The reality is seeping in, as growing numbers in Europe are recognizing that the Anglo-American war hawks intend to continue the fighting in Ukraine until Russia is so damaged that a successful regime change can be pulled off there. There is a growing chorus of voices of sane military vets in Europe calling for diplomacy, the break-up of NATO, and an end to the delusion that World War III can be won. More American military vets are speaking up, such as Col. Richard Black. Join with the Schiller Institute, to make sure your voice is heard in opposition to the ongoing globalist Malthusian onslaught.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and president of the Schiller Institute, was interviewed on April 27 about the German government’s decision to supply heavy weapons to Ukraine.
CHINA RADIO INTERNATIONAL: You’re listening to World Today…. Germany has for the first time announced the plans to deliver heavy weapons to Ukraine. German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht says the government has approved the delivery of Gepard tanks equipped with anti-aircraft guns. The decision comes as U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin held talks with dozens of NATO member country counterparts over the Ukraine war at an American air base in western Germany on Tuesday.
Joining us now on the line is Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based think tank. Hello, good afternoon. Thank you very much for joining us.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes, hello.
CRI: German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has actually for weeks been resisting calls for Germany to deliver heavy weapons to Ukraine. He has been suggesting that such a particular move might trigger a direct military confrontation between NATO and Russia. So, with that in mind, how would you look at Germany’s latest decision?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think it is a complete catastrophe. This government endangers the life and security of the German population. They have made an oath, the German Chancellor and others, that they would protect the interests of the German people and protect them against harm, and this is a complete violation of that oath. It is quite telling that this occurred on the very day that Austin had this meeting in Ramstein [Air Base]—I mean, this was a complete violation of German sovereignty. He’s holding court, and this decision by the German government will only prolong the suffering of the Ukrainian people. They’re cannon fodder in a proxy war between NATO and the U.S. and Russia; and obviously, the attitude on the side of these people is to fight this to the last Ukrainian.
It’s a complete catastrophe, because when Foreign Minister Lavrov said this could lead to World War III and a nuclear war, this is being ridiculed by the German media in cartoons, as if it would be just scare-mongering. I think we are in a very, very dangerous situation.
CRI: Hmm, indeed. As we heard from Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, the threat of nuclear war really should not be underestimated. But we understand that for decades, Berlin has actually been maintaining a policy of not exporting weapons to any particular conflict areas. So help us understand, what’s the rationale behind that policy? And now what’s the war going on in Ukraine: Do you think it is fair to say that Germany has abandoned that particular policy?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, this thing makes very obvious that Germany is an occupied country, that it’s not sovereign, and what you have seen in the last days in media and in the parties, is that in all of these institutions you have Atlanticists who have been making a drumbeat, saying, “Oh, Germany is not a reliable ally.” But in reality, this delivery of heavy weapons makes Germany a party in the war, and therefore a target if this thing continues to escalate.
Part of the problem is also the EU, because Josep Borrell, who’s the so-called “foreign minister” said this situation will be “decided on the battlefield.” He has never mentioned the idea of diplomacy or that there should be negotiations. And it’s completely insane to try to settle conflicts in the 21st century with war! It’s madness! I can only say, it’s complete madness.
CRI: So, critics, including some officials in Ukraine, have accused Berlin of dragging their heels on giving heavy weapons to Ukraine, and on some of the other possible measures, like a possible embargo of Russia energy imports. Do you think those criticisms that I mentioned are fair to Germany?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, the reality is, George Friedman, who is a strategic analyst in the United States, he already said in 2015 in a speech in Chicago that the German-Russian relation is the only threat to the United States, because the combination of German technology and capital, and Russian raw materials and labor, would be the only counterweight to the United States. Now, one result of it is that this relationship between Germany and Russia, as of now, has been completely ruined, and this, in light of German history. One should not forget, Russia lost 27 million people in World War II.
The idea to have an embargo against Russian oil and gas, is more insanity, because there are many leaders of the industry who have said this would mean millions of unemployed, entire sectors of industry would collapse; so it’s really an aggression against German interests if such demands are made.
CRI: So, realistically speaking, is Germany capable of sustaining its supply of heavy weaponry to Ukraine, if we talk about a scenario where this conflict between Russia and Ukraine becomes a protracted war?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, it’s obvious that Germany has a significant arms industry, and they would naturally be happy, like the military-industrial complex in the United States, to deliver these weapons. But the effect on the rest of the economy—you know, you already have massive inflation in food prices, energy prices; if this continues you will have social chaos. The poorer parts of the population already can’t make it to the end of the month. And it’s a complete outrage that there are billions and billions being expended for weapons, when you have a world famine of 1.7 billion people facing starvation. I’m really upset, and I hope you can hear it, because this should not happen! This is really something which needs to be reversed.
The people who are responsible for this, they can commit suicide if they want, but they have no right to completely drive Germany into a catastrophe.
CRI: By the way, do you think President Putin has a point when he said, recently, in a meeting with UN chief António Guterres, that this increasing Western delivery or Western supply of heavy weapons to the battlefields in Ukraine are making Kyiv, making Ukraine a sort of unreliable partner on the negotiation table? Do you think he has a point in saying that?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think the reality is that Zelenskyy is a complete puppet. He’s an actor, and he plays the script which is being written by British public relations firms who basically tell him what to do, as is the United States. The reality is, if you look at the statements by Biden, Boris Johnson, Stoltenberg, they have no mentioned once, the word “peace negotiations.” They only say, “more weapons, more weapons.” So I think it’s not Zelenskyy, it’s the U.S., NATO and the British.
CRI: Well, I guess from Washington’s perspective, they might argue, “OK, we are returning our diplomats back to Kyiv, we have nominated a new ambassador as the U.S. ambassador to Kyiv”: That is a signal that Americans pay attention, attack greater importance to diplomacy.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I wish your words would be right, because I think any reasonable person in the world must agree that we have to have to have an end to this war immediately. The Ukrainian people are being slaughtered, and I think what should be discussed instead, is President Xi Jinping at the Boao Forum made a very important proposal to have a Global Security Initiative. And I think the problems of the world are so big, that you need such a global approach, and in that context, the Ukraine situation can be settled also. Because it’s much more complicated. It has very little to do with Ukraine. The Ukrainians are the cannon fodder in a geostrategic confrontation from the United States against Russia—and China, by the way.
CRI: So we understand Russia has suspended, or is suspending natural gas deliveries to Poland and Bulgaria, after these two particular countries refused to pay for the energy supplies in Russian rubles. Do you expect Moscow to take this kind of action against more European Union countries?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, we should remember that the Russian reaction is coming in reaction to the West confiscating $300 billion in Russian assets, after they took $9 billion from the Afghani people. So the dollar system is not regarded as safe any more, and therefore, Russia and many other Asian countries are reorienting and trying to create an alternative financial system based on gold and other commodities. And you have right now, massive agreements between Russia and India, Russia and China, and many others. I think if it would come to such an embargo, or cutoff from oil and gas from the side of Russia, or the other way around, I think Russia in one sense would cope better than Germany! Germany and Europe would go into a real economic crisis. So the people who are pushing Germany and others in this direction are really not acting in the interests of Germany or the European countries.
CRI: Thank you very much for your analysis. That was Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based think tank.
Listen to the podcast here.
The Schiller Institute presents a new webpage “Shakespeare in Exile,” which introduces the public to semi-private lectures on the dramas of Shakespeare delivered by Dr. Fred Wills, former foreign minister, and justice minister of Guyana. Examining the “in- between,” and going beyond the storyline of Shakespeare dramas, Dr. Wills guides the listener to examine what underlies his/her own method of thinking and the epistemological questions posed by the dramatist. A scholar of English literature and the Greek dramatists of antiquity, Dr. Wills was an associate of Lyndon and Helga LaRouche serving on the Schiller Institute’s Board of Directors. Visit the website here.
March 7 (EIRNS)–Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche appeared as a guest on the CGTN Dialogue show on March 7 together with Victor Gao, a regular CGTN commentator and Professor Peter Kuznick from American University. The program aired directly following Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s traditional annual press conference at China’s legislative Two Sessions, so there was no doubt of many viewers. The discussion, as well as Minister Wang’s press conference, centered around the conflict in Ukraine. In her initial comments, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche lauded Wang Yi’s press conference as “the return of sanity” in a world gone crazy over the Ukraine situation, noting that he underlined the importance of adhering to the principles of the UN Charter. “China is taking a leadership role in the world which is badly needed,” she said.
When she was later asked about the impact of the Ukraine crisis on US-European relations, she noted the negative effect on trade, and added that “the “world needs something completely different, similar to a community of shared interests,” and reiterated her call for an international conference to create such an order, comparable to what was done in Europe by the Peace of Westphalia, but which would include Russia and China. “If it comes to nuclear war, there will be no winners,” she warned.
In response to a third question, referring to Wang Yi’s comment that this year would be an “Asian year” with Asian countries hosting the BRICS, the APEC summit, and the G20, she noted that a number of countries in Asia have a 5,000 year history, which is a much different situation than with the United States. “We need a new model of international relations,” she
In response to a third question, referring to Wang Yi’s comment that this year would be an “Asian year” with Asian countries hosting the BRICS, the APEC summit, and the G20, she noted that a number of countries in Asia have a 5,000 year history, which is a much different situation than with the United States. “We need a new model of international relations,” she said, “but it must be filled with content.” She referenced the Non-Aligned Movement and the Bandung Conference as models. “The region must come together to resolve the problems of humanity, including the question of food supply, energy prices, etc. This year one could say that we need a new model of international relations,” she said, and noted that the BRI, the Build Back Better World, and the EU Global Gateway projects could work together instead of at odds. She added, “The present financial system is going out of whack, and it’s worse than 2008. There is therefore an urgent need for a New Bretton Woods System.”
While the perspective introduced by Zepp-LaRouche went quite beyond what the other speakers were expecting, Professor Kuznick, who had the last word in the program, expressed support for the notion of a new security architecture.
Tony Magliano, a Catholic columnist for peace and justice, syndicated internationally, wrote on Feb. 3, “We Have a Moral Obligation to Save Afghans from Starving,” posted on Catholic Online, and since appearing in local media, e.g., on Feb. 6 in the Clarion Herald, the newspaper of the Archdiocese of New Orleans. Magliano wrote in his strong article, that the Federal Reserve’s freeze of Afghanistan’s national funds, is a strategy which “heartlessly ignores the fact that Afghans are now starving to death. This de facto collective punishment, albeit unintentional, is immoral and illegal according to international humanitarian law.” Magliano calls for unfreezing funds, for getting the Afghan Central Bank operating, and to “do our best” so that no one starves. He provides the email and telephone numbers to contact Congress and the White House.
Other national figures in the Catholic church are speaking out, including Sean Callahan, head of the Catholic World Services (CRS), the aid agency associated with the U.S. Bishops Council, who wrote an article in December, issuing a call for international action to stop the starvation. CRS Vice President Bill O’Keefe likewise has spoken out on the need for the Afghanistan national economy to function. He was quoted in The Intercept Jan. 23, “The U.S. government, and the international community, has got to find a way to get over itself, and support the administrative state and structures on the ground to prevent a humanitarian crisis. Twenty-three million people without a functioning government and without help is not going to be a solution that we can stand for.”
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, President of the Schiller Institute, was a guest on the CGTN podcast, World Today, on Wednesday, January 5, 2022. This segment was transcribed by EIR.
CGTN: A spokesperson of China’s Foreign Ministry said it is right for Lithuania to acknowledge the mistake it has made regarding Taiwan, and China urges Lithuania to take action and return to the One-China policy. Spokesperson Wang Wenbin made the remarks in response to Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda’s rebuke against his government’s decision of allowing the opening of a Taiwan representative office in his country. President Nausėda said on Tuesday that it was a mistake to allow China’s Taiwan region to open a representative office in Vilnius using its own name. He told a local radio station that “the name of the office has become the key factor that now strongly affects our relations with China.”
China had expressed a strong protest over Lithuania’s approval of the establishment of the so-called “Taiwan representative office” in Lithuania and downgraded the diplomatic relations with Lithuania in November.
For more on this, we’re now joined on the line by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based political and economic think tank.
Thank you, Helga, for talking to us again.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes, hello.
CGTN: First off, do the Lithuanian President’s remarks mean a softening of tensions regarding this issue?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, it’s definitely good that he retracted the approval of the name, but this is not a case of nominalism. The question is not the label, the question is the One-China policy which is internationally recognized since 1971, and the question is, can the United States, the British and other countries that use a little country of 3 million people as a pawn in their geopolitical confrontation, and this is an effort by Secretary of State Blinken to push all of these little countries in an “alliance of democracies” so-called. But I think it’s not good for the people of Lithuania. It’s not in their interest.
CGTN: Right. Well, you pointed out correctly this is not just a matter of the name. Rather it’s the principle of the One-China policy. But how much does the difference between the Lithuanian President’s remarks, and the actions of the Lithuanian government have to do with how the government is run in the country, and the domestic politics in the country? Because remember, I think the prime minister of Lithuania, who has the cabinet, was beaten in the elections in 2019 by the President.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, according to the Lithuanian media, the support for the government is absolutely dropping. Only 17.3% of the people voted in a poll that they trust the government, while 47.8% say they distrust the government. So you can see, now, the effect of how Lithuania has to be seen in the context of the NATO expansion to encircle Russia. I mean, we should look at the documentation which the Schiller Institute just produced: There are now absolutely authentic documents which prove that Secretary of State [James] Baker, on Feb. 9, 1990 promised that NATO would not move one inch to the East. But as we now know, 14 countries have joined NATO, and now President Putin is demanding the signature under two treaties that this stop, because it impinges on the security interests of Russia. Now, Lithuania is a victim of that NATO expansion to the East, and billions of dollars have been spent to finance NGOs to convince the population of the East European nations that they should adopt Western values, but you see right now a big backlash against it, and this is one of the reasons why the support for the Lithuanian government is dropping so quickly.
CGTN: Going again into the question of Taiwan, how bad an example is Lithuania’s decision to allow the opening of this office? How bad is it, in the sense that it kind of internationalizes the Taiwan question, which should be a domestic issue of China?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Naturally, it is bad, because Lithuania, also, as a result of this policy, left the 17+1—these are the countries in Central and Eastern Europe which cooperate with the Belt and Road Initiative—but it’s really not that significant, because there are many countries in Europe which stick to the One-China policy, and which do see it in their self-interest to cooperate with the Belt and Road Initiative. So, it’s bad, but it’s not dramatic.
CGTN: Lithuanian officials once appealed to the European Union for help, regarding their tensions with China. What is the EU’s position on this issue, because we see, recently the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in a year end interview with the press that Europe has a “cognitive split” in its policy toward China, by trying to be both a partner and also seeing it as an opponent. Do you agree with Wang Yi? What is the EU’s state, here?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think Wang Yi is a very good diplomat: Because I could easily find much more harsh words for describing a person who has a split mind. So I think he’s very diplomatic.
I mean, the Europeans on one side see—there are many people in Europe who see it as their self-interest to have good relations with China. On the other side, there are also people who are just NATO representatives within the EU so to speak. So I think many do not have the backbone to stand up against U.S. and British pressure, but increasingly, it’s a question of credibility of the West in general. If you look at their policy toward Afghanistan, for example, it’s completely disgusting.
So I think the content of the policies will become increasingly important, and I think Europe will have to make up its mind, to follow its self-interest or not.
CGTN: Indeed, that’s the autonomy that European Union leaders have been talking about for quite a long time. Thank you.
We have been talking to Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based political and economic think tank.
The full podcast is available here. Ms. LaRouche’s remarks start at min 26.06.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche proposed that we make 2022 the Year of Lyndon LaRouche. In doing so, we are not only commemorating the 100th year of his birth, but offering a pathway for solutions to the unresolved crises, which threaten humanity at the end of 2021.
Wang Wenbin, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, on June 4 blew the whistle on Wall Street Journal fraudster Michael Gordon. “Not long ago,” Wang said, “Michael R. Gordon, an American journalist, by quoting a so-called ‘previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report,’ hinted a far-fetched connection between the ‘three sick staff’ at the Wuhan lab and the Covid-19 outbreak. Nineteen years ago, it was this very reporter who concocted false information by citing unsubstantiated sources about Iraq’s ‘attempt to acquire nuclear weapons,’ which directly led to the Iraq War.”
As EIR has reported, it was Gordon, who was then working at the New York Times, who teamed up with the infamous liar and leaker Judith Miller to publish the first claim that Saddam was building nuclear weapons. The Sept. 8, 2002 article was titled, “U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts.”
RT reports that the Wuhan lies were quickly spread across all the fake-news press, and days later Biden switched his stated opinion that the WHO should be involved in any investigation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab, to calling on the intelligence community to make up their own account.
Nicola Scafetta, an Italian scientist and world leader in climate models based on astronomic oscillations, has exposed climate policies as a pretext to build a financial business in an earlier interview with Italian media. Speaking to the Italian daily Il Libero Quotidiano for Jan. 21, 2020, Scafetta said he suspects “that there is an effort to exploit climate fears to generate a catastrophism aimed at allowing a changed economic and social model in a direction promoted by big finance and multinationals. They created a demand to make money: They must have people accept costly and disadvantageous policies, which are profitable for some investors. Catastrophism is more for business rather than for the environment.”
Read the article in Italien.
The dialogue appeared live on Youtube, the CGTN website and different social media accounts. See here:
Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche added a profound call for sanity in an interview on China’s CGTN TV today. Asked to make suggestions for today’s youth in a moment of great peril, she responded that the fundamental issue is the image of mankind, with two opposite views being contested. The one is that of the Malthusian and oligarchical view, that man is a parasite, polluting Mother Nature, and the fewer people the better, a view most evident in those promoting the climate scare. The other view is that which perceives that every person is sacred, blessed with the power of reason, capable of making discoveries of new principles of nature which can be applied to enhanced production and higher standards of living for all. She said that it is time for all of humanity to unite behind this elevated view, to form a common party of mankind which unites citizens of all countries in a common mission, without contradicting the interests of the diverse and beautiful cultures of the world. To start this process, she said, mankind must unite behind the urgent need to end the pandemic, and all future pandemics, by building modern health facilities in every country. This would create a potential branching point for the human race, building the basic infrastructure required for the health of all people, and ending once and for all the idea that poverty is an unavoidable part of civilization which can not be eliminated. In 100 years, she added, when we have become a space faring species, national boundaries will be less important.