Top Left Link Buttons
  • English
  • German
  • Russian

Jason Ross

Author Archives

The Green Energy Killers and the Silence Of The Children

(PDF)

November 4—On October 26 of this year, Colterm, the city-owned heating company of Timisoara, a major city in western Romania, was declared insolvent, and was shut down. Since 2006, Colterm was supposed to pay millions of euros for its CO₂ emissions. Unable to afford the expense, Colterm was consequently fined 21.6 million euros under the Government Emergency Environmental Ordinance 196/2005 with regard to the Environment Fund. This, combined with other accumulated debt, forced Colterm into bankruptcy. Thus the hospital in Timisoara had to put all newborns into the one room with electric space heaters; all other patients just got an extra blanket. As this is being written, the outside nighttime temperature is projected to be 34°F.

Unlike in 1989, after the overthrow and execution of Ceausescu, when there was a media furor in the West about the condition of malnourished children in orphanages—and medical personnel remarked on the eerie silence from children too weak to cry—now we have a different eerie silence, from the West: not a word about the deliberate starvation of women and children in Haiti and Afghanistan, or the devastating effects of the Green New Deal.

Nor is Colterm an isolated case; it is the trumpet of a prophecy, coming to a neighborhood near you! Perhaps it’s time to heed the Wake-Up Call issued by CLINTEL and the Schiller Institute.

Who Saw it Coming?

Lyndon LaRouche warned about this even before August 15, 1971, when Richard Nixon abandoned the FDR Bretton Woods monetary system, with its fixed exchange rates, in favor of turning financial markets into a gambling casino.

Who Did It?

A small group of elite bankers and Davos billionaires demanded “regime change” (now being undertaken through the Green New Deal) at an Aug. 2019 conference of central bankers in Jackson Hole, WY. They have apparently succeeded in wresting control of finances out of the hands of elected governments, and establishing dictatorial control to divert all revenues and investments onto the green track. Now, with the huckster’s excuse that these vital energy sources should be taxed because they are contributing to catastrophic climate change, these bankers are using green blackmail to cut fossil fuel energy production worldwide. To show their lying hypocrisy, they shut down nuclear plants, despite nuclear being entirely “carbon-free.” In this way, real shortages were created, such as the Dutch making huge cuts in their natural gas production. In turn, these shortages became the subject of feverish speculation, driving prices up, and up, towards the infamous 1923 Weimar, Germany levels.
We have now reached the critical point of the famous “triple curve,” warned about by the greatest economist of the 20th and the early 21st century, Lyndon LaRouche. This is the critical point of 1923-Germany-style hyperinflation, where disinvestment in the physical economy and unlimited printing of money fuel exponential inflation. In 1923 Germany, people would run to the store for their groceries right after work, because by morning the price would have doubled! This is now happening in most of the world, the result of decades of endless bailouts of the financial sector—bailouts handed over to elite bankers and hedge fund speculators by Western governments. Combine this with the disinvestment in the physical economy, a trend accelerated by COVID (which made the bailouts easier to camouflage), and the economies of Western Europe and the USA have now reached the point of the unfortunate person whose monthly disposable income is less than the interest he or she owes on their credit card debt. Unfortunately, the damage wreaked by this hyperinflationary crisis is rapidly spreading around the world, and can only be mitigated by great powers such as the U.S., Russia, and China, working in collaboration. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE!

What Is To Be Done?

LaRouche diagnosed the disease fifty years ago; he has also provided the cure: his Four Laws.

  1. We must protect the commercial banks and cut loose the investment banks, as per FDR’s Glass-Steagall law of June 16, 1933. Under this system, the government must protect the commercial banks, and erect an impervious firewall to separate them from the speculative investment banks, which will no longer have access to commercial banks’ assets, nor have the privilege of being bailed out by taxpayer money.
    Both Russia and China have made significant moves in this direction: Russian President Vladimir Putin has offered long-term contacts for natural gas deliveries, at much lower prices than those charged by the “loan-shark” speculators on the spot market. China is also a bright light here, cracking down on speculators, and preventing John Q. Public from being skinned alive by the money masters.
  2. We must immediately make agreements with other countries to set up our own national banks, in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton’s Bank of the United States or the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau in Germany after WWII, so that state credit for productive investments can supply the physical economy with the necessary funds for explosive growth. Issuance of such credits must be guided by the principles of high energy-flux density and an optimal increase of the productive capacities and powers of labor through an emphasis on scientific and technological progress.
    China’s construction of 30,000 km of high-speed rail and its eradication of poverty are exemplary.
  3. We must establish fixed parities between the currencies of participating sovereign states and make treaties to pursue well-defined infrastructure and development projects. These treaties taken altogether, will represent a de facto New Bretton Woods System as intended by Franklin Roosevelt, with the explicit intention of providing credit for the industrial development of the formerly colonized countries.
    China’s Belt and Road Initiative is exemplary.
  4. We must urgently increase the productivity of the world economy to accommodate a growing world population, now more than eight billion. Such an increase in productivity must be facilitated by an international crash research program for the development of nuclear fusion as well as other advanced technologies, such as optical biophysics and life sciences, to find solutions for challenges such as the coronavirus. This should be coupled with international cooperation in space technology and travel, towards the next higher economic platform for the world economy.
    In Defense of Common Sense
    Everything we use in our day-to-day life requires energy. Even more important, the future of our children and grandchildren requires power sources of greater and greater energy densities, such as advanced fission reactors and—as fast as a crash program will get us there—nuclear fusion. Energy is a utility needed to promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity, and should not be manipulated for private profit. Speculation in energy and housing should be made illegal. Do you like to eat? Natural gas is a feedstock for fertilizer, now rising beyond the budget of farmers; crop yields will collapse, and food may become a luxury. Do you need a car to go to work? Heat your house? Take a bath? Then you had better tell your representatives to turn the tables, and skin the green agenda alive. Keep gasoline prices rationally low; keep electricity low; build nuclear power plants, and ditch super-expensive and unreliable windmills and solar power.
    Join the Schiller Institute to create a beautiful future of development and growth!

India's Permanent Representative to the U.N., T S Tirumurti

U.S. “Caesar Sanctions” Criticized by India at U.N.

Apr. 14 (EIRNS)–On March 16, the Permanent Representative of India at the United Nations, Ambassador T.S. Tirumarti spoke out against the humanitarian disaster related to the U.S. imposition of sanctions against Syria, the so-called Caesar Sanctions. Tirumarti said the sanctions should be “relaxed,” calling on the international community to act “with a sense of urgency” to help the Syrian people. He said there is an “urgent need to increase humanitarian assistance to all Syrians throughout the country without discrimination, politicization, and any preconditions.”

The sanctions, which were a part of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, went into effect on June 17, 2020, and have plunged more than 90% of all Syrians below the poverty level. With the full backing of Secretary of State Pompeo, the U.S, Special Envoy for Syria Engagement, James Jeffrey, exposed the hypocrisy of U.S. policy in his explanation of the actual intent of the Act. While insisting that “We’re not demanding total victory, we’re not saying that Assad has to go,” Jeffrey said that the goal of the Act is to “make it clear to anyone who wants to rebuild Assad’s Syria that that cannot happen without Caesar sanctions,” until there is a government in Damascus that carries out US demands with what Jeffrey described as “real eagerness.” He later clarified that anyone, or any nation which engages in economic activities in Syria is “a potential sanctions target.”

The sanctions were drafted in response to a collection of photos compiled by a defector of Syrians who were allegedly victims of the brutality of the Assad government. It was delivered to the opposition group, the “Syrian National Movement”, which passed it on to Human Rights Watch, (HRW) which released it in an 86-page report, “If the Dead Could Speak: Mass Deaths and Torture in Syria’s Detention Facilities.” Critics of the report point out that, of the 28,000+ photos included, only a “couple dozen” could be confirmed by HRW activists, who claimed to have “meticulously verified dozens of stories” of people who died in Syrian detention centers. Many of the others were Syrian soldiers murdered by terrorists, or victims of assassinations and bomb attacks done by terrorists.

In passing the bill, no significant voice in Congress was raised about victims of U.S. torture in Iraq or Afghanistan, or about the civilian toll of the “War on Terror,” or about the millions whose lives are endangered by the sanctions. Also of note is that the publisher of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, who published classified U.S. documents reporting on torture and other atrocities carried out by U.S. military and security forces occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, was not hailed as a “hero” — as the defector and HRW activists have been — but is left to rot in a jail in London, awaiting extradition to stand trial in the U.S.

The Schiller Institute is demanding that the sanctions be lifted immediately.


Exonerate LaRouche! Assange, Snowden Pardons Can Expose 2016-2020 Russiagate Hoax

Download a PDF

The possibility that President Donald Trump may pardon Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, now being slowly killed in a London prison, especially in the aftermath of the recent resignation of Attorney General William Barr, has raised a tantalizing question. Will the Russiagate “computer hack that never was” so central to the present Assange incarceration and torture finally be brought to light if he is released from prison? Will the criminal conspiracy against the US Presidency that involved “Five Eyes” intelligence agencies, and City of London/Wall Street financial interests, be exposed, through the declassification and release of all documents essential to revealing the Russiagate hoax? Will these documents include relevant portions of the tens of thousands of pages Ty Clevenger has learned the FBI has just acknowledged to exist in their files that are relevant to his request in a FOIA lawsuit regarding information on Seth Rich? Will we perhaps finally see the release of these and other documents through the firings and/or resignations of CIA Director Gina Haspel and FBI Director Christopher Wray, following William Barr? 

Swift, unexpected and unorthodox action by the President could now be the only way to reveal the true nature, and reverse the present outcome of the 2020 Presidential election. By allowing justice, through such actions, to provide a platform for Snowden, an ailing Assange, National Security Agency whistleblower William Binney and others, to reveal how the surveillance state has nearly mortally wounded the American electoral process, just as it has manipulated and fixed elections throughout the planet for decades—regardless of where the chips may fall—Donald Trump could yet be inaugurated President in January 2021. If the truth of the campaigns of 2016 and 2020 were finally told to the American people, whoever does that will have earned their undying support. And that truthful explanation will instantly reveal the bloody face of the Obama-Bush Administrations joined at the hip through their advocacy of war as the primary tool of diplomacy.

British Intelligence, Not Russia Or China, Is The “Foreign Actor”

Have you noticed that, if one names China or Russia, many are quick to simply accept the idea of foreign intervention in the US elections, but whenever the well-documented involvement of British intelligence in interfering in the United States elections and presidency in the past five years is brought up, “conspiracy theory” is the term used to reject that analysis? The names Christopher Steele, Robert Hannigan, Sir Richard Dearlove, American Stefan Halper, and Sir Kim Darroch—all of them attached directly to GCHQ, MI6, or the British Foreign Service—are only those operatives so far known to have directly fomented either the “Russia, Russia, Russia” story, or the “China, China, China” story. There may be many more. 

Yet “it’s really hard for me to see how Great Britain is involved “ is still used as an excuse by most {not} to face what has actually been going on. Ignoring the truth however, becomes impossible when looking at the case of Julian Assange. Assange is being killed before our eyes in a British prison in order that the Russia fiction be preserved. How is this done? On February 20 earlier this year, the Guardian newspaper printed the headline: “Donald Trump ‘offered Julian Assange a pardon if he denied Russia link to hack.’” Most media would be instantaneously discredited as hoaxsters, and reluctantly ever believed again, once Assange, along with knowledgeable others, were allowed to speak publicly about Russiagate. The cui bono—who benefits—from Assange’s silence, is the conspirators that originated, carried out, and hid the plot against the American Presidency—British, American and otherwise. As journalist Viktor Dedaj stated at the December 12 Schiller Institute panel, “Hang Together or Hang Separately: Free and Sovereign Republics, or Digital Dictatorship”:

“When Julian Assange was finally removed from the Embassy in violation of international law and even the Ecuadorian constitution, it only took a quarter of an hour for the British judge, first to insult him and then to sentence him to 50 weeks in prison for violating what? His ‘conditions of probation’….But he (was) not just…sentenced to 50 weeks, but to 50 weeks in a high security prison. We will see that this is the only case to my knowledge in Great Britain, that a journalist, accused of nothing, in preventive detention, is locked up in a high security prison…. We saw a trial that almost took place behind closed doors, refusing by name the presence of about 50 NGOs, where 90 journalists had been accredited…”

Edward Snowden, it should be remembered, was aided in 2013 by Julian Assange in his successful escape from Hong Kong. Snowden was then marooned in Moscow when his passport was revoked, thus making it impossible for him to travel further. National Security Agency whistleblower Kirk Wiebe has observed that, far from being a traitor, as many have asserted, Snowden may have been forced to act in an illegal way in order to preserve his sworn oath to the Constitution of the United States. His actions occurred several years after Wiebe, along with William Binney and Ed Loomis, and later joined by House Intelligence Committee staffer Diane Roark, had used “the approved channels and procedures” to report wrongdoing following their resignations from the NSA in 2001, only to be raided at gunpoint by the FBI and nearly railroaded and sent to prison by the Department of Justice in 2007. President Trump’s recent indication that he might look to pardon Snowden, after Trump had years earlier even stated that Snowden deserved death, has deeply worried intelligence insiders, Republican and Democrat. These “deep staters” above all else want to draw attention away from the ugly truth. The systemic overthrow of governments, including through the manipulation and fixing of elections by members of the “Five Eyes” secret government arrangement, is standard operating procedure for what is called in the American intelligence world “Project Democracy,” first widely revealed to the American public by Lyndon LaRouche and Executive Intelligence Review in the 1987 Report “Project Democracy: The Parallel Government Behind the Iran-Contra Affair.”

How Project Democracy’s Campaign Against Lyndon LaRouche Destroyed American Elections

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
—Martin Niemöller

The past is prologue. To understand how it came to pass that American intelligence agencies, acting in collusion with a British foreign power that no one cares to name, committed fraud against both the 2020 and 2016 elections, it is necessary to understand the use of Executive Order 12333 and other 1980s Presidential directives to reorganize and centralize many intelligence functions into the Office of the Vice President. (To understand the implications of what this means, think “Dick Cheney.”) E.O. 12333 and various other orders hastened the privatization of military and intelligence functions. Companies, sometimes referred to as quasi non-governmental organizations (“quangos”), infested daily American life—and then came the internet, developed originally for military use and afterwards illegally deployed for universal surveillance through criminal applications of programs originally designed to defend the United States, such as Bill Binney’s ThinThread program. 

Studying the case of Lyndon LaRouche, and his 1984–1989 legal lynching, is the single most efficient means by which today’s American electorate can begin to understand the true nature of the grand crime against the Presidency presently being committed, a crime that will require, for its correction, LaRouche’s exoneration, as well as justice for Assange and Snowden. 

In fact, whether Julian Assange is successfully kept alive and released from prison in the next weeks, or whether Edward Snowden is soon allowed to return home and assist in the process of cleaning out the “secret government” that has run the United States, is intimately tied to whether Lyndon LaRouche, economist, statesman, and Presidential candidate, is finally exonerated. Though LaRouche died on February 12 2019, his exoneration now plays an even greater role in rectifying the destruction of the American Presidential system that has gone on for over a half-century. The October 6, 1986 attempted assassination of LaRouche, and his subsequent prosecution, conviction and imprisonment, was not an attack on a “maverick political extremist,” as it was portrayed by literally thousands of printed and electronic media stories at the time. It was, because of LaRouche’s use of his Presidential campaigns to change the direction of the policies of the Reagan and other presidencies, that destroying him meant, in reality, a violent, near lethal assault on the American Presidential system. It was the same Presidential system that came under violent attack with the November 22, 1963 murder of JFK, the April-June 1968 double assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, and the March 1981 near-assassination of Ronald Reagan.

Lyndon LaRouche(1922–2019), economist and statesman, was for five decades the most controversial figure in American politics. He became a world-class threat through his United States Presidential campaigns. His 1970s denunciation of the genocidal looting policies and predatory lending practices of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Anglo-American financial establishment in general, and his successful organizing of the Reagan-era Strategic Defense Initiative in 1982-83, earned him the undying enmity of the “baby doomers” that have now huddled around the trillions-dollar financial scam known as the “Green New Deal.” LaRouche had to be taken out, or at least, down. That attack was coordinated through the privatized intelligence route , including the April 1983 establishment of a “Get LaRouche Task Force” headed up by financier John Train of New York, and involving multiple intelligence agencies. Individuals such as London’s favorite Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, also played a central role in initiating fraudulent legal actions that aimed to stop him. LaRouche’s enemies, including Robert Mueller, played a role in the attempt to shut down LaRouche’s Presidential campaigns in both 1984 and 1988. 

It is virtually impossible for Americans to understand what is now unfolding around the Presidential election without knowing why LaRouche posed such a threat, and what was done to silence him. LaRouche’s enemies are the Malthusians—those who want to see the planet’s population reduced by at least half in the next 30 years—the bankers’ environmental movement. Poor people are very bad for the environment, they say. And the most prominent of environmentalists are now, often, also the world’s biggest bankers. Take, for example, the newly-formed Guardians for Inclusive Capitalism, founded by Lynn Forester de Rothschild, whose leaders claim to represent more than $10.5 trillion in assets under management. Is this a “grassroots environmental movement?” Is this even an “astroturf movement? “ Their plan is to de-carbonize the planet by lessening the number of people presently on it by four, five, or six billion. Famine, pestilence, disease, and war—the “Four Horsemen”—are their preferred way of doing it. And those are the policies that are the immediate future under the new, friendly, enlightened cyber-dictatorship. 

Only a vigorous campaign on behalf of justice in all forms—electoral justice, economic justice, defense of the right to know—can save the United States, the trans-Atlantic world, or the world as a whole. These next days before us give us a chance to not merely demand, but secure that justice. Action in these three cases—pardons in the cases of Assange and Snowden, and exoneration for Lyndon LaRouche—are the direct path to securing justice for all citizens throughout the world, and in every country. They are the path to justice for the President of the United States as well. Fiat Justitia ruat caelum —“let justice be done, though the heavens fall.” Now, in these next days, justice given, is justice gained.


Italy and China Sign Groundbreaking MOU on Belt and Road Initiative

Italy and China have signed the famous Memorandum of Understanding on Belt and Road cooperation Friday, together with 10 economic agreements and 18 institutional agreements (19 with the BRI MOU). The MOU is a milestone and is said to already be being studied by other countries that want to follow Italy.

The MOU says at the outset that

“The Parties will work together within the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to translate mutual complementary strengths into advantages for practical cooperation and sustainable growth, supporting synergies between the Belt and Road Initiative and priorities identified in the Investment Plan for Europe and the Trans-European Networks, bearing in mind discussions in the EU China Connectivity Platform.”

With the MOU, Italy is the first large industrial economy to join the Belt and Road, as Chinese media proudly stress. The signature of the MOU occurred in spite of trans-Atlantic pressures and open hostility by Italy’s “partners” in the EU. Italian Minister for Economic Development Luigi Di Maio, who signed the MOU together with his counterpart He Lifeng, chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission, stated that

“today is for us a very important day, in which the Made in Italy is winning, Italian firms are winning. We made a step to help our economy to grow. Italy came first with China.”

The economic agreements include: a strategic partnership between the Italian Cassa Depositi e Prestiti and the Bank of China to finance Italian firms in China; a MOU between the Italian oil company ENI and the Bank of China for explorations in China; Ansaldo Energia signed two agreements, one to develop gas turbines with UGTC and another one for the supply of a turbine to Shanghai Electric and Benxi Steel; the Port Authorities of Trieste and Genoa signed an agreement with the construction giant CCCC. Cassa Depositi and the natural gas utility Snam signed a deal with the Silk Road Fund for investments along the Silk Road; the Institute for Foreign Trade signed a deal with Suning to create a platform to promote Italian lifestyle in China; and the Danieli group signed a contract with China Camc Engineering for the construction of a steel plant in Azerbaijan.

The institutional agreements, besides the MOU on the BRI cooperation, include cooperation on innovative startups and electronic trade, as well as cooperation between the two space agencies, agriculture and culture, health and media.

Italian President Sergio Mattarella told the business leaders that, once again, there is a “culture of growth.” He said, “we can have confidence in both countries” that there will be development. The Memorandum of Understanding has been worked on since last September, and the cooperation between Italy and China will not only facilitate our own development, but will “enable global growth.” He said that ‘the globalized world needs more consultations” between nations, in all areas, especially trade, space and culture.

In an interview with Chinese journalists, Italian President Mattarella spoke at length about the ancient bonds between Italy and China and the future perspective for cooperation. This year marks the 15th anniversary of the comprehensive strategic partnership between the two countries, and this partnership is “built on solid foundations, inspired by natural convergences between two very ancient civilizations,” Mattarella was quoted by Xinhua.

Mattarella underscored the “growing and fruitful interaction between our peoples, who are so similar in terms of industriousness and creativity.”

Xi’s visit is an expression of the “solidity of the bond and the mutual respect” between Italy and China, he said.

After some lip service to transparency and openness, Mattarella said that on the cultural front, the heritage of both Italy and China “arouses admiration everywhere in the world,” and this heritage could be a great development driver. He referred to the mechanism of forging twinning relationships between the two countries’ World Heritage Sites.

Speaking of how the Italy-China partnership contributes to a better and more stable world, the President said that Italy is committed to safeguarding peace and rules-based multilateralism, and is pleased to see the two sides have consensus on that.

The Italian press agency ANSA reported that Mattarella expressed the wish that, with the visit of President Xi, “agreements, ideas, projects can come out, in which the Italian-Chinese partnership could develop further, including for a larger benefit of the collaboration between Europe and Asia, which needs an ever bigger volume of sustainable investments in infrastructure, to ensure a future of well-being and peace for all peoples of the two continents.”


Italian PM Conte Outflanks EU in Parliament Speech on China Policy

In the foreign policy debate in the Chamber of Deputies Tuesday morning, Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte judoed all critics of the upcoming agreement between Italy and China on the Belt and Road by describing the upcoming MOU as so pro-European that it complies with EU guidelines and principles and values as “nobody has so far done in Europe.”

Conte said that the EU “will be strengthened by the Italian approach.” The MOU is not a treaty but a “programmatic agreement outlining targets in the framework of the BRI, which is a large project of international connectivity that Italy has expressed interest for, already back in 2016.” Italy’s interest “is legitimate” and responds to its “national interests.” Italy wants to increase its export in a “market of giant dimensions,” increase investments in infrastructures and “enjoy the natural economic advantages of the New Silk Road.”

The negotiations for the MOU have lasted many months and the text is “fully in line with the EU strategy.” Furthermore: “Nobody in the EU has done as much as we have” to advance EU policy vis-à-vis China. The MOU promotes European principles of mutual advantages, reciprocity, intellectual property, level playing field, etc. “Our approach to the BRI is the most far-sighted and effective ever adopted in the EU.”

In his reply, after a debate in which the opposition distinguished itself in hysteria, infantilism and incompetence, Conte reiterated the “finalities” of the MOU with China:  “First, balance trade relations. Our exports to China are far behind exports of our partners in the EU. Second, the BRI is a big project of infrastructure connectivity which offers opportunities to our companies. We have leading companies in know-how and technology which will be able to participate. Third, the BRI is of such a significance as to redefine major trade routes and we don’t want to miss any chance to be part of them. Fourth, protecting our strategic infrastructure is a primary, non-negotiable objective.”


Feasibility Study for Panama High-Speed Railway Released

President Juan Carlos Varela presided over a ceremony Friday for the release of China Railway Design Corporation’s feasibility study on the Panama City-David high-speed railway line agreed upon as part of Panama’s participation in the Belt and Road Initiative. The study found that building the proposed 391.3 km railway from the capital to David, a city near the Costa Rican border, is economically and, as the President emphasized, socially viable—and that it is feasible to extend it into Central America.

hsr-panama

The railroad will provide “unprecedented integration of the country, and will empower the country’s logistical platform,” Varela said at the ceremony. The study took into consideration its future extension into Costa Rica, which would “facilitate trade of products between our [Central American] countries, which face great challenges in the area of logistics,” he stressed.

“Such a railway has been the dream of Panamanian leaders for 100 years, and therefore I hope that future leaders will take it up and make it a reality, always thinking of Panama first,” Varela added.

Panama will elect a new President on May 5, and Varela had previously announced that it will be up to his successor to undertake the project. By ensuring the feasibility study was released with proper promotion now, Varela is placing Panama’s participation in the Belt and Road, with the great potential it represents for transforming the country’s poorer regions, at the center of that campaign. (He cannot run again because of term limits.)

The CRDC, assisted by Panamanian government agencies, universities and private consulting companies, estimates that it will take six years to complete the railway, at a cost of $4.1 billion, involving 6,000 employees, direct and indirect, to build it, and 2,900 to operate and maintain it once built.


Helga Zepp-LaRouche and Jacques Cheminade Interviewed on China’s CCTV-13

Interviews with Helga Zepp-LaRouche and Jacques Cheminade appeared on a newscast by CCTV-13 reporting on U.S. reactions to the just-concluded National People’s Congress. CCTV journalist Wang Guang reported on the reaction of U.S. think tanks to the ideas presented during the Two Sessions with regard to U.S.-China trade and the Belt and Road Initiative.

The broadcast then shifted to an interview done with Helga at the Morristown Schiller Institute conference. Zepp-LaRouche said:

“I personally think it is the most important strategic initiative, because it is a concept with which you can overcome geopolitics. Geopolitics has been the cause of two wars in the 20th Century, and the idea that you can not have blocs of countries or nations against nations, but that you have what Xi Jinping always calls the ‘community of the shared future of humanity,’ that you put the one humanity first, is a strategic concept which allows you to overcome the divisions which existed in previous centuries.”

This was followed by Cheminade, who said,

“The Chinese way is to a world integration through common development, what President Xi Jinping calls a ‘win-win’ system. So that is a future. The Chinese want a world development. They don’t want to impose their model, but they don’t want the other models to impose upon them.”

Helga’s clip was also aired on CCTV Plus, an English-language CCTV site, on a program entitled “Foreign Experts Applaud Development Concepts.”


Webcast—Neocons Move to Box Trump In, While Italy Points Toward the New Paradigm

The ongoing battle between two paradigms was center stage in Italy this week, as the conference cosponsored by Movisol and the Lombard Region, demonstrated the potential for the Belt-and-Road Initiative (BRI) to break the power of the London-run geopoliticians in Europe. Helga Zepp LaRouche’s report on the conference, at which she spoke, and was joined by Michele Geracci, an Undersecretary of the Italian Finance Ministry and head of the government’s China Task Force, highlighted the significance of the upcoming trip of Xi Jinping to Italy, and the signing on an MOU for Italy to join the BRI. If Italy and fifteen other EU member nations can participate, for mutual benefit, with the BRI, what of France and Germany? Why are the EU bureaucrats and the London neo-liberals so distressed by this development?

Contrast this potential to the hysteria coming from EU bureaucrats, from NATO officials such as Gen. Scaparroti, and from U.S. Secretary of State Pompeo, which is part of a neocon contingent trying to rein Trump in. Helga presents a clear picture of how the neocons are moving, aiming at sabotaging the trade talks with China, denuclearization of North Korea, and pushing for regime change in Venezuela, to force Trump to move away from his campaign promises.

She appealed to viewers to use the mobilization to exonerate Lyndon LaRouche as a means of bringing down the war party, which is continuing its efforts to destroy the potential of the Trump presidency.


Movisol Conference on BRI in Milan

The conference “Italy on the New Silk Road” organized by Movisol (LaRouche’s movement in Italy) and the Lombardy Region (state legislature) in Milan Wednesday, was a success, with Undersecretary Michele Geraci (of the Task Force China in the Italian government) opening it and emphasizing the importance of the MOU which Italy will sign with President Xi Jinping on March 22 in Rome, of the benefits for Italy of this cooperation with China, including for the development of the Italian Mezzogiorno.

Undersecretary of the Task Force China in the Italian government, Michele Geraci and EIR's Claudio Celani.

Undersecretary of the Task Force China in the Italian government, Michele Geraci and EIR’s Claudio Celani.

Geraci was followed by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who explained the more profound meaning of this important development for the rest of the world, the realization of the New Paradigm for which Lyndon LaRouche and the Schiller Institute have been working for the last 30 years. See a full text of Helga’s remarks below.

There was a short message from Sen. Tony Iwobi, the first Nigerian parliamentarian elected for the Lega, about the historical significance on the Transaqua project, which was then described in detail by Engineer Bocchetto of Bonifica, which is working on the feasibility study with China.

Geraci, Celani, Zepp-LaRouche and Movisol leader, Liliana Gorini.

Geraci, Celani, Zepp-LaRouche and Movisol leader, Liliana Gorini.

Liliana Gorini, chairwoman of Movisol, concluded the conference by thanking the Lombardy Region, which had helped to organize it, and dedicating it to Lyndon LaRouche, who is known in Italy not only as the “visionary” of the New Silk Road, as former Economics Minister Giulio Tremonti defined him Tuesday in Corriere della Sera, but also as the main promoter of Glass-Steagall and LaRouche’s Four Laws, and reminding people how many parliamentarians who had heard him speak at the Italian Finance Committee at the Parliament in Rome in 1998, admitted years later that he was completely right.


TRANSCRIPT OF HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE’S REMARKS

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: It is in one sense quite amusing to see what high waves the possibility of Italy signing the MOU with China is causing right now.  Because, when Xi Jinping announced the New Silk Road in 2013 and then proceeded to make treaties in the meantime, I think it’s with 112 countries, an enormous growth developed, six major industrial corridors, the Belt and Road Initiative became very quickly the largest infrastructure project in history, ever.  And the strange thing was that for about four years, in the mainstream media in the United States and Europe, there was practically no reporting about this.

And then, all of a sudden, in an obviously coordinated way, the major think tanks of Europe and the United States started a series of attacks, studies, that China is causing countries to fall into a debt trap, that it’s just an effort to replace the United States as the dominant force in the world, to become Chinese imperialists, that the Belt and Road projects are not viable, that China is an authoritarian system and Xi Jinping is a dictator.  So all of a sudden, you had a barrage of attacks on this concept.

The funny thing is, if you would ask and listen to the leaders of the countries cooperating with the Belt and Road, like the Africans, the Asian countries, the Latin American countries, they would be full of praise and say that with the Chinese cooperation, they have for the first time, the opportunity to overcome the underdevelopment and poverty they had suffered as a result of Western colonialism, and 70 years of IMF conditionalities, which prevented them from having exactly that kind of development.  And they were full of praise, calling China a friend — so you get a completely opposite view.

I have come to the conclusion that everything in the Western mainstream media are saying about China is fake news, and just a lie.  And it comes from the fact that many people in the West simply have lost the ability to imagine that any country, let alone China, could promote something which is, indeed, for the common good of all of humanity. When Xi Jinping talks about the “shared community of the common future of mankind,” or the “community of destiny,” he means it!  And isn’t it obvious that in the time of thermonuclear weapons, in international space travel, of conquering all the problems of the world, that we have to think about the one humanity first, before we talk about national interests? As a matter of fact, the concept of a win-win cooperation for the Belt and Road Initiative, it has all the economic aspects which are beneficial to all the countries that have participated.

But it is much more than that:  Because from the standpoint of the evolution of mankind, if you take a step back, and don’t take a look at the conflict between Marseille and Trieste, which I understand is obviously very important for the Italians, but if you look at the larger point of view, isn’t it natural that infrastructure development would eventually open up all continents and connect them?

So now, all of a sudden, you have this eruption of anti-China propaganda, but it comes from the fact that we are now at a  point where something is happening, which has already happened 16 times in history, namely, that the up-to-now dominant power is being surpassed by the up-to-now second largest power. And in history this has led 12 times to war, between those two competing power, and 4 times it was just that the second power surpassed the dominant power without war.  China has emphasized many times, they don’t want, obviously, to follow the 12 examples where this conflict would lead to war, but they also don’t want to simply replace the United States in the role of the leader of an unipolar world, but that they want to build a completely new system of international relations based on sovereignty, on respect for the different social system, on non-interference, and actually proposing a completely new system of international relations.

So, the big question strategically is you have the conflict between the United States and Russia, which is obvious, because of the cancellation of the ABM Treaty, then the Russian reaction to that, and now the cancellation of the INF Treaty — so there are many who think that we are actually close, in worse strategic crisis than during the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis, because of the relations between the United States and Russia. But if you talk to some strategic insiders on both sides of the Atlantic, they easily admit that the much more dangerous conflict is actually the one between the United States and China:  Will the United States accept the rise of Asia, and the Belt and Road Initiative is just the obvious expression of that?  Or, is what was said by the RAND Corporation a couple of months ago, that it’s better to have the war with China now, than in 10 years, because the casualties will be less?

Well, obviously, this is something we have to change, and I think that the best way to change it is, indeed, to bring in this reality of a new paradigm of thinking altogether:  We have to leave geopolitics.  We have to leave the idea that there can be a legitimate interest of one country, or a group of country, against another bloc of countries, because this was what led twice to world war in the 20th century.  As a matter of fact, I think the potential to overcome this conflict is absolutely there.  I know in Europe, many people are fainting when you mention the name of President Donald Trump, but President Trump is not seeking confrontation with Russia — as a matter of fact, he wants to have an improved relation with Russia, which he proved in the summit with Putin in Helsinki.  And despite the present trade tension, President Trump always talks about President Xi Jinping as his very good friend, and China being a great country and that he wants to actually have a good relationship between the United States and China.

So the attacks on Italy, coming from the White House — the [i]Financial Times[/i] mentioned this Garrett Marquis — is not representing the same view as Trump.  It comes from a faction of the neo-con which are unfortunately also in the Trump Administration, but the factional situation in the United States is very divided.  You have the Democrats and the neo-cons trying to get Trump out of office with Russiagate, but on the other side, I think President Trump has proven a tremendous sustainability against the efforts to drive him out of office, and his supporters are absolutely backing him, and the chances that there will be a second Trump Administration are actually very, very high.

Now one of the accusations against China and the Belt and Road Initiative is that it would divide Europe.  I think everybody knows Europe is divided already, without China:  You have the North-South conflict because of the EU austerity policy, which impoverished, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, gave no development to the East European countries, so they are now happy to cooperate with the Belt and Road initiative, because the EU did not provide these things.  Now, the second area of division is obviously the migrant issue, where you have the division between East and West — the East European countries do not want to have any part of the proposed quota system of the EU.

Now, what Italy is actually doing in this context is really a role model, because the kind of cooperation between Italian firms and Chinese firms in the development of Africa is actually the only human way to address the refugee question.

So you have right now 13 countries which have already signed the MOU with China; you have, now with Italy, the first G7 country (which is really overrated, because the G7 is no longer that important as compared to the G20, for example).  And you have many ports — Mr. Geraci said, if actually all the ports of Europe which are already wanting to be a hub between not only the New Silk Road over the land route, but also hubs to the Maritime Silk Road, Portugal and Spain becoming the hub for all the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries around the world.  So there is a completely changed attitude developing very quickly.

Now, also even in Germany and France, the two countries which are now trying to put the brakes on the most, apart from the EU Commission, there are many cities which are absolutely recognizing their self-interest to cooperate with the Belt and Road Initiative.  You have three states in Germany — Schleswig-Holstein, Bavaria, and Brandenburg — which all the time have huge delegations back and forth; you have many cities whose mayors are complete fans of cooperation with China, and it is an increasing dynamic, which is growing more rapidly than you would think.

So, if you would ask my prognosis, I think the perspective of unifying Europe, not necessarily under the EU bureaucracy, but in the conception of de Gaulle, more like a “Europe of the Fatherlands” uniting with China, with Russia, with the Belt and Road Initiative, the Eurasian Economic Union [EAEU], and European countries, to cooperate fully in this new paradigm is absolutely there.

Well, I think that that is also the only way how Europe can impact the strategic situation:  Because if you had a united Europe of the Fatherlands cooperating with the Belt and Road Initiative, including Germany and France, that would be the best way to get the United States to also give up their opposition — which I said, is not Trump himself, but these other forces — and get the United States to join the new paradigm.  And I think this is the [i]only[/i] hope we have to avoid a catastrophe where we would end in World War III with nuclear weapons, meaning the extinction of civilization. So in that sense, what Italy is doing right now, is of the greatest historical importance, because Italy, with what you are doing, with the MOU but also with the joint ventures with China in Africa, can become the role model for all the other European countries.

But the New Silk Road is not just an economic concept. Obviously, infrastructure, investment, all of this is extremely important, as the backbone, but it has a much more, and not so well-known cultural/moral dimension, which I think is best expressed in the fact that the Chinese thinking is actually based on the Confucian theory, namely, that you absolutely must have harmony among all the nations, developing all in a harmonious way.  And when some think tanks say that there is now a competition of systems between the Western liberal model and the state-guided model of the Chinese state economy, well, what they really mean is, China has developed its whole policy based on a Confucian orientation, which means that the state is also in charge of the moral improvement of its population through the aesthetical education.  As a matter of fact, Xi Jinping has said repeatedly, that he puts the highest emphasis on the aesthetical education, because the result of this is the “beauty of the mind” and the “beauty of the soul.”

So the problem is, the reason why some people in the West regard that as a competition, is because Western neo-liberal and liberal philosophy has moved away from that conception:  We are no longer humanists.  We are no longer thinking as during the Italian Renaissance or the German Classical period, but we have replaced that with a liberal thinking of “everything is allowed,” every degenerate form of culture is allowed, everything goes — I don’t want to elaborate that, but if you look at the violence, the pornography in the entertainment, we don’t have to worry.  We will lose that competition of the systems, simply because we are not taking care of our future generations, but allowing them to completely morally decay.

And that is why I think that we have to understand that the only way how Europe can persist in the coming future is not through military power — what Mr. Macron is proposing is ridiculous — but we will preserve our European culture [i]only[/i] if we return to the greatest tradition of our own history, meaning reviving the spirit and the ideas and principles of the Italian Renaissance, of the Ecole Polytechnique of France, of the German Classical music, literature, and poetry.  Only if we rise again to our best traditions can we persist in the coming world.

So I think that the cultural dimension of the New Silk Road is as important, if not more important, than the question of economics.

I would be happy to take any questions.  Thank you.


Second Belt and Road Forum To Be Held in Beijing in Late April

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi gave a press conference on March 9, in which he presented China’s plans for the upcoming second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, or BRF. He said that it was China’s most important diplomatic activity of the year, and that President Xi Jinping will deliver the keynote address.

According to Xinhua, Wang said the event,

“will have more foreign heads of state and government than the previous forum [two years ago] and thousands of delegates from over a hundred countries are expected to attend. It will include a series of events, such as leaders’ round table, high-level meeting, thematic forum, CEO conference, under the theme of Belt and Road cooperation shaping a brighter shared future.”

Wang also stated that,

“China will build consensus with parties on high-quality cooperation following the principle of consultation, cooperation and shared benefits; champion an open, transparent and inclusive approach to Belt and Road cooperation, and strive for green and sustainable development. Meanwhile, China and the participating countries will seek a greater complementarity between the BRI and their development strategies.”

He concluded: “We have reasons to hope and believe the second BRF will be a greater success,” than the first one.


Page 1 of 27123...Last