PRESS RELEASE
Russian Prime Minister Medvedev Warns
that Violations of National Sovereignty
May Lead to 'Nuclear War'
May 18, 2012 (EIRNS)—On the eve of his trip to the United States, where he will meet with President Barack Obama and representatives of the G8 nations at Camp David, Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev on May 17 delivered an unequivocal message to the Western nations threatening to intervene with regime-change operations in Syria, Iran, and elsewhere: Such actions can lead to "nuclear war."
As of today, Lyndon LaRouche PAC has deployed with leaflets announcing Medvedev's statement, in Washington, D.C. and around the country—and called for an accelerated mobilization to remove President Obama before he detonates nuclear war.
The headline on the Russia Today wire on Prime Minister Medvedev's speech, which was given at the plenary session of the Russia-sponsored International Legal Forum in St. Petersburg today, was: "Infringing national sovereignty could lead to nuclear apocalypse." The picture with the article showed U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder sitting right behind Medvedev.
Medvedev's warning comes in the midst of visible Russian concerns about the escalating Western intervention to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad, in particular, which they see as an escalation of the illegal Libyan operation of 2011, and aimed directly at the sovereignty of every nation state. A reliable Washington source has told EIR that this Medvedev speech echoes the message which Russian ambassadors have been conveying in capitals worldwide, and has been dubbed the "Putin doctrine."
The relevant section of the speech, as translated on the official Russian Federation website, reads as follows:
"I would like to emphasise that we need to act in unison against such modern global challenges as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, international terrorism, organised transnational crime, drug trafficking, and the threat of natural and man-made disasters. We can achieve this only through the collective efforts of states based on undeviating respect for the supremacy of law.
"Many say that the international legal system has become obsolete. I have heard this said many times during my political practice. They say that its norms do not always ensure an effective response to new challenges. This is partly true, because everything eventually becomes obsolete, and the legal system is no exception. But the acute need for modernising international law does not mean that we should abandon its founding principles, which I believe is an obvious truth.
"Particularly dangerous, in my view, are unilateral actions made in violation of the fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which is the main venue where the international community brings it problems. In fact, this is the only venue we have, even though some may not like it. But it truly is the only venue. And we understand that the UN Charter calls for respecting the supreme power of law and the sovereignty of states.
"One more thing that I believe is important, considering my experience in politics, is the concept of state sovereignty. It should not be undermined even if for the sake of achieving some immediate political gain, including an election to a particular post. Such attempts threaten global order. There have been many recent examples of the concept of state sovereignty being undermined. Military operations against foreign states bypassing the United Nations, declarations of illegitimacy of certain political regimes on behalf of foreign states rather than the people of the country involved and imposing various collective sanctions, again bypassing international institutions, are some of them. This does not improve the situation in the world while rash military interference in the affairs of another state usually results in radicals coming to power. Such actions, which undermine state sovereignty, can easily lead to full-scale regional wars even—I am not trying to scare anyone here—with the use of nuclear weapons. Everybody should remember this especially when we analyse the concept of state sovereignty." (Emphasis added)
