April 2, 2025 (EIRNS)—Donald Trump was savvy enough to ride a growing wave of anger in the American population against the Washington Establishment’s “forever wars,” and the related collapse of the economy under their weight, into the White House in 2025. He quickly opened direct communication with Russian President Vladimir Putin to work on peace in Ukraine, slamming the brakes on Biden’s defiant drive to World War III against Russia. Trump refused to include neocons such as Mike Pompeo and John Bolton in his government, rightly arguing that they had stampeded the country into war one too many times. And he even started cleaning the London-run permanent bureaucracy out of the intelligence community—some refer to it as the “Deep State”—and turned instead to reliable professionals such as Tulsi Gabbard at ODNI and Kash Patel at the FBI.
But is that savvy Donald Trump now so foolish—or so manipulable by the know-it-all British and their Israeli junior partners—to be seriously contemplating escalating American attacks against the Houthis in Yemen into an all-out strike against Iran? A strike that would include an attempted knockout blow against Iran’s well-protected nuclear program, which could end up covering the entire region of Southwest Asia in a radioactive cloud, even if a broader war were somehow avoided?
Trump’s own escalating rhetoric against Iran points in that direction. But more than the rhetoric, there is last week’s deployment of a half-dozen B-2 stealth bombers to the U.S.-U.K. military base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, within striking distance of Iran. There is the reported shipment of a sophisticated THAAD anti-missile system to Diego Garcia, which is otherwise largely unprotected from air attacks. There is the deployment of a second aircraft carrier strike group, the USS Vinson, to join the USS Truman in the Red Sea.
Have the Israelis and the British managed to convince Trump that Iran would crumble under such a “decapitation” strike? Has his own intelligence team, perhaps still reeling from the British-orchestrated SignalGate scandal, not been able to provide the actual intelligence that shows otherwise?
On April 1, one of Russia’s most level-headed senior diplomats, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, warned against such an American strike on Iran: “Threats are indeed heard, ultimatums are heard…. The consequences of this, especially if the strikes are on nuclear infrastructure, could be catastrophic for the entire region.” Ryabkov offered Russia’s help to deescalate the crisis: “While there is still time and the ‘train has not left the station,’ we need to redouble our efforts to try to reach an agreement on a reasonable basis. Russia is ready to offer its good services to Washington, Tehran, and everyone who is interested in this,” he said.
That kind of cooperation among the United States, Russia, China and others, is essential to defuse the war danger that now threatens in various theaters—Southwest Asia, the Taiwan Strait, and of course Ukraine—and to initiate deliberation on the broader issue of a new security and development architecture. It is the old architecture which is spawning war after war, as well as economic looting and financial breakdown.
Trump’s tariff warfare is certainly not the right approach. Given that the entire world financial and economic system is held together by little more than spit and chewing gum at this point, it is quite possible that this will unleash a chain reaction that no one was expecting, and bring down the entire trans-Atlantic financial system. Even if it doesn’t go that far, what it will do, for sure, is drive more and more Global Majority nations to seek alternative trade agreements, bypassing the United States, much as happened in response to the American sanctions against Russia and other nations. On this trajectory, “America First” will quickly become “America Last.”
As for Europe, and the drive to rearm in order to prepare for war against Russia—using the false argument that Russia had launched an “unprovoked attack against Ukraine” in 2022—Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche had some sharp criticisms, during her April 2 weekly webcast.
“The German elite or establishment, and many others in Europe as well, seem to have bounced back to an outlook we had more than 80 years ago. I feel I’m in a very difficult position to say that, but there is no other explanation [of what is going on]. How can it be that the vast majority of the world’s population has a completely different view of Russia … [and] completely refuse to buy the narrative that the Ukraine war was caused by ‘unprovoked aggression’ by Russia?”
Zepp-LaRouche reminded her audience that “the New York Times, two to three days ago, had a 13,000-word article which was the result of a year-long investigation in which they interviewed 300 different individuals from many different countries, about the circumstances regarding the outbreak of the war against Ukraine. What they clearly established is … that NATO was in the war from the very beginning, preparing it and instigating it, and that is now officially out.”
Zepp-LaRouche continued: “One would think that these Establishment people would say: Our narrative is no longer manageable, and we can’t keep it up. But, no! They show no inkling of recognition that their lies have been caught. There is the New York Times, which is after all the newspaper of record in the United States.”
Zepp-LaRouche concluded by demanding some good, old-fashioned, public recanting of their lies, since it has now been shown that none of their narrative was true. This is necessary, she asserted, in order to clear the way for a new policy of peace through development.
