Join us LIVE on Saturday at 2pm EST. A reevaluation of the strategic significance of Martin Luther King’s insightful and principled critique of war, viewed from the standpoint of Helga Zepp LaRouche‘s recent call for a new world defense architecture to replace the obsolete NATO. Speakers include Ray McGovern and Mike Billington. Also featured: Lyndon Larouche’s reflections on “The Immortal Talent of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King,” delivered in Talledega, Alabama in 2004.

As of the time of this dispatch, word is awaited from a meeting (virtual) today, to be held with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and top officials of the United Nations on Afghanistan, that was announced yesterday by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, because of the imminence of mass death. Guterres called not only for mobilizing full-scale aid, but for the urgent re-establishment of the Central Bank, currency liquidity and a financial system, or the country will cease to exist. He said that millions of Afghans are on the “verge of death,” and that “freezing temperatures and frozen assets are a lethal combination. Rules and conditions that prevent money from being used to save lives and the economy must be suspended in this emergency situation,” he warned.Guterres singled out the United States, saying that it has “a very important role to play because most of the financial system in the world operates in dollars,” and the U.S. is withholding most of the frozen Afghan foreign reserves. Expected to be present at the meeting today with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, besides Guterres himself, are Peter Maurer, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross, and Martin Griffiths, UN Undersecretary for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief. On Jan. 11 Griffiths issued an international funding appeal, on behalf of all UN humanitarian agencies and aid partners, for $4.4 billion this year for Afghanistan, which is the largest such appeal for a single nation in the history of the United Nations. Among the necessary measures cited in the appeal is the lifting of sanctions against Afghanistan, which prevent essential commercial functions, as well as emergency aid, and the unfreezing of the $9.5 billion in assets belonging to the nation and people of Afghanistan, and other measures allowing banking, currency and exchange to function. Impoverishment has reached the stage of destitution, in which barely 5% of the entire population of 38 million have enough to eat. 23 million are in various degrees of extreme hunger, and of those, 8.9 million people are at the starvation point. Among the limited fallback initiatives of the Taliban government, is the food-for-work program, in which a person who is still able, is offered 10 kg of wheat, for a set amount of work. This is unlivable. Yesterday, World Food Program Country Director for Afghanistan Mary-Ellen McGroarty described the situation to AP as a “tsunami of hunger.” Responding to this emergency is a test of morality for the “West,” whose U.S. and NATO forces pulled out five months ago, after 20 years of occupation. No lies about “democracy” and “values-driven” foreign relations can cover up the culpability for mass death that will result unless emergency action is taken now. The same test of morality is involved in the question of war or peace, in the current confrontation of the U.S. and NATO against Russia. Yesterday was the last of the trio of talks this week between Russia and the “West”: On January 9-10, talks between the U.S. and Russia (Geneva) took place; on January 12, between NATO and Russia (Brussels); and on Jan. 13, the OSCE and Russia (Vienna) talks. Initiated by Russia, which provided two security guarantee texts in December for concrete action, potential for productive work was blocked, not surprisingly, by a collective stance of lies and threats from the U.S. and NATO, with almost nil exception. Nevertheless, today, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, giving his annual review of last year’s diplomacy, did speak of proceeding on these security talks, on principle, with good will, while sternly saying that what is now expected are written replies to the Russian proposed texts, and soon. Russia does not have infinite patience, he underscored. However, almost at the same time as the end of the Vienna OSCE talks yesterday, U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan signaled a new attack on Russia, which has since come to pass. Sullivan said at a press briefing, that “the intelligence community has developed information” that Russia is right now “laying the groundwork to have the option of fabricating a pretext for an invasion” of Ukraine, the same way they did so in 2014. He said Russia is using the same “playbook” as they did in 2014, and “the Administration will have further details on what we see as this potential laying of a pretext, to share with the press over the course of the next 24 hours.” Right on Sullivan’s cue, “the press” came out this morning with three waves of articles—with the Washington Post and the New York Times in the lead—that Russia has assets embedded in Ukraine, ready to stage a “false flag” stunt, to justify Russian invasion. Secondly, that the U.S. better consider leading, not just supporting, Ukraine’s defense against Russia in the event of attack. Thirdly, come the reports that a new cyber-attack on Ukraine ministries has just occurred, with Russia presumed to be the perpetrator. If this line of insane foreign policy is allowed to continue, the result will be mass death from war. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has already come out denouncing these accusations as completely unfounded, based on “hearsay.” The Schiller Institute, with collaborators, has mobilized all possible means to expose and stop this deadly course of action, and its perpetrators. For immediate attention to the Afghanistan emergency, a Schiller Institute webinar will be held Monday, January 17, at 11 a.m., titled, “Stop the Murder of Afghanistan.” Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche said yesterday on her weekly webcast, “If you have any heart left in your body, then join this campaign. Because, I think if the West cannot mobilize to help to resolve the situation which we caused—I mean, ‘we,’ the West, NATO was there for 20 years—if we cannot solve that, the whole world will look at the West with complete contempt. So this is a last chance to reverse that, by joining hands now with all the neighbors, and including emphatically Russia and China, but the Europeans and the United States are called upon the most. Because if we can’t do that, then I think this will be the symbol of our demise. And we must not allow that to happen, but must take that as the turning point of history.”

Jan. 14 -- A week of summits scheduled to resolve the deepening tensions over Ukraine between Russia and the United States and NATO did not succeed, based on the initial press briefings and read-outs produced by the participants. The talks came after two video calls between Presidents Biden and Putin, and were centered on U.S. charges of an impending invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces, and the Russian's insistence on receiving written, legally-binding treaties from the U.S. and NATO, agreeing to no further eastward expansion of NATO, including a prohibition on placing sophisticated weapons and ABM systems in Ukraine.

The axioms under which they operate, have led the U.S., NATO, and the other members of the OSCE to make essentially no response to Russia’s central security concerns, which that nation laid out repeatedly over a series of meetings this week. But those axioms can be junked at the moment the decision is made to do so. And the accelerating approach of the menace of nuclear annihilation must serve as the catalyst for this change!Will the Treaty of Versailles approach being taken by NATO — whereby the victor dictates terms to the vanquished — give way to a new Peace of Westphalia, whereby the interest of the other must guide a nation’s (and one’s own) actions, as the key to durable peace? Consider the example of Syria, which has been pummeled by years of economic warfare, invasion by outside military forces, and support for domestic and imported terrorists. Despite its suffering, still the State Department and Members of Congress demand more blood. But China offers something else — something that the trans-Atlantic world could have offered, but didn’t. China offers development, investment, advancement, and growth. Syria just joined China’s Belt and Road Initiative, a modern approach like that of the Treaty of Westphalia that ended the brutal and bloody Thirty Years War by creating an active peace — one based on cooperation for the future, rather than recriminations for the past. Can empty politicians, selfish billionaires, and City of London and Wall Street institutions be reformed? Kazakhstan’s newly empowered President, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, shows a way to achieve that goal, with a little “assistance.” His country possesses vast mineral resources, a phenomenally wealthy elite, and great need for economic, cultural, and scientific advancement. To help achieve those latter ends, Tokayev has announced the establishment of a “National Fund” to invest in “health care, education, and social services.” How will it pay for these investments? Tokayev is direct: through “meaningful and regular contributions to the fund on the part of businesses.” “Thanks to the first president [Nazarbayev], there is a group of very profitable companies in the country and a layer of people who are rich even by international standards. I think the time has come to pay back the people of Kazakhstan, and help them on a systematic, regular basis.” He even offers to help, by compiling a list of eligible “donor” companies, and a calculation of how much they should “contribute.” A similar approach towards such extravagantly and unjustifiably wealthy institutions as the British Monarchy, Blackrock, and Jeff Bezos could have a salubrious effect on both donors and recipients. On a national and global scale, the Four Laws of Lyndon LaRouche can guide the establishment of a system whereby the many “contributions” given to the financial oligarchy over the decades can be redirected to create growth through infrastructure, technological leaps, and scientific advance. The world is ready to be turned upside down. Will we take this great opportunity to think big? Join the Schiller Institute’s January 17 event “An Injustice Anywhere Is a Threat to Justice Everywhere: Stop the Murder of Afghanistan” for the outlook capable of creating such revolutionary change.

"It is midnight in the social order. As we look out on the international horizon we see the nations of the world engaged in a colossal and bitter contest for supremacy. Within a generation two world wars have been fought, and the clouds of another war are constantly hovering dangerously low. Man now has within his possession atomic and nuclear weapons that can completely destroy any of the major cities of the world in a matter of seconds. In spite of this, the arms race continues at breakneck speed. Nuclear tests continue to explode in the atmosphere with the grim prospect that the very air we breathe will be poisoned by radioactive fallout. Bigger and faster missiles continue to carve highways of death through the stratosphere. There is the ever present danger that all of these conditions and weapons will yet conspire to bring about the total annihilation of the human race." - From Strength to Love, a compilation of sermons of Dr. King, this sermon was delivered on February 11, 1962 Eight months before the Cuban Missiles Crisis, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. made the above remarks in a sermon entitled "A Knock at Midnight," thus demonstrating the quality of leadership and insight which caused Lyndon LaRouche to say that King would have been qualified to become President of the United States. We are closer to midnight now than we were in 1962, and neither King, nor LaRouche is here to personally guide us, but we have had the privilege to know their work, and we should learn from their example how to meet the crisis currently challenging us in the immediate days ahead. Join Diane Sare of the LaRouche Movement National Executive Committee to discuss!

In reviewing the ongoing series of discussions this week between Russia, the U.S. and NATO -- which she said so far "looks terrible" -- Helga Zepp-LaRouche returned to what she described as the two alternative approaches to relations between nations.The Versailles Treaty at the end of World War I has in common with the posture of the U.S. and NATO today the view that the victors in war can dictate the terms of peace, as a unipolar force. This blatant assertion of world dominance ignores the legitimate wishes of other nations, and insists on their subordination to the unipolar power. This typifies the "arrogance of power" of today's globalist war hawks, who claim the U.S. "won the Cold War", and therefore has the right to be the dominant world power. In contrast, the Peace of Westphalia, which ended the Thirty Years War in 1648, was based on the idea that recognizing the "interests of others" is the key to a durable peace. The outright rejection thus far by U.S. negotiators of the legitimacy of President Putin's security concerns will not be accepted by Russia. While it is better to talk than not, she said, the overall posture of the U.S. in these talks has "lowered the nuclear threshold", making the use of nuclear weapons more likely should war break out. NATO, which should have been dissolved at the end of the Cold War, must be replaced, especially since its present policy course leads to a war in which its members in Europe will be destroyed. Belonging to a security alliance which would lead to war doesn't make sense. Demonizing Putin and attacking the Belt-and-Road Initiative when the western financial system is crashing also does not make sense. She concluded by calling on our viewers to participate in the emergency Schiller Institute's online seminar on January 17, on the theme, "Stop the Murder of Afghanistan."

Helga Zepp-LaRouche's description that we are "sitting on a powder keg" regarding relations between the U.S. and Russia was confirmed following the conclusion of talks Wednesday. A Russian spokesman said there is no "unifying, positive agenda" between Russia and NATO, as the West is choosing a Cold War containment strategy. A sudden outbreak of war is increasingly possible, as long as relations are defined by the imperatives of imperial geopolitics, i.e., divide the world into competing blocs, with the unipolar power of the U.S./NATO dictating terms. One flank, where cooperation is possible, is collaboration to rebuild Afghanistan. Join us, Jan. 17, at 11 AM EST, for our online seminar "To Stop the Murder in Afghanistan" (register here: https://schillerinstitute.nationbuilder.com/20220117-conference).

Between Monday and Wednesday of this week, the world has moved dramatically closer to the brink of thermonuclear war.The United States and NATO dug in their heels in their respective Jan. 10 and Jan. 12 high-level security talks with Russia, and proclaimed their intent to continue expanding NATO eastward up to Russia’s very border, and to deploy threatening nuclear attack systems also on that border, five minutes flight-time from Moscow. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko emerged from today’s Russia-NATO Council meeting to report that not only was there no unifying positive agenda between Russia and NATO, but that the U.S. and NATO have reverted to the full Cold War strategy of “containment” towards Russia, including “full spectrum dominance.” Russia is being left with no option but to respond in kind to the policy of containment, deterrence and intimidation, he stated. The Monday U.S.-Russia discussions ended on a similar note. These results are not surprising, Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche commented today. Other than any possible back-channel or private communications between Presidents Biden and Putin that may be underway and which offer a more rational approach, there could well be a quick counter-action on the part of Russia. As Putin and many top Russian leaders have warned repeatedly over recent weeks, Russia cannot back down to the threats being posed to its very sovereignty and existence. Russia is faced with a reverse Cuban Missile Crisis, only this time with a far shorter hair-trigger to war. Recall the words of JFK sixty years ago: “Within the past week, unmistakable evidence has established the fact that a series of offensive missile sites is now in preparation on that imprisoned island (Cuba).” To do this, he reminded the world, “in an area well-known to have a special and historical relationship to the U.S., is a deliberately provocative and unjustified change in the status quo which cannot be accepted by this country.” Zepp-LaRouche warned that, if the bellicose statements and confrontation continue, then the world is most likely in for a sudden showdown—which could escalate to the thermonuclear threshold nearly instantly. A broad mobilization of forces worldwide is urgently required to stop this descent into hell, and quickly develop new options that will guarantee security and wellbeing for all parties. • A new, global security architecture is needed to immediately replace the NATO organization and policy, which has brought the world to the brink of war. The driving force that is impelling the world towards thermonuclear war is the breakdown crisis of the entire trans-Atlantic financial system. For their system to survive, the predatory speculators of the City of London and Wall Street must impose fascist levels of economic looting, and bring Russia and China to heel to ensure that there is no real opposition to that policy. • The trans-Atlantic system must be put through bankruptcy reorganization along the lines specified by Lyndon LaRouche in his 2014 Four Laws. Put that system out of its misery, and you remove the danger of World War III. Throughout his life, Lyndon LaRouche repeatedly explained this intimate connection between the collapsing financial system and the drive to war. One of his clearest expositions was in a Dec. 23, 2011 statement, “To Stop Thermonuclear War, Bring on the World Economic Recovery,” which we have previously quoted in this space, and excerpts of which are the editorial appearing in the January 7, 2022 issue of Executive Intelligence Review. As that editorial notes, LaRouche’s remarks from 2011 “confirm the prescience of this genius, and demonstrates why Helga Zepp-LaRouche has called for the year 2022—the 100th anniversary of his birth—to be known as ‘The Year of Lyndon LaRouche.’” LaRouche warned in his 2011 presentation: "We are now on the verge of what must be called World War III: This will be thermonuclear World War III—not pre-nuclear war, not nuclear war, but thermonuclear war. The targets, principally, are Russia and China. These are the two principal targets…. “The issue is as follows: The present world system, the economic system, is in the process of disintegrating. Exactly how that will occur is uncertain, but it is happening. The intention is to eliminate two nations—Russia and China—and this means nuclear weapons; it means thermonuclear weapons. That part is engaged…. “Now, at this point, the United States, nations of Europe, Russia, China, and other countries, are poised for exactly this war. “The background of the war is the fact that the entire world is going bankrupt, especially the trans-Atlantic region, especially Europe, and also the United States, and the nations of South America and elsewhere, as well… “The bankruptcy from the United States’ standpoint, was set into motion back in 2007, when the beginning of the bailout process was set into motion. Since that time, the entirety of the trans-Atlantic region, particularly the United States and Europe, have been trapped into a bailout crisis, a hyperinflationary bailout crisis. At this point, the debt which has been accumulated since 2007, under this program, is such that every part of Europe at this time, under the present rules and the present arrangements, is hopelessly bankrupt! They could never recover as living nations, under the present degree of indebtedness they have. The same thing is true of the United States; Europe is a little more acute. That’s what’s happened…. The author of this thing is the British…. “Now, what we have to do—there are solutions for this bankruptcy. First of all, we have to put the world through bankruptcy—that is, a legitimate bankruptcy operation. We can do that, by, first of all, in the United States, for example—and other nations can copy this measure in cooperation with the United States—we go with a Glass-Steagall law, a U.S. Glass-Steagall law. And there are nations of Europe who are thinking of adopting the same Glass-Steagall law. “Under a Glass-Steagall law, the greater part of the debt of European nations, and the United States and others, will be wiped out, in effect, because under Glass-Steagall, the gambling debts, which are the major part of the indebtedness of the United States, will be simply put into a special category where somebody’s going to try to figure out how to get these debts paid—and they will never be paid! They will simply be wiped off the books; there’s no other solution. “Wiping that debt off the books, canceling the bailout debt, will mean that the United States, and Europe if they join, will be in a position to reorganize their finances, to create a credit system, and actually going into a new kind of Hamiltonian kind of credit system, a banking system which will enable the United States, and also Europe and other nations if they join, to organize a financial recovery. “In other words, what would happen, immediately: Remember, most of this bailout debt, the Wall Street debt, the London debt, the other bailout debt, is absolutely worthless! It can never be repaid! It never could be repaid: And the only solution, of course, for this thing, was to have this war. And if the British Empire came out as the victor in such a war, with the support of the United States, then they would cancel their debts, and they would go about their business. But, the population of the world would be reduced, greatly, through hunger, starvation, and so forth, which is about to occur anyway.”

Has there been any progress in the ongoing talks between U.S. and Russian reps? The best that can be said is that it's good they are talking, but statements issued by them show that the Russians have not received the agreement they are seeking, as the U.S. continues to insist it will not accept Russian "red lines" on NATO expansion and arms to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the attempt at a "Color Revolution" coup in Kazakhstan has been thwarted by decisive action by the CSTO allies of the nation. "Russia will not allow a 'Color Revolution'", Putin stated yesterday, after revealing that "Maidan technologies" -- a reference to the methods used in the 2014 coup in Ukraine -- had been employed in Kazakhstan.

The following article appeared in Russian press service RIA Novosti today. Expert Black: US Must Be Urged to Seriously Negotiate on the Demands of Russia NEW YORK, January 11 - RIA Novosti. The US authorities should be encouraged to conduct serious negotiations on the requirements and conditions that have been put forward by Russia, Richard Black, a representative of the Schiller Institute in New York, told RIA Novosti.Speaking about the Russian-American negotiations on security guarantees which took place in Geneva on Monday, Black said, “it is too early to say what the outcome of the talks, which will extend through the week, will be.” Talks are expected later this week in the Russia-NATO format, as well as of the OSCE . “We at the Schiller Institute believe that it is necessary to mobilize veteran diplomats and leaders in civil society in the United States who must call on the United States to seriously negotiate the demands and conditions set out by President Putin,” Black said. “We believe that a drastic turnaround is needed on the part of the United States, in terms of goodwill negotiations with Russia,” he added. At the same time, Black expressed doubts about the truth of the allegations promoted by the media and the US authorities, that “Russia is an autocracy, Russia is a strategic enemy, Russia has invaded Ukraine.” “In our opinion, this is an extremely dangerous situation,” he added. Earlier, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that there had been no progress in negotiations with the United States on NATO’s non-expansion. Ryabkov said that Moscow needs significant legal guarantees, “reinforced in concrete,” that Ukraine and Georgia will never become NATO members. This is a matter of Russia’s national security, Ryabkov stressed. Moscow and Washington, during January 9-10, held consultations in Geneva on Russia’s proposals on security guarantees. Following this, a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council will take place in Brussels, and consultations on the platform of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe will take place in Vienna. At the end of 2021, Russia had published proposed draft agreements with the United States and agreements with the North Atlantic Alliance on security guarantees. Moscow, in particular, demands from its Western partners legal guarantees to refrain from further expansion of NATO to the east, and guarantees to prevent both Ukraine from joining the North Atlantic Alliance, and to prevent the creation of military bases in post-Soviet countries. However, even before the start of the consultations, the United States had already stated that some of Russia’s proposals were unacceptable. Moscow, in turn, stressed that although the project of the proposed treaties is not an ultimatum, Russia will not agree to any unilateral concessions, especially under pressure. At the same time, Ryabkov did not rule out the possibility that the dialogue with the US might be limited to only one meeting—that there would be no point in continuing it. If so, this threatens a new round of confrontation. Translated By Ilko Dimov

In recognition of the January 11 birthday of Alexander Hamilton, the inventor of the American System of economics—not “capitalism,” which the Founding Fathers never called it, but the national system of credit, banking and Constitutional law documented in Hamilton’s four Reports, written as the first Secretary of the Treasury, and implemented in the Washington-Hamilton Presidency’s revolution in self-government through economic development—and in celebration of the American System’s challenge to the British East india Company, through the creation of such institutions as the Paterson, New Jersey, Society for Useful Manufactures in implementation of those policies—we present Lyndon Larouche’s 2013 remarks on the principle of Glass-Steagall, the June 1933 legislative action deployed by Franklin Roosevelt to clean up Wall Street, and to put people first.LAROUCHE: OK, what I’ve been pushing, of course, is this program around Glass-Steagall, but pushing it from what I do every Friday night, where I have a regular internet television program internationally, and this is covered. But we’re at the point where we have to immediately install Glass-Steagall. Now, what does that mean? Glass-Steagall was the foundation of the formation of the United States. What we call Glass-Steagall, which was established at that time: Now, that has been destroyed a number of times, that concept, which was set up by the chief organizer of the whole American System, Alexander Hamilton. And his design is the design on which the United States Constitution was premised for action. We have since been destroying that, or ripping it up, again and again, as was done recently, in the terrible years just preceding now; and so, the question is Glass-Steagall now. Now, what that means is, that if we in the United States act with our powers, as citizens of the United States, to ensure that Glass-Steagall is installed in the United States now, we open the gates for a new system of national economy, which other nations will go into, why? Because Glass-Steagall is the only formulation available, in the trans-Atlantic region in particular, which could solve the problems we face now, the economic problems and related problems. So therefore, if we get Glass-Steagall through, then what happens? Europe’s situation is generally hopeless: That is, the governments of Europe, the conditions of their laws and so forth, do not allow them to go directly into Glass-Steagall as an alternative. However, if the United States does that first, reinstalls Glass-Steagall, which is what has to be done now, then, immediately, you have the basis in Glass-Steagall for agreements among other governments, across the Atlantic and so forth, and these agreements mean that you are launching a new world system, which will actually address these kinds of problems. That’s the simple, practical solution: Glass-Steagall, what it means is that all the junk credits are cancelled. The junk is cancelled. And then we go back to a credit system, based on Glass-Steagall in particular, but actually on the original design by Alexander Hamilton of the credit system of the United States. Once we re-establish the credit system of the United States, which had been launched first by Alexander Hamilton, we are on the way home. Because every nation in the world needs that same program as their way out of the chaos. And therefore, we can then, on that basis—and I know what the situation is in China, for example, relative to this; what the situation is in other parts of Asia, and so forth. If we do this, we can turn the tide on the history of the United States, to get back to what we were really intended to become, when we were founded as a republic." Sooner than people may imagine, the necessity of returning to the principle of the American System will be perceived as the only way out, if the United States, or the trans-Atlantic world, will have any chance to survive. Right now, as can be seen in myriad ways, it is gripped by a Nebuchadnezzar-like madness, but this also means that, by losing its reason, it has also “lost the mantle of heaven.” British “Great Game”tricks, such as the ugly deployment of “Afghansi” terrorists to make a “Color Revolution” coup in the nation of Kasakhstan, have failed through resolute, pre-emptive action. The days of the late British Intelligence agent Bernard Lewis and his “Islamic Fundamentalism/ Arc of Crisis” jihad against Russia and China for control of the “Eurasian heartland” are over—though Victoria Nuland and other State Department “creatures from Foggy Bottom” have yet to get the memo. In the midst of the whirlwind of anxiety-creating fast-moving events, which often require analytical methods considerably above the “intellectual pay grade” of the dismally demented media of today, it is important to remain keenly focused on what is actually knowable and changeable in humanity’s dire condition. Therefore, we are re-emphasizing the conclusion of what was said by Helga Zepp LaRouche in the conclusion of her remarks made on Monday: “I always have this image of acting on the basis of Providence. Providence in my view is not something where you somehow have an angel from Heaven, who puts a crown on your head and then you are a Bishop or something. Providence is that you, almost intuitively act on necessity, and one thing Lyn has really taught all of us, is what that means, because Lyn was the man of Providence 100%. He was fearless, he knew the laws of the universe and he acted on it, and that’s why he was so right in his forecasts. That’s why Lyn’s analyses were so absolutely sharp, in being able to forecast events which would occur decades later. And, at the same time, then proposing solutions, always from the top, always from the standpoint of mankind first, of the laws of the universe, and if you internalize that as your parameters, —we don’t know how the solution will come. It could come by a financial crash, and then the only governments which are functions calling an international conference and reorganizing a system which has already collapsed. It could be like that. It could be more peaceful, like eventually at some big conference a proposal is made, and many countries endorse it. I have no idea: It’s very difficult to exactly say how we can win. “But the idea that we have not only a solution, but that that solution can become the dominant solution in history, I’m deeply convinced of it. It’s almost like every time something gets worse, it’s an affirmation that we are getting closer to the solution. If you’re not married to the system, then you think that what is becoming worse, in one sense, somehow affirming what Lyn has been forecasting all of this time, you say, yeah, we’re on the right track. And in a certain sense, it’s only when you marry into income, money, prestige, all of these things, then you don’t see it. And I think one of the reasons why these individuals don’t believe there are solutions possible, because they have one foot in paradise and one foot in hell; and then naturally, you don’t see a solution because you’re torn apart. “And I think it’s really something worth thinking about, because the one powerful weapon is that we can tell people we do have the solution and there exists a solution because otherwise, you would think that Leibniz was wrong about the best of all possible worlds; you would think that the Creator made the universe badly, which I fundamentally don’t think; I think this universe is the most perfect, beautiful, universe, that the Creator is the most loving Creator you can imagine, and the whole existence of creation is an example of the principle of Love. I fully agree with Kepler who said, the more I study the stars the more I come to the conclusion that the Creator must have been the absolute Loving existence in the universe. “I think this emotion of Love, recognizing the beauty of the Creation, can only come from this gigantic principle of agapē. That gives you hope. And if you are attuned to that, you are not afraid, either. So I think we should be absolutely emphatic, that solutions are possible, and that if people don’t see it, then they should investigate what’s wrong with their thinking, and not for one second give credence to such an idea.” As the institutional forces of the trans-Atlantic world lose the mantle of heaven, we will begin to see spontaneous, if disorganized and semi-informed, revolt. The walk-out yesterday by several hundred students in Brooklyn from a high school where they were required to show up and remain, despite known Covid cases among the faculty and fellow students; the request by Black Voters Matter and other Georgia Democratic organizations that Biden and Harris not show up to spew vacuous platitudes about Martin Luther King at his Atlanta memorial; the cowardly but continuous move toward nuclear power by nations asserting its indispensable role in an “energy taxonomy,” despite the conniptions of the “Brown Greens,” indicates in different instances how the mantle of heaven is being lost. Look at the contrast between the 1.4 million cases of Omicron virus in one day in the United States, and the 87 cases in Henan province in China, leading to a full lockdown of the city of Anyan (pop. 5.2 million.) The idea that the nation of China, 1.4 billion people, cannot continue to do the kind of lockdown process, mass testing, and aggressive healthcare that in fact defeats the pandemic, shows only the pessimism of those whose Malthusian health-care outlook, like the outlook of the recently exhumed Obama-era Ezekiel Emmanuel, will soon be shown to be unsustainable. Another contrast: not America or Europe, but Russia, as proposed by its medical officials at the December CIS meeting, has converged upon the public sanitation approach for all nations proposed 18 months ago by the Schiller Institute. This means that two of the world’s major powers are proceeding as the Schiller Institute suggests. Why not the rest? Soon, the populations of all nations will have no choice but to attempt to preserve their lives by adopting the proposals of Dr. Jocelyn Elders, and Helga Zepp-LaRouche. This Saturday, Helga will address international youth on the life, work, and significance of the great Islamic thinker and physician, Ibn Sina, after whom her strategic intervention into Afghanistan, “Operation Ibn Sina,” is named. Monday, on the Martin Luther King holiday, the Schiller Institute will host a gathering entitled “Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere: International Seminar to Stop the Murder of Afghanistan.” Meanwhile, to remind everyone of the boorish behavior of the Brutish Empire toward the United States, we present in the Documentation Section Prince Andrew’s (yes, that Prince Andrew) discussion about “The Great Game,” as recorded in October, 2008 by Tatania Gfoeller, the American ambassador to Kyrgyzstan. This sheds light on the ideational and synergist geopolitical context of the recent, failed attempt to overthrow the government of the nation of Kazakhstan. The efficiency of response by the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) to the attempted “Afghansi” disintegration of that nation will not have been lost on the negotiators that met in Geneva. Vladimir Putin’s attempt to engage President Joe Biden in a rational discussion, even amidst continuous provocations to war, may well prove to be the primary reason that we all survive.

The talks between U.S. and Russian officials yesterday in Geneva reached no positive outcome. This should not be a surprise, as U.S. spokesman Ned Price announced that the U.S. "had not intended to reach any agreement with Russia." Will this attitude persist as the U.S. approaches further talks? With the Trans-Atlantic nations facing a deepening economic crisis, warnings of a "sharp correction" in hyper-inflated stock markets, the continuing disruption caused by the pandemic, starvation threatening 22 million in Afghanistan, and electricity blackouts in Germany, this is the time to move towards cooperation between sovereign nation states, rather than geopolitical confrontation to defend bankrupt corporate cartels.

So many institutions of the U.S. intellectual establishment are now echoing the Schiller Institute and demanding the release of Afghanistan’s aid and reserve funds—15 think-tanks and organizations in a Jan. 8 joint letter to President Biden and others on their own websites—that there is clearly a horrible realization: United States financial and economic sanctions are murdering an innocent people, for insufficient loyalty to NATO occupying forces. Any citizen who thinks this crime is unrelated to the threat of an imminent, much bigger conflict over Ukraine, is mistaking moral posturing for morality.In the U.S.-Russia meetings now going on in Geneva about NATO in Eastern Europe and Ukraine, moral posturing by U.S. diplomats has quickly and completely replaced the personal diplomacy between Presidents Biden and Putin which seemed to give hope of a solution. After the bilateral U.S.-Russia stage of the meetings on Jan. 10, State Department spokesman Ned Price said that the United States would never consider keeping Ukraine out of NATO, “had not intended to reach any agreement” with Russia, and did not even “consider the talks as a negotiation.” He concluded his briefing with a talking points list of Russian “malign activities,” to claim that Russia, and only Russia, had to de-escalate and make concessions, to allow NATO forces and missiles to complete their long advance right to Russia’s borders—while Russian troops must vacate their own western border regions and “return to their permanent bases.” Secretary of State Tony Blinken added, at the same time, a gratuitous attempt to gloat over Russia’s assistance to the government of Kazakhstan to control rioting and attempted insurrection. Unless President Joe Biden intervenes personally again, Russia’s proposed agreements have been bluntly and permanently rejected. This is the equivalent of Nikita Khrushchev having refused ever to consider withdrawing Soviet missiles from America’s southern border in the terrifying Cuban Missiles Crisis of October 1962. At that time, tens of millions of frightened people around the world had already imagined what that refusal would mean. Even if the consequence now is “merely” a conventional conflict in Ukraine, U.S. former chief weapons inspector and military expert Scott Ritter gives an idea why that would not go well for NATO forces. What if the consequence is only the “complete rupture of relations” threatened by Putin and a deep and immediate Cold War. The nation with the world’s most rapidly expanding and technologically advancing economy, and with the greatest anti-poverty and development influence in Africa, South and East Asia, is firmly in partnership with Russia. This is clearly shown once again in the suppression of the apparently failed “color revolution” attempt in Kazakhstan. If the Biden Administration has decided the United States will attack and confront Russia and China together in a new Cold War—opposing them in space, fighting their policies of exporting nuclear power to third countries, demanding they stop using coal for power, attacking China’s Belt and Road and poverty eradication policies, and so on, who will it have in its corner? Why, the British Empire, of course—those green royals and Bojo the Clown and Her Majesty’s forces eager to deploy into Ukraine. What will America have in reserve? No development credit institution; a weak economic recovery from a deep recession; a labor force 3 million workers and 3.5 million jobs down from two years ago; declining real incomes; a Federal Reserve creating economic calamities worldwide, as the IMF warned Jan. 9, trying to stop the inflation it caused. But far worse than any of this is the ongoing strangulation of the people of Afghanistan by U.S. sanctions. It is causing a growing cascade of deaths by starvation, by freezing in homes with no winter fuel, in a nation for which the United States clearly bears responsibility after 20 years’ war and occupation. Murdered for the sin of not sustaining a puppet government when NATO left it. These sanctions are a crime against humanity. With this Afghanistan as its “banner,” nations will instinctively shun an Anglo-American attempt to make the rules for the world. There would be perverse new meaning, as Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche said today, to the phrase “Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires.” This must be prevented, reversed. The policy must be changed to one of development, by Helga LaRouche’s Operation Ibn Sina. The Schiller Institute’s urgent organizing for this objective, will take its next step forward with a webinar on Martin Luther King Day, Monday, Jan. 17.

This evening in Geneva, informal talks began between the United States and Russia, at a supper with U.S. delegation leader, Wendy Sherman, Deputy Secretary of State, and Sergey Ryabkov, Deputy Foreign Minister, and their teams, at the residence of the U.S. ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament. Tomorrow, the formal talks ensue, on the topic of security, between the U.S. and Russia. On Jan. 12, in Brussels, NATO and Russian officials will meet on security. On Jan. 13 in Vienna, the U.S., Russia and other member nations of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) will meet.On the eve of this historic week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke this morning on two Sunday TV interviews, unfortunately reiterating his litany of charges against Russia, his false history of Europe, and his crazed assertions about what he claims is in the interest of the United States, e.g., backing Eurasian nations against Russia—Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, Ukraine and now Kazakhstan. In turn, Minister Ryabkov today told TASS, speaking of the Russian readiness to discuss the two draft security documents that they have provided for discussion and action: “Honestly speaking, I really doubt that our American colleagues are ready for such a talk, judging by the signals that we have been hearing in recent days…. But it would be naïve to expect progress, given the revised public presentation of the position that we see today, right before the start of contacts.” The Schiller Institute and collaborators in recent years, have done everything in their means to prevent this state of brinkmanship expressed by the Blinken position, which is, in fact, the classic, deadly British Great Gamesmanship in Eurasia. Now is not the fitting moment to prognosticate what exactly will happen in the discussions tomorrow and this week. But it is time to redouble our efforts to engage everyone possible to understand what is going on, and what they can do to stop the drive to Armageddon. An important initiative comes from the United States. Fifteen organizations—including religious, veteran, diplomacy and other groups—issued an open letter Jan. 8 to President Joe Biden, on what kind of negotiations should go on with Russia this week, to the joint interest of all nations and peoples. The letter was also sent to Blinken, and Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Nancy Pelosi. The letter is titled, “Further Strengthen Diplomatic Efforts and Avert War,” and is circulating through the channels of the American Committee for U.S.-Russia Accord. The bipartisan authors call on the U.S. to reject expanding NATO, and say: “It is in the interests of the United States, the region, and the world to address these and other root causes of tension with Russia as part of an ongoing strategic dialogue.” It states: “Continuing engagement is necessary to avert a military conflict that will harm the interests of the United States, harm innocent civilians in Ukraine, and risk spiraling into a potentially catastrophic war between the world’s two leading nuclear powers.” What is called for is statecraft in service of the common good, which in the face of war, is life itself. Look at Afghanistan, for the threat of mass death from famine, disease and weather. Some days ago, a fierce storm system hit south of the Hindu Kush, bringing snow and freezing temperatures in Kabul and neighboring provinces. To the east in Pakistan, over Jan. 6-7, the storm system dropped up to four feet of snow very fast, and trapped thousands of tourists in their cars in the scenic mountain area some 22 miles north of Islamabad, in the popular winter resort town of Murree. So far 22 are dead. Emergency crews are working hard, and this is rightly highly publicized. However, in Kabul, a city of 4.5 million, the frigid weather and lack of food are creating mass death circumstances, but the “news” remains almost completely blacked out. On Jan. 7, the Afghan government issued a direct world appeal by video. Acting Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Ghani Barada said, “In various places right now, people do not have food, accommodation, warm clothes or money….The world has to support Afghan people without any political bias and carry out their humanitarian obligations…. We call for the international community, NGOs and all the countries not to forget our poor people.” The situation underscores the role of the Schiller Institute and collaborators to make known the reality of the crises, and the reality that nations collaborating can solve them all. Plans are being made final for a Schiller Institute international conference on the Afghanistan emergency within the coming 10 days. Circulate everywhere the Schiller Institute Memorandum (Dec. 31, 2021) “Are We Sleepwalking into Thermonuclear World War III?”

Now is the perfect time for the people living in the Trans-Atlantic nations to come to their senses, and throw out the ideological insanity embodied in neoliberal, and neo-conservative policies. The security dialogues with Russia this week provide an opportunity to move away from geopolitical confrontation with Russia; hyperinflation, supply-chain breakdowns, and unsustainable debt expose the fallacy of radical free market/free trade policies; and winter has shown why the Green New Deal must be dumped. So let's get to work, and organize a new paradigm, based on the body of work done by statesman and economist Lyndon LaRouche.