangovernment to answer:

“How will the governmentensure that no operations o theJoint Deence Facility Pine Gapcontribute to a nuclear attack onany country?

“How will the governmentensure that the planned deploy-ment o a large space radar a-cility at North West Cape un-der the auspices o the US JointSpace Operations Center willnot contribute to armed confictin space and possible escalationinto nuclear war?

“Under the US policy o ‘re-

 balancing to Asia’, includingthe application o the Air-SeaBattle Concept to oset China’sdeence o its home waters, howwill the government ensure thatUS orces deployed to ADF a-cilities will not be drawn into anescalation to nuclear confict?”

Pro. Tanter concluded, “Weare at a peculiarly danger-ous time strategically.  If any-thing, Mr Fraser has under- stated those dangers, both inrange and severity.” (Empha-sis added.)

These striking warnings roman experienced statesman and an expert in nuclear conlictcome in the wake o the massdistribution o 250,000 cop-

ies, nationwide, o theCEC’s

June/July New Citizen news- paper under the banner head-line: “British Crown’s End-game: Financial Collapseand Nuclear War”. The news- paper documented in great de-tail, illustrated with maps o thesubjects touched upon by Fra-ser and Tanter, that the Brit-ish-Obama policies o ballisticmissile deence, targeting Rus-sia and China, combined with“regime change” against sov-ereign nations in the MiddleEast, have provoked both Rus-sia and China to warn in no un-certain terms, that they are be-ing pushed into a nuclear con-rontation. The June/July  NewCitizen also documented the

oolhardy direction o Austra-lia’s deence policy in supporto this British-Obama agenda,which is almost guaranteed to provoke a war with China.

o those crisis-points has escalat-ed in recent months.

Israel’s pro-war PM Ben- jamin Netanyahu threatens tostrike Iran at any moment, whileU.S. aircrat carrier strike groupsare clustered around the PersianGul. September military ex-ercises in the Gul led to Rus-sian public statements like this23 Sept. national TV comment:“Judging by the concentration o military equipment, we may turnout to be just one step away romwar.… A record number o war-ships has assembled—rom over 30 countries, including the USA,Britain, and Saudi Arabia. Battle-ships, submarines, aircrat carri-ers, including Nimitz-class ves-sels with up to 70 ghter aircrat

on board. The participants do notconceal the act that this show o orce is addressed to Iran.”

Fighting within Syria, driven by British- and Saudi-backed in-surgents, has ignited ring acrossthe border between Syria and  NATO member Turkey, whose parliament has approved an in-vasion o Syria. Turkey has ini-tiated ormal consultations with NATO on the situation. Article5 o the NATO treaty denes anattack on one NATO member asan attack on all o them. Thus theUSA is involved, while Russia isa long-time ally o Syria.

In the Pacic Basin, Sino-Jap-anese tensions rose in Septem- ber over the Senkaku/DiaoyuIslands, as Japan tried to settle a

simmering ownership dispute bynationalising the rocks, thus pro-voking China to send naval shipsto the area. By October, two U.S.carrier strike groups had alsosailed nearby in the largest U.S.show o naval orce in the west-ern Pacic since 1996, whichJapanese ocials called “a dem-onstration o U.S. resolve” to in-clude the islands under the U.S.nuclear umbrella covering Japan.The London  Economist head-lined: “Could China and Japan

Really Go to War…?”In the Philippines, the U.S. ro-tation o orces to its mammothSubic Bay naval base, ater anabsence o two decades, has be-come so intense that the Asia ed-itor o Britain’s IHS Jane’s De- fence Weekly trumpeted in a 16Oct. commentary, “The U.S. Navy Returns to the Philippines.”

During the same months, the

 build-up o the U.S. global Bal-listic Missile Deence (BMD)network, aimed at both Chinaand Russia, continued headlong.In September, the USA and Ja- pan announced agreement on building another ground-based BMD radar in Japan. On theother side o the globe, Span-ish Prime Minister Rajoy in ear-ly October nalised the basingagreement or U.S. Aegis radar-missile ships (Fig. 1). “Russiacould nd itsel surrounded by

a ring o NATO radar and mis-siles,” said Russia Today TV.The U.S. and Israel are conduct-ing joint BMD exercises in Oc-tober. Within months, the RoyalAustralian Navy will take deliv-ery o the rst-ever Aegis sys-tems or installation on its ships.

As shown in the last New Cit-izen, Russia and China identiythis unilateral U.S. BMD pro-

gram as an attempt to allow aU.S. rst strike by neutralisingRussia’s and China’s ability tolaunch their own missiles in re-taliation. The Russian Strate-gic Missile Forces (SMF) have just now tested and demonstrat-ed those retaliatory capabilities.Early-September command-sta exercises o the SMF had the stated purpose o honing nu-clear deterrence “or the evento an armed confict with the participation o Russia.” In Oc-

tober came simultaneous test-ing o Russia’s land-, sea-, and air-launched strategic nucle-ar weapons, in exercises per-sonally overseen by Putin and announced as the largest-scalesuch practice in Russia’s 20-year post-Soviet history.

Both Russian and Chineseocials have warned that theyreserve the right to launch nu-

clear rst strikes, should a com- bined U.S. oensive and BMD build-up on their borders threat-en their very existence. And whatdoes the anti-war crusader HughWhite have to say about all this?In return or the U.S. “accommo-dating the rise o China”, he de-mands that “China should stopits … complaints about [U.S.]BMD programs in Asia”.

Fig. 1. Anglo-American “Containment” of Russia

As Eurasia’s keystone nation, Russia has been surrounded by political, economic, and military destabilisations. The map shows countries that are neighbours,

allies, or economic partners o Russia and have been aected by past or intended uture “regime change” through Colour Revolutions (a technique developed atOxord University and aimed against Vladimir Putin in Russia beginning 2011) or military insurgencies.The red symbols show the European Ballistic Missile Deence System, created as part o NATO’s eastward expansion. Potentially part o an attack on Russia, itis identied by Moscow as a threat to its sovereignty and a tripwire or war. The Euro BMDS is part o the global U.S. missile deence project, which in the Pacicregion meshes with similar attempts at what Malcolm Fraser calls “a policy o containment” against China.

Published & printed by:Citizens Media Group Pty Ltd

595 Sydney Rd Coburg Vic

PO Box 376 Coburg Vic 3058ACN: 010 904 757

Tel: 03 9354 0544

Fax: 03 9354 0166

Editor Craig Isherwood 

cec@cecaust.com.au

New Citizen

Malcolm Fraser: Australia Heading for Nuclear War

 From page 1

Stop Nuclear War

Former Prime MinisterMalcolm Fraser

7/29/2019 cv7n8_web

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cv7n8web 3/4

The New Citizen Oct/Nov/Dec 2012 Page 3

Former Deputy Secretary o Deence Hugh White has

likely done more than anyoneelse in Australia to promote pol-icies leading to a thermonuclear war with China, while posing asa ull-time campaigner to avoid it. White argues that the USAmust neither withdraw rom theAsia-Pacic region, nor seek todominate it as in the past, but

should take a third way: accom-modate the “rise o China” in a“concert o powers” in the Pa-cic. White compares his “con-cert” with the 1815 Congress o Vienna, the post-Napoleon dip-lomatic disaster that set Europeon a century-long course o Brit-ish-manipulated conficts with-in a “balance o power”, whichWhite considers a success.

White also holds, however,

that his “concert” is highly un-likely to come about. Thus, themassive deence build-up thathe describes as intended to es-tablish Australia as a “middle power” within the concert, is ar more comprehensible as a com- ponent o Anglo-American prep-arations or a ull-scale nuclear showdown with China.

White advocates acquisition

not merely o the now planned twelve attack submarines or the Royal Australian Navy, toreplace our six aging Collins-class subs, but double that num- ber; and double the planned 100Joint Strike Fighters, as well. Inhis words, the objective is to de-velop “air and naval orces thatcan eectively deny our air and maritime approaches to substan-tial hostile orces out to several

thousand miles rom our shores,and project signicant orce be-yond that.”1 

And who might the target be?Hugh White was the lead au-thor o Australia’s Defence 2000White Paper , which asserted thatAustralian “air and naval orc-es had to be able to operate e-ectively in coalition operationsagainst the region’s major pow-

ers like China.”White’s insistence that Chi-

na “stop its complaints” againstthe U.S. global ballistic missiledeence program, in return or the unlikely U.S. “accommo-dation” o China in the region,gives the lie to his peacemaker image. The BMD plan is part o global showdown preparations:it rings Russia and China withanti-missile radars and batter-

ies or the purpose o enablinga thermonuclear rst strike bydeveloping the capability toknock out a retaliatory response.2 

Anglo-American Imperium:the Cheney Doctrine

On 23 March 1983, U.S. Pres-ident Ronald Reagan announced his Strategic Deense Initiative(SDI) or anti-missile deence.

As conceived by its author, U.S.economist and statesman Lyn-don LaRouche, and by Reagan,the SDI was to be a joint U.S.-Soviet program not only to elim-inate the escalating danger o thermonuclear war, but also tounleash a scientic renaissanceas the cornerstone o a globaleconomic recovery—the basisor truly durable peace. The So-viets rejected the SDI, launched a orced-drat military build-up,and the USSR collapsed eightyears later.

With the apparent disappear-ance o Russia as a superpower,British-owned elements in theUSA revived the notion o bal-listic missile deence, but thistime as a means o securing per-

manent Anglo-American world domination. In 1992 then-De-ense Secretary Dick Cheney de-veloped a Drat Planning Guid-ance or coming decades, saying,“Our strategy must now reocuson precluding the emergence o any potential uture global com- petitor”. Use o military orce,including nuclear weapons, wasincluded. An outraged then-Senator, now Vice President JoeBiden commented that it was “a plan or ‘literally a Pax Ameri-cana,’ an American empire”.

The Pentagon’s Oce o NetAssessment (ONA), which drovethe campaign or the Cheneydoctrine, had argued since 1977that China would soon emerge

as the chie threat to the United States. The ONA maintained in-timate relations with Australia’sown ONA, the Oce o Nation-al Assessments, the nation’s pre-mier intelligence body.

Hugh White has been in-volved in designing Australia’s

“deence” doctrine that accordswith the Cheney Doctrine since1992, when he entered the Aus-tralian ONA as head o its Stra-tegic Analysis Branch. His wholecareer gives the lie to the notionthat showdown with China is anAmerican scheme that White isresisting with his “concert”; hehas been pushing an adversaryrelationship with China or two

decades.White has described his 1992-

93 stint at the ONA and work inthe Deence Department’s In-ternational Policy Division in1993-95 as a search or Austra-lia’s position in the post-Sovi-et world. With the USSR gone,the remaining obstacle to Anglo-American plans or world domi-nation was China. Most Austra-lians would not sign on to prep-arations to ght China as a na-tional priority, so White has pro-moted a massive military build-up as being vital or Australia’sown deence, up to and includ-ing the possibility that Austra-lia “might contemplate ghtingChina alone… [a] question [that]has exercised me since the mid-

1990s when we began to won-der about the consequences or Australia i China just kept ongrowing.”3

Australia’s “Defence”Doctrine: Made in BritainIn a 2008 paper, “Strategic In-

terests in Australian Deence Pol-icy: Some Historical and Meth-odological Refections”, Whitedescribed basing Australia’s so-called deence doctrine explicitlyupon that o the British Empire:“During the early 1990s some o us working in Deence began ex- ploring this problem o deningAustralia’s wider strategic inter-ests in the post-Cold War world.Our attention was caught by Lord 

Palmerston’s amous line about‘Britain having no permanentriends and no permanent ene-mies, only permanent interests.’We started to look at how Brit-ain dened these permanent in-terests, and what we might learnrom them. For centuries British

 policy was guided by a view o its strategic interests which had hardly changed rom the time o Elizabeth I until ater World War II, articulated and implemented  by men like Burleigh, Marlbor-ough, Walpole, Pitt, Wellington,Palmerston and Churchill.”

British imperial conceptsshould be applied to Australia,White argued, because Britain,like Australia, was an island na-tion. It had organised “concentriccircles o deence”, ultimately toembrace the whole world: rst,guard the English Channel; next,control European ports rom

which invasion feets might sail;and, nally, “align with weaker  powers to preserve a balance o  power among Europe’s major states and ensure that none be-came dominant. These preceptshave determined British strategic policy or centuries.”

Asked White, “How mightwe apply the principles o Pittand Palmerston to Australiain the 21st century?” His an-swer was an Australian ver-sion o the British imperialconcentric circles theory: rst,“deend the Australian conti-nent”; then, deal with the “near neighbours”; and, nally, tack-le the Asia-Pacic version o the“dominant power on the Euro-

 pean continent”—China.White boasted that British impe-rial doctrine had been transormed into Australia’s national strategy, asrst embodied in the Defence 2000White Paper : “The ideas that weadapted rom Pitt and Palmerston

The U.S.-Israeli-NATO military buildup around Southwest Asia (violet dots) directly targets Iran and Syria, butthe ultimate targets in a global showdown are Russia and China. The green dots along Russia’s western bordersshow the U.S.-NATO European Ballistic Missile Deence System, which Moscow has called a trigger or war. Inthe Asia-Pacic region, the yellow dots represent the increasing U.S. military presence or conronting China, intowhich Australia has been drawn. U.S. Navy Ohio-class submarines armed with Trident II D5 submarine-launchedballistic missiles (locations shown are representative o operating areas) are the strategic nuclear capability thatwould infict a rst strike on Russia or China.

FIG. 2. Anglo-American Military Encirclement of Russia and China

Chairman o the Parliament’sJoint Standing Commit-

tee on Foreign Aairs, Deenceand Trade Michael Danby ac-cused ormer PM Malcolm Fra-ser o “hysteria”, or soundingthe alarm that Australia’s de-ence build-up puts our nation

on a course towards nuclear war.Danby ponticated, “No ratio-nal examination o the oreign policy o the US under Obamaor Australia under both primeministers Gillard or Rudd could lead anyone to believe Canber-ra or Washington had sought or encouraged nuclear conronta-tion with China.”

An honest examination o Danby’s own international po-litical activity reveals him as oneCanberra-based gure who has pushed events in exactly such adirection. Anglo-American en-circlement o Russia and China(Figs. 1 and 2) includes a Brit-ish-ounded “Project Democra-cy” component o “colour revo-lutions” and “regime change”,done under the fags o “democ-racy and human rights”. Such os-tensibly non-violent schemes,directed against major nuclear  powers China and Russia whoseleaders understand them as threatsto national sovereignty, serve to in-tensiy a global showdown and in-crease the likelihood that a particu-lar hot spot will suddenly zoom to

ull-scale nuclear war.As with his nominal opponent

Hugh White, with whom Dan- by has squabbled, charging thatWhite is selling out to China and seeks an “Asian Munich” (as in Neville Chamberlain’s notoriousappeasement o Hitler in 1938)— 

all roads lead back to London.Danby serves on the steering com-mittee o the World Movement or Democracy (WMD), ounded in1999 as a spin-o o the British-guided U.S. National Endowmentor Democracy. Thus he is a lead-ing proponent o the Project De-mocracy road towards nuclear war.

Danby is also an Internation-al Patron o Britain’s HenryJackson Society (HJS), ound-ed at Peterhouse College, Cam- bridge. The maniesto o the HJSgives the British imperial gameaway: “The British Moment:The Case or Democratic Geo- politics in the Twenty-rst Cen-tury”, by Brendan Simms, a pro-essor in the History o Interna-tional Relations at Cambridge’sCentre o International Stud-ies. The HJS advocates a “or-ward strategy” to spread “liber-al democracy across the world”through “the ull spectrum o ‘carrot’ capacities, be they diplo-matic, economic, cultural or po-litical, but also, when necessary,those ‘sticks’ o the military do-main.”1 The HJS achieved noto-

riety in 2011 when it emerged that the opposition Syrian Na-tional Council’s plan or carv-ing out “sae havens” or insur-gents in Syria, which the U.S.and British would then moveto secure militarily, as had beendone in Libya, was actually writ-ten by HJS sta. Simms boast-ed about operations in Libya, inan article on the HJS’s website:“Democracy Can Be Dropped From 10,000 Feet”.

Even as NATO and the U.S.waged their illegal war to over-throw Libya’s Muammar Qad-da, Danby and co-authors Pe-ter Khalil (a ormer Rudd oreign policy advisor) and Carl Unger-er o the Hugh White-ounded Australian Strategic Policy Insti-tute (ASPI) screeched that Syr-ian President Bashar al-Assad 

was a ar more important target:“The close relationship betweenSyria with [ sic] Iran makes it aneven more signicant test o theArab spring than Libya, Tunisia,Yemen or Bahrain.” Claimingthat the Syrians are secretly de-veloping nuclear weapons, Dan-

 by et al. concluded that “Austra-lia has a direct stake in ensuringthat the current regime in Syriais removed as soon as possible.”2

Danby has also vehementlyadvocated a U.S./Israeli strikeagainst Iran. In The Australiano 14 Dec. 2010, “Iran’s Nu-clear Plans give West a ToughChoice”, he and the same co-authors lied: “The internation-al community … share an ines-capable view that Iran is pursu-ing an oensive nuclear weapons program”, adding that “sanctionsare never enough”, and that “theonly credible alternative” to Ira-nian domination o the region,with or without nuclear weap-ons, “is to use military orce” and “accept the short-term pain and consequences” o a war, rather than “live with the longer-termstrategic challenges o a nuclear-armed, regionally dominant, mili-tarily aggressive and emboldened Iran”. What’s more, according tothe title o Danby’s article in the11 Feb. 2010 Wall Street Journal article, the world should “BlameChina or Iran’s Nukes”.

As with the Project Democ-racy crowd at large, Danby de-mands not only war against Syr-ia and Iran, but regime changein China, as well. As in his rau-cous criticism o the Hugh White“concert o powers” scheme,Danby harps on the theme o 

concessions to China being likeappeasing Hitler. Danby’s alter-native to “a Canberra Munichmoment” is to overthrow thecurrent Chinese leadership, us-ing Project Democracy methodsto achieve “a process o Chinatransorming into a non-bellig-erent, liberal democracy”.3

Danby chairs the All-PartyParliamentary Group or Tibet.In July 2009 he led the rst-ev-er Australian parliamentary del-egation to meet with the DalaiLama in Dharamsala, where hedemanded, “Let reedom reignin Tibet”. The Chinese govern-ment angrily charged Danbywith interering in China’s in-ternal aairs, as they did againthe next month when he organ-ised a visit by a Uighur leader to the Melbourne Internation-al Film Festival. Anglo-Amer-ican intelligence agencies havelong supported the secession o Xinjiang Province in China’swest, agitating among its largeUighur population. Danby hasalso been a leading member o the Australia-Taiwan Parliamen-

tary Friendship Group. In March2005 China passed an anti-seces-sion law, declaring that should Taiwan secede rom China, itsaction would be met with mil-itary orce.

In 1986-93, this great dem-ocrat was editor o the Austra-

lia-Israel Review (AIR), ound-ed by Robert Zablud, a ollow-er o the Jewish ascist Vladi-mir Jabotinsky. Israeli ound-ing ather David Ben-Gurionamously reerred to Jabotin-sky as “Vladimir Hitler”, butDanby has deended him as a“much-misunderstood centre-right Zionist ideologue”. One o the AIR’s major nancial sup- porters has been multi-billion-aire Frank Lowy (whose LowyInstitute has been home base or Visiting Fellow Hugh White).Danby and Lowy share their admiration or Jabotinsky withthe son o Jabotinsky’s long-time personal secretary—IsraeliPM Benjamin Netanyahu, whois presently leading a crusade or a war with Iran, with its likely es-calation to thermonuclear war.

Notes

1. Neil Clark, “Cameron is nomoderate”, The Guardian, 24 Oct.2005.2. “Syrian regime takes priority over Gaddai”,  National Times, 3 June2011.3. The Australian, 16 Sept. 2010.

Michael Danby: the Project Democracy Road to Nuclear War

Continued page 4

Hugh White

British Empire’s Hugh White Prepares for War with China

Federal MP Michael Danby

7/29/2019 cv7n8_web

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cv7n8web 4/4

Page 4 The New Citizen Oct/Nov/Dec 2012

Any one o hal a dozenhot spots around the globe

could quickly escalate to all-out thermonuclear war and the possible extinction o the humanrace. One o them likely will, i the British Empire is allowed to continue the “divide and 

conquer” policies typical o allempires throughout history. Inhis 1983 proposal or a jointU.S.-Soviet Strategic DeenceInitiative (SDI), Americanstatesman and physical economistLyndon LaRouche proposed a pathway or sovereign nationsto escape imperial manipulationand the present thermonuclear nightmare, but that option wasrejected by British-inluenced Soviet leader Yuri Andropov.

On 18 Oct. 2011 Russia’sthen-Ambassador to NATODmitri Rogozin, soon thereater to become deputy prime minis-ter or the deence industry, pro- posed a new orm o the SDIcalled the Strategic Deence o Earth (SDE): international co-

operation to saeguard our plan-

et against deadly threats romspace. Bombardment by as-teroids and comets is a part o Earth’s history that will recur.Russia’s TV channel Russia To-day reported that Rogozin’s planwas intended “to ocus on ght-ing threats coming rom space

rather than just missiles. ... Itwould be an integration o anti-aircrat, missile and space deens-es… [The system] would be target-ed against possible threats to Earthcoming rom space, including as-teroids, comet ragments, and other alien bodies. ... The system should  be capable o both monitoring thespace and destroying any danger-ous objects as they approach our  planet. ... The idea has been nick-named ‘Strategic Deense o Earth’as an allusion to ‘the Strategic De-ense Initiative’”.

Upwards o one million aster-oids orbit between the orbits o Mars and Venus, many o themintersecting Earth’s orbit at some point. Only a tiny raction o them have been identied. Even

i an Earth impact could be pre-

dicted with certainty, there pres-ently exist no means to stop it.

A relatively small asteroid, thesize o a large whale, can devas-tate an area o around 800 squaremiles (over 2,000 km2), as hap- pened when one exploded over Tunguska, Siberia in 1908. Ev-

ery year around thirty smaller asteroids, in the range o 10 me-tres in diameter, explode in theEarth’s upper atmosphere witha blast equivalent to the Hiroshi-ma atomic bomb in 1945. A Tun-guska-type event is estimated tooccur every ew hundred years.Geological evidence shows that,over time, many larger space ob- jects come all the way to hit thesurace o the Earth. The extinc-tion o the dinosaurs 65 millionyears ago was likely caused byan asteroid 10 km in diameter.Small to medium-sized asteroidsthat land in the ocean generatemassive tsunamis, larger than theone which killed 200,000 peoplein Indonesia in 2004.

Asteroid 2005 YU55 passed 

 by Earth just inside the Moon’s

orbit on 8-9 Nov. 2011, while99942-Apophis will pass Earthin 2029 inside the orbits o manycommunications satellites. Thoseare just two o the million or more Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs), hal a million o them Tunguska-classor larger. Travelling towards the in-

ner solar system rom a greater dis-tance and at higher speeds are com-ets, which may be larger, more di-cult to detect, and ar more devas-tating than asteroids.

Unlike non-existent man-made “climate change”, thedeadly danger rom space is as-sured, and mankind must ini-tiate an international eort todeal with NEAs and other threatsrom space, such as the large so-lar storms o 1859 and 1921;their eects were minimal then, but today such radiation would wreck electric and communica-tions grids or months or evenyears, plunging large sections o the planet into chaos.

Lyndon LaRouche said onLPAC-TV ater Rogozin’s 2011

 proposal: “So SDI is back, my

SDI in that sense. And the bring-ing o the United States into a direct

alliance with China and with Rus-

sia, now, on this program, and oth-er nations coming in, is the global

requirement to save civilisation.”

underlay the development o theshort account o Australia’s wid-er strategic interests provided inthe 1997Strategic Policy Review,and the revised, extended and more detailed description giv-en in Chapter Four o the 2000White Paper .”

The idea was to justiy a mas-sive Australian deence build-upor an Anglo-American show-down with China. In a recentessay, White wrote: “Howard’s Defence White Paper , released in 2000, clearly acknowledged that China’s rise constituted amajor change in Australia’s cir-cumstances, and that Australianeeded to take a wider view o itsnational interests and expand itsmilitary capabilities. The possi-

 bility o war with China now in-fuenced major orce-planningdecisions or the rst time sincethe Vietnam War.”4

Unhappy with less than com- plete adoption o his perspective,White later in 2000 resigned hisDeence post, but secured De-ence Department unding toound a new think tank, the Aus-tralian Strategic Policy Institute.Its purpose was to continue hiscrusade or “projecting pow-er” many thousands o kilome-tres beyond Australia’s shores.

A Giant U.S. BaseThe announcement o the

 perma nent deployment o acontingent o 2,500 (initial-ly) U.S. marines to Darwinoccasioned much debate over whether a “U.S. base” were being established in Australia.In reality, the U.S. presencein our country has already ex- panded so dramatically over the past two decades, that Australiais practically one giant, ever-expanding U.S. military base,targeted at China in particular.5 This process began in the mid-1990s, under Hugh White’s su- pervision. As Deputy Secretaryo Deence or Strategy and In-telligence, 1995-2000, he over-

saw the negotiations and dealsstruck with the USA and the UK towards this end.6

The New Citizen o June-Ju-ly 2012 showed that the Brit-

ish called the shots in this pro-cess, though the USA was themore visible partner. “The Aus-tralian relationship with the UK is even more intimate than it iswith the U.S.”, observed GregSheridan in The Australian o 27 Dec. 2007. And the 1997 De-ence Eciency Review, whichstrengthened White’s positionin the Deence Department, washeaded by a top British DeenceDepartment ocial, Dr. Mal-colm McIntosh.

As closer ties with the USAand UK unolded in exerciseslike Tandem Thrust, the 1997rst-ever U.S. Marine trainingexercise in Australia, expertDesmond Ball testied in 1997Parliamentary hearings that notonly had  Australia requested the exercise, but that, “As re-cently as May 1997, Australiawas sharply criticised in Chi-na’s leading English languagedaily newspaper or being used with Japan as a US pincer to pindown China. … There is a lot o rhetoric in this Chinese position but … it does contain a germ o truth. … The exercise did noteasily t credible contingen-cies in the deence o Australia.”

Who is Hugh White?

White was born into an old British oligarchical amily, romwhich a son had migrated to become a grazier in southernQueensland. Since at least his

time in the Philosophy Depart-ment at Melbourne University,White was groomed by the Cam- bridge and Oxord Universities-centred priesthood that has man-aged the British Empire or cen-turies.7 That priesthood propa-gates an imperial view o peo- ple and the world, in the traditionreaching back to Babylon. Its precepts were bluntly expressed  by Thomas Hobbes: that humanlie or the great majority o man-kind outside the ruling oligarchyis “nasty, brutish and short”, and society is but the “war o eachagainst all”.

Oxord traditionally produc-

es “managers” or the Empire,with the Oxord PPE degree— Political, Philosophy, and Po-litical Economy.8 Despite end-less squabbles amongst thesemen and their epigones (suchas those who trained White atMelbourne University and thenOxord, where in 1978 he wonthe coveted John Locke Award in Mental Philosophy), theyare all anatical “reduction-ists”, who reject the existenceo “universals”, whether univer-sal laws o the physical universe(as opposed to “statistical cor-relations”), or principles o hu-man society such as truth, jus-tice, and the reality o a Com-mon Good within nations and 

among them. Instead, they ar-gue, only isolated particularshave reality: those o the mind such as the “atoms” o ormallogic, and isolated “acts” in the

“outside world”, knowable only by sense certainty.

These people especiallyhate Christianity, as not only“wrong”, but disruptive to rule by an empire. Typical was theoutlook o White’s early men-tor, Melbourne University phi-losophy department head and Trinity College, Cambridgegraduate Douglas Gasking. AnAustralian who spoke with a proud pommy accent, Gaskingdenied the reality o the humanmind in avour o the physical brain alone, holding that ideasor belies were merely “brainstates”. Gasking boasted that he

“had rejected Christianity sincehe was three”. White’s own “seto habits o mind” were devel-oped under such philosophicaltutelage, as he wrote in a Feb.2011 paper, “Why Study Phi-losophy?”

This philosophy gave rise tothe “British school o interna-tional relations”, centred at Ox-ord and The International Insti-tute or Strategic Studies (IISS),an institution that since the 1950shas ocused on managing the balance o thermonuclear ter-ror. White calls himsel a disci- ple o one o its leading gures,Hedley Bull, saying that his own“balance o power” proposalor Australia and or Asia “was

oreshadowed by Hedley Bullin 1972”.9 The Australian-bornBull was number two at the IISSor decades, and headed BritishPM Harold Wilson’s Arms Con-

trol oce. His Hobbesian world view is captured in his magnumopus on “international relations”,The Anarchical Society, a work White lauds, even as he admitsthat Bull “once wrote that bal-ance o power systems are notdesigned to prevent war, but to prevent hegemony, which theydo at the cost o occasional, bigwars.” Such a “big war” todaywould, as White well knows, bethermonuclear.

Notes

1. “Australian deence policy and the possibility o war”, Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 56, No. 2,

2002, p. 262.2. “Why War In Asia RemainsThinkable”, speech at IISS-JIIAConerence, Tokyo, 3-4 June 2008.3. “Could Australia Fight China alone?”,The Interpreter , Lowy Institute online

 publication, 27 Sept. 2011. 4. “Power Shit. Australia’s FutureBetween Washington and Beijing”,Quarterly Essay, Issue 39, 2010.5. Chronology and “Australia Preparesor World War: Tragedy, or Just PlainFarce?”, The New Citizen, June/July2012, p. 4-5.6. “Australia Forums: Hugh White”,ABC Radio, 9 Feb. 2003.7. The New Citizen, Oct./Nov. 2011,

 p. 11-12.8. Besides the above-cited  New Citizen

issue, also helpul on the Oxbridgeoutlook is a comedy sketch posted on YouTube, “Beyond the Fringe onOxord Philosophy”.

9. “Strategic Interests in AustralianDeence Policy: Some Historicaland Methodological Relections”,Security Challenges, Vol. 4, No. 2,Winter 2008.

Whereas:

The presently ruling policies o globalisation, privatisa-tion, deregulation and ree trade, together with the en-orcement o “environmentalist” policies so radical thatthey are best described as “green ascism”, are plungingthe vast majority o Australians—along with most o the rest o the world—into poverty and misery; destroy-ing our once-great nation; and eliminating any mean-ingul uture or our children,

Be it therefore resolved:

1) That the entire body o “globalist” economic reormsintroduced by the Hawke-Keating regimes beginning1983 and relentlessly extended since then, be scrapped,together with all the equally-murderous, radical envi-ronmentalist legislation enacted since that time;

2) That this nation return to the traditional protectionist,well-regulated orm o agro-industrial economy under which we once fourished, typied by the agreement inoutlook between “old Labor” as exemplied by ALP

 prime ministers John Curtin and Ben Chifey, on the onehand, and Country Party leader and longtime Trade and Industries Minister John “Black Jack” McEwen, on theother;

3) That we must re-regulate our national nancial system

upon two essential pillars:a) the immediate separation o sound commercial bank-ing which benets the average Australian, rom thespeculative merchant banking activities which havegrown like a cancer under nancial deregulation,

 both in this country and worldwide and which havelargely caused the present, ever-deepening globalnancial crisis; the well-known precedent or such

a separation is the 1933 U.S. Glass-Steagall Act ,which President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used to bring his nation and the world out o the GreatDepression, and whose adoption is presently beingdebated in numerous countries around the world;

b) the immediate re-establishment o a new, govern-ment-owned national bank to provide credit or urgently needed great inrastructure projects asthe engine to drive a great new renaissance in our agro-industrial,  physical  economy; we must have

a sovereign Australian national credit system, not aLondon/Wall Street-controlled  monetarist system,to enable us to secure the well-being o all Austral-ians instead o just the privileged ew, as under the

 present, monetarist system.

4) That we, the undersigned, will exert our utmost eortsto bring these reorms into reality, NOW!

The Future of Australia: Develop or Die

Mankind Must Grow Up!The Strategic Defence of Earth

A collision with one o the 1,000 Near-Earth Asteroids (NEAs) o more thanone km diameter would devastate Earth. Though some 90 per cent o theselarge asteroids have been detected, we have no way to defect any heading orEarth. Smaller asteroids are harder to detect, but also deadly: o the 1,500 or soasteroids 500-1,000 m in diameter, an estimated 80 per cent have been detected;o the 2,400 that are 300-500 m (still large enough to devastate a continent),only hal are detected; and o the over 15,000 that are 100-300 m in diameter,

 just 10 per cent are detected. There are an estimated one million NEAs lessthan 100 m in diameter, like the one that fattened 2,000 km 2 in Siberia in 1908.

 From page 3

Hugh White Readies for China War

Copies of this Resolution are available at http://www.cecaust.com.au or call 1800 636 432 for a FREE Resolution literature pack.

Hugh White’s book