Join us LIVE on Saturday at 2pm for our weekly Manhattan Project meeting featuring Hussein Askary, Harley Schlanger and Diane Sare. Just as the attempt by the forces running the British Empire to establish and maintain a global "Rules-Based Order", through applying an imperial strategy they named "geopolitics", failed in Afghanistan in the 19th century, so the replay launched in the late 1970s until the present has once again failed, disastrously, as the U.S. and NATO forces retreated this week, under the cover of night. The failure in the 19th century did not teach the world a lesson, as allowing the imperial oligarchs to apply the same geopolitical theory led to two bloody and destructive world wars in the 20th century — which many believe, with some validity, was precisely their intention! Have we not learned the lesson yet, that submitting sovereign nation states to geopolitical practices deployed on behalf of imperial ambitions threatens the survival of mankind? This time, we have an alternative: dump geopolitics and adopt Lyndon LaRouche's approach to peace through development. We must act now, as we may not have another chance.
A majority of people now know that one cannot trust what appears in the media. Yet even those who know this, and consider themselves to have been "awakened" by this awareness, get manipulated by the narratives scripted by psychological warfare specialists. Today we take up questions shaped by those brainwashers, who have developed narratives to convince you that: 1) Afghanistan is hopeless, as civil war, underdevelopment, drug trafficking and terrorism are its destiny; 2) China's economic progress, and its commitment to aid others through the Belt-and-Road Initiative, make it a threat to the U.S.; 3) That a military confrontation between the U.S. and Russia is inevitable.
Lyndon LaRouche frequently made his audiences uncomfortable by posing to them the question of whether or not the United States, and Mankind as a whole, had lost the moral fitness to survive—that if the trajectory of current policies and thinking continued, our species might well disappear.For example, in his Feb. 15, 2000 article, “‘He’s a Bad Guy, But We Can’t Say Why’”, LaRouche wrote: “Through the cult of popular opinion, Rome acquired its fatal loss of the moral fitness of its culture to survive. We as a nation, have been following that same road to Hell, during no less than the recent three decades. The leading, characteristic pathology of that self-doomed Roman culture was the corruption of the mass of the population by the methods of ‘bread and circuses.’ There is virtually no moral difference between the form of entertainment which the Romans enjoyed in the Coliseum under the worst of the Caesars, and popular mass-entertainment today, both TV entertainment, and such forms as mass-spectator stadium and related sports events. If one compares the pornography and blood-and-gore in mass entertainment, with what usually passes for mass-media news broadcasts, one should recognize, with a sense of horror, the systemic likeness of the moral depravity of ancient Roman culture and our own.” LaRouche elaborated: “History punishes, or even weeds out nations and cultures which suffer a manifestly incurable want of the moral fitness to survive.” Now consider today’s withdrawal from Afghanistan by the U.S. and allied NATO forces. Will we be able to debate out and change the disastrous policies which led us into that 20-year catastrophe? This is a crossroad for humanity, Helga Zepp-LaRouche told associates today. Will we allow Afghanistan to sink into a civil war, with an ensuing nightmare of terrorism, drugs and mass migration? Will we continue the same, failed policies? Or can we change those policies and cooperate with China, Russia, and other powers for the well-being of the entire area, by extending the Belt and Road Initiative across the region, as Lyndon LaRouche long advocated? Or consider the COVID-19 crisis, where the world has just reached the terrible marker of 4 million deaths due to the pandemic, while the majority of the world’s population still has almost no access to life-saving vaccines and other health requirements. As Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the head of the World Health Organization, just stated: “Vaccine nationalism, where a handful of nations have taken the lion’s share, is morally indefensible and an ineffective public health strategy.” He added: “The fact that millions of health and care workers have still not been vaccinated is abhorrent.” Will we find the moral fitness to at last adopt the necessary world health policy that Helga Zepp-LaRouche has championed, of quickly providing not only vaccines, but modern health capabilities in every nation on the planet, with the needed accompanying development of food, energy, infrastructure, and other physical economic requirements? To best address the urgent strategic issue of mankind’s moral fitness to survive, the LaRouche Legacy Foundation has announced that it will be holding an international seminar “On the 50th Anniversary of LaRouche’s Stunning Forecast of August 15, 1971: So, Are You Finally Willing to Learn Economics?” The online seminar will bring together leading international experts to examine the unique contributions of Lyndon LaRouche (1922—2019) to the science of physical economy, on the 50th anniversary of President Richard Nixon’s fateful announcement of the end of the Bretton Woods system on August 15, 1971. As the announcement states: “This is also an urgent invitation to reflect on what went wrong with economic policy in the trans-Atlantic sector over the last five decades, in order to correct those persisting policy blunders and change course before we plunge into a breakdown crisis comparable only to the 14th century New Dark Age.”
This week's Fireside Chat featured guest speaker Jason Ross of LaRouche's scientific research team. Have you been told that consumption and development destroy nature? That resources are limited? That climate change is soon to reach a point of no return?The truth is that through economic development, especially in areas of infrastructure platforms and public health, climate catastrophes kill fewer people and cause less damage than a century ago. Overall, fossil fuels are fantastic for human health -- they've allowed life spans to expand by decades.Piercing the lies behind the green religion of the Great Reset reveals a beautiful world of unlimited resources, the absolute end of poverty, and increasing power in space.
The United States/NATO occupation of Afghanistan, the latest, long trail of fruitless wasting of blood and treasure in that suffering country, is now ending. There is an alternative start to peace through economic development which could now succeed, if the sine qua non which Lyndon LaRouche made clear years ago goes into action. The great powers in the region—China, Russia, and India—along with the United States, must cooperate, not with their special forces but with their engineers and their credits, to support that success.This was proposed by LaRouche’s Executive Intelligence Review in special reports already in 1997. It was sabotaged by regime-change wars throughout the region. Proposed again by Russia in 2014—an Afghan region development concept reported by EIR in its 2014 special report, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge”—it was again sabotaged by Russia’s expulsion from the G8 after the Ukraine coup d’état. Behind this was the British intelligence Bernard Lewis Plan, adopted by Zbigniew Brzezinski as Carter’s National Security Advisor, to use this region as an “Arc of Crisis” permanent weapon of war and terror against Russia and China. The Belt and Road Initiative, initially a Chinese land-bridge infrastructure project across Eurasia but now involving more than 100 countries, offers economic development advantages and prospects to Afghanistan, including the Taliban, if major nations in the region cooperate on them. The obvious question is why the U.S./NATO occupation persisted for so long in blocking the government of Afghanistan from negotiating on the Belt and Road, when it clearly was open to this and in desperate need of development as we show here. Railway-technology.com, the Belt and Road News, and The Diplomat have all recently reported on the agreement reached in February 2021 by the foreign ministers of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan for a railway to be built at an estimated cost of $4.8 billion from Tashkent, Uzbekistan’s most northerly major city and its capital, through Mazar-e-Sharif and Kabul, Afghanistan, to Peshawar, Pakistan. Uzbekistan—the initiator of the plan, according to The Diplomat—proposed to ask the World Bank to make a loan for this fund, and that request was made in April. Moreover, a Peshawar-Kabul-Dushanbe highway project was recently agreed upon between Pakistan and Afghanistan representatives. As a Pakistani planned project, called the Khyber Pass Economic Corridor as an offshoot of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, this plan dates to March 2015, when a feasibility study was begun. If the rail and road developments are combined, effectively a north-south transportation and economic development corridor begins to be launched running from the main Eurasian Land-Bridge on the north, to the Indian Ocean on the south. This is true even though the core Kabul-Peshawar stretch through the Khyber Pass runs east and west. Tashkent will connect the corridor north through secondary rail lines to the dry port of Khorgos, Kazakhstan, on the main Eurasian Land-Bridge rail line from Lanzhou Port in China to Russia and Europe. Peshawar, via the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), will connect the corridor directly to Pakistan’s growing port of Gwadar on the Arabian Sea—and of course, back into China’s southern industrial heartlands. Mazar-e-Sharif in the extreme north of Afghanistan is the only Afghan city with rail connections now, largely into Uzbekistan. Within Afghanistan itself, this rail-road corridor would turn the northeast quadrant of the Afghanistan Ring Road into a protected part of that international corridor; and through Mazar-e-Sharif, it would connect the Tajik capital Dushanbe which lies to the east of that corridor. The major economic powers must turn from tensions, charges and confrontations, and cooperate for this potential to finally allow peace and development in Afghanistan. The rail line from Peshawar to Tashkent and potentially north to Russia will have serious logistical-engineering challenges, which only the Chinese rail-building companies can solve. The World Bank loan will only be made if the United States agrees to support the plan, and then the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) can become involved in providing additional credit. And development along the corridor will require a lot of new electric power, which can best be nuclear plants engineered by Russia’s world-leading nuclear exporter Rosatom. These are only the beginning of the needs for power, water management, transportation, and urgently now, healthcare. They are the way out of the constant “Arc of Crisis” warfare LaRouche first exposed in his 1998 classic video lesson, “Storm Over Asia.”
While British Foreign Minister Raab threatens China over its unwillingness to submit to the City of London's Rules-Based Order, the largest financial institutions are granted exemptions from the new minimum global corporate tax praised by Biden. If a company is a corporation based in the City of London, Wall Street or Silicon Valley, it is exempt from the new taxes. The blowhards demanding subservience to the new global order are deploying regime change operations and military threats against nations which don't accept the arbitrary rules the Davos billionaires have created for everyone, but themselves! The imperial order is dying, help us put it out of its misery, by creating a new, just order based on principles of international law. Send me your thoughts and questions: HarleySch@gmail.com
Unfortunately, the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan is not a break with British imperial geopolitics, but an attempt to change the venue from the Middle East to the Indo-Pacific region. The failure of the U.S.-NATO war in Afghanistan will be followed by an even more devastating debacle in the Indo-Pacific, unless the U.S. breaks definitively from the Military Industrial Complex's commitment to geopolitical doctrine. A potential for such a shift was opened by the three-way call yesterday between China's Xi, France's Macron and Merkel of Germany. Will the U.S. join them, or remain an enforcer of the global central banker's Rules-Based Order dictatorship?
Helga Zepp-LaRouche gave the following interview today to the “World Today” broadcast of ChinaPlus, the English website of China Radio International. ChinaPlus: Chinese President Xi Jinping is calling on China and European countries to expand consensus and cooperation to jointly cope with global challenges. He made the remarks at a virtual summit with French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The Chinese leader says what the world needs is mutual respect and a sincere cooperation among nations. Xi Jinping: At present, the global pandemic situation remains severe, with frequent resurges. The prospects for economic recovery are uncertain and there is still a long way to go. The world more than ever needs mutual respect and close collaboration, rather than suspicion and technism or zero-sum game. ChinaPlus: During the meeting, the German and French leaders expressed their support for the conclusion of the EU-China investment agreement, and adding that they hoped the 23rd EU-China summit would take place as soon as possible. For more on this, we are joined by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a global political and economic think tank headquartered in Germany. Thanks for joining us, Helga. Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, hello; good day. ChinaPlus: So, what’s your main takeaway from this virtual summit, and what’s your assessment of the overall tone of the meeting? Zepp-LaRouche: I think, from everything one can say, is that it was very constructive, and also much needed, because there were some recent difficulties after the European Parliament blocked the EU-China investment agreement. So, I think that they discussed the possibility of reviving it is very positive. Mrs. Merkel said that she wants to have this revived as soon as possible. And President Macron said that he supports the conclusion of the China-EU investment agreement. So, I think it was very useful and productive.ChinaPlus: The summit is coming at an increasingly tense moment for EU and China ties, given that the EU’s recent sanctions against China and its interference in the country’s internal affairs. So, will this call lead to a shift in the EU’s approach to relations with China? And possibly, easing confrontations between the two sides? Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, I think it will. And I think it’s also important that this comes only four days after the very hysterical statement coming from the Lithuanian Foreign Minister Landsbergis, who had on Friday last week called for an end of the French-German dominance of the EU. He wanted to have a unified EU policy on China, which in his terms means against China. He even said that he wants to set up offices in Taiwan. So, I think this was a clear rebuttal of this position of Landsbergis. So I think that that was very useful. ChinaPlus: What’s your assessment of the current EU policy on China in general? Do you think that the tough stance recently taken by the EU side against China needs to change? As we know, China became the world’s largest EU trading partner last year, overtaking the U.S. European business leaders have expressed their hope that the EU will strengthen cooperation with China, rather than shut it out and decouple. Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, I think such a change is really very urgent, because, as it was mentioned by President Xi Jinping, the world is still confronted with a very serious pandemic. We have a world famine of biblical dimension, as the head of the World Food Program, Beasley, is calling it. We have a hyperinflation danger in the Western countries. As you can see with the situation in Afghanistan, there needs to be an urgent cooperation for economic development in the entire region of Southwest Asia, because otherwise, there is a danger of a new explosion of terrorism, and also the drug problem is very big. So, I think there are so many common aims of mankind in a world which is very fragile, and therefore, I think that these three important countries—China, France, and Germany—make steps to really mend fences and work together more closely, can only be welcomed in the interest of humanity as a whole. ChinaPlus: We see many European politicians have emphasized the differences between China and the EU, but President Xi is calling on China and the EU to adhere to the norms of mutual respect, and to handle differences appropriately. So, were the differences between the two sides addressed during the talks? And how can the two sides resolve their differences? Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, I think some of the differences were clearly addressed. For example, China is always emphasizing the need to stick to the UN Charter and international law, while some Western politicians always talk about a “rules-based order,” which, if you look at it more closely, has turned out to be a rather arbitrary definition of pursuing the interests of some groups. So, I think that was addressed—at least from the read-out, one can say that. And also, it was stressed by China that the intention of China is not to replace anybody else, but to focus on its own development. But I think there was one aspect in the discussions which I thought was particularly promising: Namely, that they seem to have focussed on a joint mission, which helps countries and people to always overcome their bilateral or trilateral difficulties. In this case, the focus was on Africa, that China and Germany and France would work together. That Germany, for example, said they were considering to join the initiative on partnership for African development. I think President Xi not only pointed to the severe situation of Africa, because of the pandemic and economic hardships resulting out of that, but he also said that Africa has the greatest development potential. He has stressed that in the past, in summits with African leaders, and I think this is absolutely true. The African continent has a very young average population, which means that if you provide them with jobs and economic opportunities, they can become really an economic engine in the next generations. That positive look on Africa is generally lacking in Europe, and I think therefore the populations of Germany and France and other European countries can only profit from the optimistic perspective that China has towards Africa. I think this can only have a positive effect. ChinaPlus: Another key factor crucial for China-EU relations nowadays is the U.S. factor. We’ve noticed increasingly frequent interactions between the U.S. and the EU, with Washington trying to rally its European allies against China. Do you think the call emanating from the summit is sending a signal from France and Germany that they are refusing to align themselves with the U.S. bipolar confrontation? Zepp-LaRouche: I would think so, because as you know, there was just the G7 summit, where Biden had travelled to England, and this was an effort to unite the allies in this stance against Russia and China. But Chancellor Merkel had always stressed in the recent period that she does not like to be pulled in one or the other direction, and forced to choose sides, and that she supports a multilateral world order. So, I think this is definitely a positive signal. One would hope that the Europeans really understand that it’s in their self-interest to have such a balanced view, to say the least. ChinaPlus: But some observers believe the U.S. has more power over the EU than that of Germany and France combined, so the change of attitudes from Germany and France won’t make much of a difference in the EU’s China policy. How do you look at this? Zepp-LaRouche: The EU right now is very disunited You had the Dutch leader, Rutte, who wants to kick out Orban from Hungary, and Hungary out of the EU. Then, Slovenia just took over the EU Presidency for the next six months, and he clearly is supporting Hungary, and backs the Hungarian view that they don’t like cultural interventions, interference with their value set, whereby Western European countries try to impose their liberal views, while the East European countries are more traditional. I think if they keep doing these kinds of things—and von der Leyen then attacked Slovenia, and then you have the disunited Baltic states and Poland. I think the EU right now is not in a strong position at all. I think the thing which will, I’m pretty sure, dominate in the future will be the self-interest of these countries. For Germany, for France, and also the other European countries, the economic interest in a world which is in a turmoil, the relation with China is clearly a factor of stability. This is what the German industry wants for the most part. I think also the United States may change. The United States has pursued policies in the last 20 years which were not really in the interests of the United States itself, as you can see by what happened in Afghanistan, where a war was fought for 20 years, and absolutely nothing came out, other than misery, death, and a lot of cost. So, maybe the United States can also start to change, and see that cooperation is more in their interest than confrontation. I know this is not the dominant policy right now, but things are changing very, very rapidly. I would really hope that the new paradigm of international relations gets into the minds of political leaders, because confrontation can only lead to a disaster. Anyway, I think we are in a flux. We are in an historic moment of dramatic change, and a lot depends on good initiatives which people have to influence the situation for the better. ChinaPlus: OK, thank you very much, Helga. That was Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a global political and economic think tank headquartered in Germany.
We present this video to introduce you to the Schiller Institute’s ongoing series of conferences designed to make sure you understand and know how to defeat what is called the “rules based international order” perpetrated by those would be masters of the planet who have deliberately robbed us of tens of millions of lives through disease, famine, war, and other products of the under-development they insist on.
In reviewing strategic developments of the last week, Schiller Institute Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche highlighted the prospects for peace and collaboration possible when geopolitical confrontation is rejected. The Merkel-Macron-Xi dialogue, for example, opens the door for a change in European Union policy, as the EU bureaucrats face growing tensions over their commitment to the unilateralism implied in imposing a “Super State.” The end of the Afghan war does not mean more conflict, but the emergence of an alternative based on a desire by its neighbors to overcome underdevelopment, as a competent strategy to combat terrorism. In her report on the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party, she challenged viewers to not fall back on the axioms drummed into their heads by corrupt media and imperial oligarchs, but to look instead at the real history of China. She described the Conference of World Political Parties addressed by President Xi, which included representatives from more than 150 parties, as an “expression of friendship”, which demonstrates that overcoming underdevelopment is a mission which can be embraced by all nations. It also makes a mockery of the view pushed by geopoliticians that China “is isolated”.
As news reports feature the threat of a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan following the withdrawal of U.S. forces, some voices in the U.S. Congress are questioning why we are leaving! The real question should be, "Why were we there for 20 years? Why did we waste more than $1 trillion and several thousand American lives on a war the Pentagon knew was unwinnable?" The followup question to that should be, "Why are we still using British geopolitical strategies to conduct our foreign and military policies? When will we learn our lesson -- as Lyndon LaRouche always insisted -- that the British Empire is our republic's only true enemy?"
Dennis Speed and Harley Schlanger discuss the implications of Edward Snowden's recent discovery concerning why by most people avoid deliberating about the root causes of actual conspiracy practices. Instead, the population and media, in general, favor obsessing over childish conspiracy theories. Why? Lyndon LaRouche's method of placing current developments in the context of the fight over the image of man of the past 3000 years is the key to subverting the propagation of fake British-authored conspiracy theories dominating popular culture and mass media today. Sign up for weekly updates from Harley Schlanger.
Paul Gallagher of Executive Intelligence Review documents the deliberate policy of hyperinflation followed by deflation practiced by Hjalmar Schacht, President of the [German] Central Bank (Reichsbank) 1933–1939. The same policy is being practiced today by Mark Carney, former head of the Bank of England, in a policy he calls "Regime Change," which intends to subvert the power of sovereign governments and replace it with policies of central banks. The policy has only one conclusion as demonstrated in the horrors of Germany during WW2. Learn more about the Great Reset and how to defeat this policy of genocide.
On this weekend, as the United States celebrates the anniversary of its Declaration of Independence, let us each reflect on how we can bring into reality the potential represented in the presentations and discussions of last weekend’s Schiller Institute conference.Consider the backdrop: After the relatively small steps towards U.S.-rapprochement (or at least normalization) with Russia, a British naval provocation in the Black Sea drew a Russian military response and the British have unleashed a new series of claims about Russian hacking of essentially everyone. The danger of nuclear war, growing constantly with the ongoing expansion of NATO despite promises to the contrary, absolutely must be addressed head-on. Inflation continues apace, with raw materials up 31% year-to-date and prices of cars, homes, and food skyrocketing with double-digit inflation. Yet the Biden White House trumpeted its economic success with a tweet merrily announcing that the cost of a Fourth of July cookout had decreased this year … by 16 cents! Green policies that are shuttering coal plants and directing energy investment into intermittent and unreliable sources are leading to blackouts and power shortages. In major de-developing countries, purchases of diesel emergency generators are booming in the context of the unreliable electricity grid. And revelations published by Revolver News site, if accurate, point to direct lines of questioning that could reveal the events of January 6 to have been, not an intelligence failure, but an intelligence setup, to drive a new war on “domestic extremists.” Preventing war means exposing and replacing the oligarchical, geopolitical insanity that drives what Ray McGovern, a speaker on the conference’s first panel, identifies as the MICIMATT (Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-MEDIA-Academia-Think-Tank) complex. A summit among the leaders of the United States, Russia, India, and China is absolutely required to replace geopolitics with a paradigm of growth. The greatest, expanding impediment to achieving that growth was taken up in the conference’s second panel, which exposed “The Real Science Behind Climate Change,” which covered the wild exaggerations central to the climate catastrophe narrative, the enormous costs of proposed mitigation measures against this false menace, and the immense potential of the actually superior power source of nuclear science. Exposing the Malthusian lie that limits to growth truly exist and must be respected, rather than shattered and overcome, can serve a profoundly liberating role. The Sunday panels marked inflection points in the drive for a global Glass-Steagall, for the kind of cooperation required to develop health systems throughout the planet, and for the quality of discussion necessary to organize into a higher mission the many different people and groups of the world. The rotting speculative debt must be given a proper, and speedy burial, and policies for creating real physical and scientific growth must be adopted. The need to ensure health—including creative mental health—for all, can serve as a central driver from which other infrastructure and development needs flow. Join the Schiller Institute’s mobilization. Celebrate Independence Day by acting to end the legacy and reality of the British Empire.
Questions taken up today: 1.) Is Putin right when he said that even if Russian forces sunk the HMS Defender, it would not lead to war? 2.) Do Europeans support the Green New Deal, as European Central Bank Chair Lagarde claims? Is it possible to have an honest debate on whether "climate change" is caused by human activities? 3.) Anything new to report on the status of Julian Assange? 4.) Is the 4th of July still relevant today?
At the Schiller Institute June 26-27 conference, “For the Common Good of All People, Not Rules Benefiting the Few!”, 37 speakers addressed the most important issues facing mankind today, and defined the level on which solutions can be worked out. This process is glaringly not the approach in the major world institutions at present, which are factionalized between the necessity and prospect of a new paradigm, as against those locked in the old paradigm, with great danger involved for everyone.This was manifest today in the Group of 20 meeting in Italy, the 2021 chair of the G20, at which foreign and development ministers and diplomats met in person—the first time in two years— and some virtually. The focus was on the pandemic and food supply crises. Speaking online, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi spoke of the need for coordinated action against the pandemic, saying sternly that the time for thinking in “zero-sum game” terms is over. There must be real collaboration. In contrast, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas used the occasion to criticize China and Russia for distributing their vaccines to countries as “vaccine diplomacy” for political purposes. Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche pointed out that the Matera gathering is one of a sequence of meetings which defines the framework to direct our efforts to make clear to the world, the type of solutions truly required, using the “spearhead” of the necessity for mobilizing for a world health security capacity. July 26-28 in Rome will be the Pre-Summit on World Food Systems, in conjunction with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Program and other UN agencies, which will be followed in September by the Summit of the same name at the time of the U.N. General Assembly in New York. In October is the G20 heads-of-state Summit. The enemy green climate track has the October Biodiversity conference in China, followed by the COP26 in Glasgow in November. The generic title of today’s G20 meeting was, “People, Planet, Prosperity,” with the most repeated word being “multilateralism.” U.S. Secretary of State Tony Blinken had the audacity to assert that the U.S. is leading the multilateral effort to distribute vaccines internationally. However, Wang Yi tweeted that, “multilateralism is not a high-sounding slogan, let alone gift-wrapping for the implementation of unilateral acts.” What is required, Wang said, is for nations to stabilize and expand the production and supply lines of vaccines and other necessities. Nations with vaccine capacity should lift any export impediments. Italian statesman Michele Geraci, in characterizing the Matera proceedings, said today specifically that it will be a world failure if “multilateralism” is taken to mean that 200 nations retrench, and in the face of crises, do not collaborate to deal with the pandemic, the economic tasks, and famine. Geraci, who has been part of prior Schiller Institute colloquies, spoke today in an interview with CGTN TV. Thus, today’s one-day G20 event, if anything, makes clear the responsibility to rapidly expand the dialogue process of the Schiller Institute, in policy and mobilization. Helga Zepp-LaRouche spoke today in particular, of the concept she had put forward over last weekend’s conference, of the necessity to re-tool the capacity locked up in the military-industrial complex, which, she said, she knows sounds utopian. But if we don’t, it will mean perpetuating the endless war policy, of the MICCIMAT, as it is called by Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst, warning of the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-tank complex. The danger of the “endless” war scenario turning into a final nuclear armageddon scenario couldn’t be made more clear, than by considering what is going on this very week in the up-close military exercises taking place simultaneously by NATO and Russia in both the Black Sea region and Eastern Mediterranean. Zepp-LaRouche noted of last weekend’s Schiller Institute sessions, that the entire conference was guided by the mode of thinking of the coincidence of opposites. Now more and more people are “getting it.” Forge the anti-Malthusian alliance.
For this week's Fireside Chat, we were joined by Paul Gallagher Economics editor at Executive Intelligence Review, and Diane Sare, Candidate for U.S. Senate (NY 2022)Host — Dennis Speed, LaRouche Manhattan Project Coordinator
In July, 2001, the newly-elected President, George H. W. Bush, met with President Vladimir Putin. At the time, there was a hard-line push from the neo-cons to dump the ABM Treaty with Russia - so as to begin building missile-defense systems close to the Russian border, and so to pin down a potential Russian response to a first-strike nuclear attack. However, the transparent argument presented to Putin was that the US had to withdraw from the treaty so as to build new ABM systems to counter of the danger coming from "rogue states"such as Iran. Such systems, supposedly, would need to be placed in eastern Europe, so as to protect western Europe. (At one point, Putin attempted to ‘call the bluff’ of this charade about Iran, by offering the United States, a joint ABM system in southern Russia, significantly closer to the Iranian border. The silent response to Putin’s offer was deafening.) Putin was clear then, and has been clear for twenty years, that the US and Russia could collaborate against rogue states, but that ABM systems deployed on the Russian border, against a potential Russian counter-strike, was intolerably destabilizing. In the July, 2001 meeting, Putin offered Bush that Russia would agree to the US leaving the ABM Treaty, if a new treaty dealing with the amount of offensive nuclear weapons were put in place - something Bush evidently found agreeable.Back in Washington, the Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, John Bolton, became concerned that Bush wasn’t fully on board. The two went to Moscow a couple of weeks later to make clear that the US was withdrawing from the ABM Treaty without any new treaty. Rumsfeld’s meeting with Sergei Ivanov, the Defense Secretary, left Ivanov cold. Afterwards, Rumsfeld was allowed to meet with Putin, but to no avail. According to Bolton, Putin countered. "Putin raised the prospect of Russia’s joining NATO, saying, ‘We are being pushed out the system of civilized Western defense.’" Putin hit the nail on the head. Rumsfeld and Bolton indeed meant to push a "Clash of Civilizations," even if it involved thermonuclear saber-rattling.The Rumsfeld/Bolton message was not being well received. After more than a few hours of such an impasse, the Russians simply dropped the "LaRouche card." General Yuri Baluyevsky, the Deputy Chief of the General Staff, and the one in charge of negotiations with NATO over missile defense, asked Rumsfeld and Bolton if they knew who had actually originated Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative – a real offer for Russia and America to collaborate on a strategic defense, that would render nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete. Evidently, Rumsfeld and Bolton were ignorant, feigned ignorance, or simply froze. The General went on - it was "an economist named Lyndon LaRouche." Message delivered.Neither Rumsfeld nor Bolton spoke publicly about this intervention until years later, and then they pretended that General Baluyevsky was simply an Internet conspirophile. This is the Russian General in charge of missile defense negotiations, a man who was in no way ignorant of the Reagan SDI offer and of LaRouche’s role in back-channel discussions with the Russian authorities over the SDI. Rumsfeld’s 2011 memoir, "Known and Unknown gave his version: "At a dinner with Ivanov and senior Russian military officials, General Yuri Baluyevsky, then the country's second-ranking military officer, regaled us with a fascinating 'fact' I suspect he may have learned from the internet. The brains behind the U.S. missile-defense system he declared, as if he had unearthed an embarrassing secret, was 'an economist named Lyndon LaRouche.' ... To my knowledge, his influence on the American missile defense program was nil. I made an effort to correct the record for the assembled Russians. But the encounter was troubling. It was not in either of our interests that Russian military leaders should lack such basic knowledge about the United States and the ways American officials think and operate."Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky, Rumsfeld’s internet hound, shortly after this became Putin's First Deputy Minister of Defense and the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces. Rumsfeld shocked and awed, i.e., blitzkrieged, the country into a victory that just won't go away.
In his annual conversation with the Russian people, Russian President Putin emphasized that the world is changing, and one of the most important changes is that no nation, or group of nations, can dictate policy, under the umbrella of enforcement of a self-interested "Rules-Based Order." He reiterated that Russia is open for dialogue, for cooperation, but its sovereignty cannot be challenged. He stated that he hopes Russia's partners in the west understand this, and will cease the provocations and sanctions, for the sake of peaceful and mutually beneficial cooperation.
The four extraordinary panels of the Schiller Institute’s June 26-27 conference described to you in Sunday’s EIR Alert open up new areas for rapidly expanded organizing and influence on world developments by the Schiller Institute and The LaRouche Organization. The latter’s Great Leap Backward pamphlet against the Green New Deal, circulating widely for months, led to a Saturday afternoon panel of real experts presenting “The Real Science Behind Climate Change”, which will become the new basis for discussion among scientists internationally. It is now the leading edge for organizing the “worldwide anti-Malthusian resistance” to defeat the Green New Deal and “Great Reset”.The Sunday morning panel, “Global Glass-Steagall To End Hyperinflation,” relaunches our drive for Glass-Steagall restoration, which was initiated by Lyndon LaRouche with several members of Congress already in 2007 just before the Global Financial Crash. At the same time it opens up anti-monopoly organizing potential in agriculture, where the pandemic has shown that a new model of family farming is necessary if we are long going to continue to eat. The opening session, “War with Russia and China Is Worse than MAD,” with a profound keynote from Helga Zepp-LaRouche and representatives from Russia, China, India and the United States, intensified the Schiller Institute’s 18-month drive for a summit of leaders of those four, genuinely to substitute collaboration in development in place of war. If that is going to be done, the first and primary mission has become clear in the past 18 months. A modern capacity for healthcare, hospitals, public health and medical staff must be created in every nation of the world, where the pandemic has shown that most nations have no approximation of this. The “advanced” countries have seen their lowered hospital capacity overwhelmed by COVID; in the developing nations hundreds of thousands have died at home. The pandemic continues; this must be done, and only collaboration of the strongest nations economically can do it. Helga LaRouche has not stopped urging this be done, since March of last year. In the fourth session of the conference Sunday afternoon she discussed this potential for three and a half hours with two former U.S. Surgeons General, other medical experts, retired U.S. military professionals, and a UN representative of Russia. The key is clean water. Each new hospital of 300 beds requires a reliable source of 100,000 gallons of clean water daily; but this is just the beginning. Public health rests on clean water for residential areas, water for sanitation systems, prevention of floods and swamps and therefore water management for transportation and irrigation for food crops, water for animal husbandry. Clean water really involves river basin systems, which can produce new electricity for new hospitals. This “infrastructure” task of clean water and associated power, bound up with modern public health, hospital, clinic, laboratory systems which must be built in every nation, is the opening for converting confrontation of the military and political systems of the United States, China, Russia, India to the beginning of cooperation in third countries, developing nations. The needed professional representatives of all those nations were at Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s Schiller Institute conference, and that international deliberation is underway. (By the way, the greatest infrastructure need of the United States, by far, is for great projects of water transfer and water desalination to prevent the entire West of the nation from becoming an uninhabited desert, in the drought which has been intensifying for a generation.) Forget the political somersaults now going on in Washington whether to pass—whether to fund—whether the President will sign—a bill called “infrastructure” which ignores this entire life-and-death infrastructure matter for the human race. Join the Schiller Institute’s mobilization of conferences until the mission is fully underway worldwide.
With power outages hitting many states in the U.S., from the Pacific Coast to Michigan, it should be becoming clear to more people that not only will "Green" infrastructure not work, but it's not supposed to work -- it is part of the policy to accelerate deindustrialization, with the intent to reduce population. Join our anti-Malthusian mobilization, to debunk the fake science behind "man-made climate change". Lyndon LaRouche already proved, many years ago, that "There Are No Limits to Growth."
In reviewing the just-concluded conference of the Schiller Institute, its founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche pointed to the ongoing provocations of London-based imperial interests as a dynamic for war. With the explicit intent of NATO’s Global 2030 policy to encircle Russia and China, to ensure that the Great Reset and Green New Deal can be successfully consolidated, we brought together leaders from all parts of the world to build an effective anti-Malthusian resistance to defeat this imperial design. She emphasized the special importance of a change in the method of thinking, by adopting the concept introduced by Nicholas of Cusa of the “Coincidence of Opposites” — which was demonstrated in each of the four conference panels — as necessary to win this fight. As the crises facing humanity escalate, she pointed to the fact that many more people are looking at Lyndon LaRouche’s ideas, as a hopeful sign that the New Paradigm can be brought into existence.
