Connect with us

Diplomacy

Experts say Bering Strait Tunnel could launch a new era of US-Russia cooperation

Published

on

International experts, academics, and project consultants discussed the Bering Strait Tunnel project at a roundtable organized by EIR News Service. Speakers emphasized that the project is not merely an infrastructure initiative linking continents but also a historic opportunity to promote global peace and development by fostering cooperation between the United States and Russia. They noted that the project could be a “game-changer” capable of moving the world out of its current, dangerously conflict-prone state.

International experts emphasized that the Bering Strait Tunnel project is not just an infrastructure initiative but also holds the potential to usher in a new era of global peace and development.

German, American, Russian, and Italian speakers, who convened at an online roundtable organized by EIR News Service, stated that the project could create a new paradigm in international relations by connecting the Eurasian and American continents.

Opening the meeting, EIR editor Jason Ross said the Bering Strait Tunnel could serve as “not just a bridge between continents, but a moral bridge to a better paradigm of international relations.”

This project is the answer to the question of war or peace

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder and President of the Schiller Institute, which organized the meeting, drew attention to the fundamental importance of the Bering Strait Tunnel.

Stating that the project carries more than just economic investment potential, Zepp-LaRouche said, “The realization of the Bering Strait Tunnel is potentially, and very likely, the answer to whether there will be war or peace.”

Zepp-LaRouche emphasized the importance of reaching an agreement between the world’s two largest nuclear powers that would replace conflict with cooperation, continuing:

“This cooperation is not only for the benefit of these two countries but for all countries in the world. This could be a game-changer, marking a break and a difference from the current, extremely dangerous moment in history.”

Zepp-LaRouche recalled that her late husband, Lyndon LaRouche, began supporting this project as early as 1978.

Expressing that the project formed the key link in the idea they later concretized in the report The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge, Zepp-LaRouche said, “This idea is the opening up of all the continents of the planet through the continuous advancement of infrastructure development, and eventually connecting the entire world with a system of tunnels and bridges.”

Zepp-LaRouche noted that with the realization of this vision, a person starting from the southern tip of Argentina by high-speed train could travel uninterrupted to Alaska, from there through the tunnel to Siberia, and finally to the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of Africa. She stated that the project is not just a transportation line but a “development corridor.”

“Four thousand kilometers of high-speed rail will be built on the Russian side, and two thousand kilometers on the Canadian and Alaskan side. But this will be just one artery in the corridor. The corridor will also include highways, energy production and distribution, and communications,” she said.

Through this, Zepp-LaRouche added, vast areas in North America and Russia’s Far East, which currently have largely permafrost conditions, will be developed with infrastructure, and the productivity of these regions could reach the level of global industrial centers.

Addressing the project’s cost, Zepp-LaRouche stated, “Some experts indicate the project will pay for itself in about 15 years. Elon Musk said the tunnel could be built in eight years for $8 billion. But the potential for economic productivity and prosperity that the project will unleash is enormous.”

Zepp-LaRouche recalled that Russian President Vladimir Putin invited other countries to invest in this project at the Vladivostok Economic Forum, adding that the project also has a peace-building dimension.

Spencer: The Panama Canal of the 21st century

Meanwhile, Scott Spencer, Chief Project Advisor for the InterContinental Railway, described the project as a significant “turning point” in history. “All great projects have more than one turning point in their history, and we are at exactly such a point right now,” Spencer said.

Stating that the cost of the war between Ukraine and Russia far exceeds the cost of this project and provides no benefit to the world, Spencer said, “The Intercontinental Railway is an important part of achieving peace.”

Spencer noted that the project is something US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin could agree on, and he reported that the Russian news agency TASS had contacted him twice in recent days to discuss the project’s potential to rebuild US-Russia relations.

Spencer expressed that despite the project’s complexity, there are only two fundamental questions:

“Who will take the leadership to build this project? And when it is built, why will people say they didn’t do it sooner?”

Summarizing the project’s benefits, Spencer said the tunnel under the Bering Strait would be about 100 kilometers long and that advanced tunneling technology could reduce the cost and time. He stated that the project is not just about the tunnel but encompasses a broader network that will connect Alaska to the other US states via Canada.

“We call this project ‘the Panama Canal of the 21st century’ because it will be as impactful and game-changing as the Panama Canal was in the 20th century,” Spencer said.

He expressed that they expect the project to initially carry about 100 million gross ton-miles of freight per year, in addition to creating extra traffic related to access to resources in Russia and Alaska.

Noting that although the project’s cost is estimated to be around $100 billion, even if it were $200 billion, this is not a significant figure considering its 150-200 year lifespan, Spencer emphasized the need for an “Intercontinental Railway Agreement” based on mutual benefit among the US, Canada, Russia, and China for the project to proceed.

Razbegin: The project is technically feasible

Dr. Viktor Razbegin, President of the Interhemispheric Bering Strait Tunnel & Railroad Group in Russia, also shared technical details about the project’s modern outlook and future potential.

Razbegin stated that the shortest distance between Alaska and Russia is 85 kilometers, but the tunnel route would be between 95 and 113 kilometers due to the presence of two small islands.

Razbegin said the existence of these islands is an advantage for the tunnel’s construction, assessing, “This way, we will cross the Bering Strait not in one piece, but in three parts, each no longer than the Channel Tunnel.”

Expressing that the project is a main line connecting not just two countries but the Eurasian and North American continents and will involve many countries, Razbegin said, “This will create an absolute revolution in logistics. Delivery times to the interior regions of the continents will be reduced from today’s 30 days to 10 to 15 days.”

Razbegin stated that about 4,000 kilometers of railway need to be built on the Russian side and about 2,000 kilometers to connect Alaska to the North American rail network for the construction of this main line. He said that thanks to technical and economic studies conducted over the last 30 years, they know how to realize the project.

“In Russia, we have organized an extensive program including engineering geology and technical research. We know the approximate cost of the project, and in fact, we have already started this project,” Razbegin said.

Stating that the engineering geology conditions for the tunnel are quite favorable for this type of construction and they do not expect major difficulties, Razbegin emphasized that the project could become profitable in 10 to 15 years with its commercial transportation benefits alone.

“But perhaps the greater benefit will come from the development of vast territories with enormous mineral resources in Russia, Canada, and Alaska. But perhaps most importantly, I completely agree with Helga Zepp-LaRouche that this project will be the embodiment of the idea of peace through development, peace through cooperation,” Razbegin concluded.

Investment signal from Russia: $8 billion, 8 years

Additionally, Azer Mahamedov, Deputy Chairman of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), stated that they appreciate the expert discussions on the project and are positive about its prospects.

“We believe the project itself is very important because it will provide significant potential not only for countries but also for the economic development of continents,” Mahamedov said.

Expressing that the project cost could be significantly reduced thanks to modern technologies, Mahamedov said, “We estimate the project cost at about 7 to 8 billion American dollars and the project duration at about eight years. We have been studying the project with the expert community for some time and will continue to do so.”

Siviero: Bridges unite hearts

Professor Enzo Siviero, a construction and transportation expert from Italy, added a philosophical and humanistic dimension to the project. “I define the tunnel as an underwater bridge because the term bridge also means to connect. This connects not only lands but also people, cultures, and emotional things like the heart,” Siviero said.

Stating that the connection between Russia and the US is vital for world peace, Siviero said, “It is necessary to build this huge project. It was necessary a few decades ago, but now it is more necessary than ever.”

Recalling that he himself had proposed a bridge-tunnel connection between Sicily and Tunisia decades ago, Siviero said that connecting continents is the key to the future.

Siviero noted that building a bridge in the Bering Strait is almost impossible due to weather conditions, making the tunnel the only option, and he emphasized the great importance of the two small islands on the route for safety.

“Infrastructures like this can also change people’s mentality. This is very important. Dialogue is the first step to peace. And in my opinion, the word peace is equivalent to a bridge, whether it is a tunnel or another structure. When we build, there is peace; when we destroy, there is war,” he added.

Bobrov: Diplomacy is undergoing a serious stress test

Dr. Aleksandr Bobrov from the Institute for Strategic Studies and Forecasts at the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia focused on the political and diplomatic dimensions of the project.

“This project not only creates a brand-new project that will bring the US and Russia together, but it is also a symbol of cooperation,” Bobrov said.

Stating that the project, much like diplomacy, brings together nations with different backgrounds and views, Bobrov recalled that the idea first emerged during the Kennedy-Khrushchev era, after the Caribbean Crisis when the world was on the brink of nuclear war.

However, Bobrov noted that there are some obstacles to the project, particularly that the European Union and some NATO countries have undermined diplomatic efforts between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. “Unfortunately, diplomacy should not work like this,” Bobrov said.

Bobrov stated that opposition within the Republican Party in the US and the current policies of the Democratic Party have reduced bilateral trade to almost zero, and the project must be launched in a “completely frozen economic environment.”

Emphasizing that this project has the potential to create a new environment in areas such as arms control, counter-terrorism, and cooperation in space, Bobrov added, “If there is a will, there is a way. Thanks to this project, I believe we are closer to a better future for our bilateral relations.”

Discussion on nuclear war risk and diplomatic solutions

In the discussion section, the question of how the project could eliminate the risk of nuclear war was raised. Scott Spencer stated that the risk of nuclear war cannot be ignored, saying, “This project can provide a very strong foundation for working together towards a future where we will reduce or eliminate nuclear weapons.”

Spencer said that with the integration of artificial intelligence into military command and control systems, nuclear weapons cannot coexist, calling it a “clear and present danger.”

Dr. Viktor Razbegin reiterated a simple idea:

“The only alternative to war is a great project. When different nations work together to create something truly great, the vector can shift from conflict to cooperation.”

Dr. Aleksandr Bobrov also stated that diplomacy is “undergoing a very serious stress test,” emphasizing that the only way out is diplomacy, just as it was during the Cuban Missile Crisis 63 years ago.

Financing and obstacles in Canada

The meeting also addressed topics such as the views of indigenous peoples in Alaska and Siberia on the project, financing models, and Canada’s role.

Scott Spencer mentioned that they have spoken with indigenous corporations in Alaska and that they want to be involved in the decision-making processes.

Canadian railway engineer Peter Schultz said that political institutions in Canada are not keen on the project, but some provinces think differently from the federal government and are actively negotiating with American officials.

Concluding the meeting, Helga Zepp-LaRouche stated that the idea that artificial intelligence and nuclear weapons cannot coexist is a “very frightening thought” and stressed the absolute urgency of a change in direction.

“The Bering Strait is an extremely important step for humanity to overcome geopolitics, to become one humanity, and to understand that we are all sitting in the same boat,” she concluded.

Diplomacy

US drafts Ukraine plan with Nord Stream restart and sanctions relief

Published

on

Draft proposals by the US administration to end the war in Ukraine envisage establishing a demilitarised line in the Donbass region, easing sanctions against Moscow, and offering a comprehensive investment package to Kyiv.

According to a report by the British magazine The Economist, citing Ukrainian officials, Washington is working on a broad framework comprising both economic and political points to persuade the parties to reach a settlement.

Under the draft plan reported by the publication, Russia is offered the opportunity to conclude trade agreements with the US, an easing of sanctions, and the normalisation of political relations.

Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing its goal of NATO membership, is promised direct foreign investment and European Union accession.

The report notes that Ukrainian officials do not possess complete visibility over every detail of the final text on the table, but are closely familiar with its overarching framework.

Nord Stream pipeline and natural gas shipments on the table

The Economist reported that the package designed to persuade the leadership in Moscow also includes items such as the resumption of Russian natural gas sales to the European market and the reactivation of the Nord Stream pipeline.

The magazine also points out that decisions regarding the operation of a pipeline located on European territory do not fall directly under US jurisdiction.

Ukrainian negotiators, meanwhile, are concerned that the Washington delegation may lock in commercial agreements in line with its own economic interests before the fighting formally stops.

Speaking to the magazine, a Ukrainian official summed up the American side’s approach with the words: ‘Why wait and waste time? Time is money.’

Diplomatic contacts intensify at leadership level

Stating that it is ready for talks, the Russian government announced that an agreement had been reached in recent contacts with Washington to launch a trilateral negotiation process that would also include Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said: ‘The objective of these negotiations will be to address the issue of ensuring the security of Ukraine and Russia once peace agreements are reached.’

As part of these diplomatic efforts, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, met Russian leader Putin on 21 October at the Konstantinovsky Palace in St. Petersburg.

Speaking during the portion of the meeting open to the media, Witkoff noted that he had brought documents outlining a pathway to peace and asked Putin to examine these texts.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov announced that the president would evaluate the American proposals.

Noting that concrete ground for a ceasefire had emerged during the St. Petersburg meeting, Witkoff expressed hope for the start of trilateral contacts between Russia, the US, and Ukraine to address technical matters.

Putin thanked Trump for his interest in peace efforts and recounted that the US president had specifically emphasized during their recent telephone calls that the war must end as soon as possible.

Framework prepared in Oslo carried to Moscow

Immediately before his visit to St. Petersburg, Witkoff had attended talks held on 20 October in Oslo, the capital of Norway.

Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner joined the meeting remotely due to illness, which was attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store.

According to information provided by Stubb, the parties at the Oslo meeting clarified key security and economic elements that the American envoy would present to Moscow. Air defence systems, energy infrastructure, and partial ceasefire measures were also discussed.

Commenting after the talks in St. Petersburg, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov argued that the newly presented approaches did not contain many elements useful for a resolution.

Noting that Witkoff informed Putin about the contacts in Oslo and relayed fresh nuances in the positions of European leaders and the Kyiv government, Ushakov stated that the meeting was thorough and frank, adding that the conflict is ‘moving toward an end.’

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

South Korea pulls part of embassy staff from Ukraine amid POW dispute

Published

on

The South Korean government has decided to withdraw part of its embassy staff from Ukraine.

According to the Yonhap news agency, Foreign Ministry spokesman Park Doo-sun cited the Kyiv administration’s failure to take “positive steps” in the dispute that began with the leak of information concerning the handover of North Korean prisoners of war as the justification for the move.

The spokesman also listed the ongoing threat of air strikes, which complicates the safety of diplomats, among the reasons.

Following the withdrawal of part of the personnel, essential diplomatic contacts will continue under the leadership of the charge d’affaires ad interim to Ukraine. All consular staff tasked with protecting South Korean citizens will remain in Ukraine.

Prior to this move, the Seoul administration decided on 8 October to withdraw its ambassador. The Foreign Ministry stated at the time that it was ready to continue consultations with Kyiv to resolve the emerging issues constructively.

Tensions between the two countries began with a speech delivered by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the United Nations General Assembly in September.

Zelenskyy announced that two captured soldiers from the North Korean army had been handed over to South Korea.

South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, meanwhile, accused Kyiv of breaching a confidentiality agreement.

Lee said the disclosure of this information endangered the prisoners’ families and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

Seoul expects a public apology

Dmytro Lytvyn, an adviser to the Ukrainian president, denied the existence of a confidentiality agreement.

The South Korean Foreign Ministry summoned Ukrainian Charge d’Affaires Andriy Veshkin on 28 September and issued a note of protest against Lytvyn’s remarks.

President Lee Jae-myung warned in a statement on 2 October that they would take additional measures against Kyiv if Ukrainian authorities did not acknowledge the agreement and make a public apology. Lee stated that Ukraine itself had initially requested that the transfer of the prisoners be kept confidential.

Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said the dispute stemmed from differing interpretations of the confidentiality regime.

Tykhyi noted that Seoul, based on its constitution which recognises the entire Korean Peninsula as its own territory, requested that the prisoners be handed over “like its own citizens”.

Describing the handover as a “gesture of goodwill”, Tykhyi stated that they were conducting closed-door negotiations to resolve differences of opinion.

Ambassador Park Ki-chang returned to Seoul on 10 October. According to a report by The Korea Times newspaper citing the ministry, recalling the ambassador served as a diplomatic protest against the leak of information regarding the prisoners.

The newspaper wrote that South Korea had last taken a similar step in 2008 by withdrawing its ambassador to Japan.

Moscow warned foreign diplomats

On 3 October, the Russian Foreign Ministry reiterated its warning to foreign nationals, including diplomatic mission staff, against remaining in Ukraine.

The ministry recalled its advice to leave Kyiv, citing ongoing strikes against military targets.

The ministry noted that those who failed to heed the warnings would bear responsibility for the potential consequences.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in a statement on 24 September that they had no information regarding Kyiv handing over two North Korean prisoners of war to Seoul.

Peskov, noting that prisoner matters fall under the authority of the Defence Ministry and intelligence services, said, “Contacts through the special services are continuing.”

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Ex-BND head Hanning tied to former Mossad chief amid spy inquiry

Published

on

August Hanning, who led Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) between 1998 and 2005, was arrested on 6 October on allegations that he obtained roughly 2,000 classified agency documents and used them during contacts with intelligence officers from a foreign state.

Accused of high treason and espionage on behalf of a foreign intelligence agency, the former spy chief is alleged to have procured the documents from former BND employee Manfred D.

Prosecutors stated that the leaked records included internal briefing notes presented to senior German officials, though the Berlin government has not yet publicly disclosed which country received the classified data.

According to an exclusive report by Jake Green for The Cradle, seized email exchanges revealed extensive ties between the arrested Hanning and former Mossad director Danny Yatom.

The correspondence shows that the two former intelligence directors built an ongoing network of contacts following their public service, combining commercial ventures, efforts to secure political influence, and intelligence links.

This dynamic has triggered debate that using personal connections and official access for private gain has left Germany’s intelligence apparatus vulnerable.

Intelligence notes for 10,000 euros and campaign proposals

According to the reviewed emails, Hanning told Yatom in a 2018 message that he could prepare an “overall assessment based on information obtained from senior German officials and intelligence agencies” concerning an unidentified candidate.

The former BND head committed to completing the report by 13 July in exchange for 10,000 euros.

Contacts between the two men subsequently expanded to cover domestic political processes in Germany. Ahead of the September 2021 federal election, Yatom asked Hanning to approach leading candidates.

Describing CIY Global as a “political campaign company”, the former Mossad chief noted that he aimed to introduce its capabilities to German politicians, and he mentioned his intention in the same exchange to transfer documents concerning a cybersecurity firm.

Cybersecurity partnership and surveillance operations across Europe

The partnership between Yatom and Hanning reached beyond political lobbying initiatives into the cybersecurity sector.

Hanning reportedly served as a consultant for World Health Energy Holdings, a cybersecurity company linked to Yatom.

Firms of this type, established or managed by former intelligence personnel, provide commercial platforms on the international market for Israeli-origin surveillance, cyber intelligence, and political influence capabilities.

The operational presence of private Israeli-based surveillance technologies across Europe has recently entered judicial records through scandals in Poland, Spain, and Greece.

Polish prosecutors announced on 12 October that data collected under the previous government via Pegasus spyware against political opponents had been transferred out of the country, adding that manufacturer NSO Group maintained access to the technical infrastructure.

In Spain, the 2022 CatalanGate investigation established that at least 65 people, including politicians, lawyers, and civil society representatives, were targeted using Pegasus or Candiru software, with Citizen Lab researchers publishing strong evidence linking the operation to Spanish authorities.

In Greece, the surveillance operation targeting journalist Thanasis Koukakis and Member of the European Parliament Nikos Androulakis was determined to have used Predator software, linked to Intellexa, a company founded by former Israeli intelligence officer Tal Dilian.

In the German espionage investigation, the traffic between Hanning and Yatom involving paid reporting, contacts with electoral candidates, and commercial partnerships does not yet provide conclusive legal evidence regarding the final destination of the roughly 2,000 classified documents.

Nevertheless, the disclosed correspondence gives German investigators a concrete line of inquiry to assess whether classified state secrets reached commercial networks tied to Israeli intelligence.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey