July 10—After the hasty withdrawal of U.S. and NATO troops from Afghanistan—U.S. troops, except for a few security forces, were flown out in the dark of night without informing Afghan allies—this country has become, for the moment but likely not for long, the theater of world history. The news keeps pouring in: On the ground, the Taliban forces are making rapid territorial gains in the north and northeast of the country, which has already caused considerable tension and concern in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan, and they have captured the western border town Islam Qala, which handles significant trade flows with Iran. At the same time, intense diplomatic activity is ongoing among all those countries whose security interests are affected by the events in Afghanistan: Iran, Pakistan, India, Russia, China, to name only the most important.
Can an intra-Afghan solution be found? Can a civil war between the Afghan government and the Taliban be prevented? Can terrorist groups, such as ISIS, which is beginning to regain a hold in the north, and Al-Qaeda, be disbanded? Or will the war between Afghan factions continue, and with it the expansion of opium growing and export, and the global threat of Islamic terrorism? Will Afghanistan once again sink into violence and chaos, and become a threat not only to Russia and China, but even to the United States and Europe?
If these questions are to be answered in a positive sense, it is crucial that the United States and Europe first answer the question, with brutal honesty, of how the war in Afghanistan became such a catastrophic failure, a war waged for a total of 20 years by the United States, the strongest military power in the world, together with military forces from 50 other nations. More than 3,000 soldiers of NATO and allied forces, including 59 German soldiers, and a total of 180,000 people, including 43,000 civilians, lost their lives. This was at a financial cost for the U.S. of more than $2 trillion, and of €47 billion for Germany. Twenty years of horror in which, as is customary in war, all sides were involved in atrocities with destructive effects on their own lives, including the many soldiers who came home with post-traumatic stress disorders and have not been able to cope with life since. The Afghan civilian population, after ten years of war with the Soviets in the 1980s followed by a small break, then had to suffer another 20 years of war with an almost unimaginable series of torments.
It was clear from the start that this war could not be won. Implementation of NATO’s mutual defense clause under Article 5 after the 9/11 terrorist attacks was based on the assumption that Osama bin Laden and the Taliban regime were behind those attacks, which would thus justify the war in Afghanistan.
But as U.S. Senator Bob Graham, the Chairman of the Congressional “Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001,” repeatedly pointed out in 2014, the then-last two U.S. presidents, Bush and Obama, suppressed the truth about who had commissioned 9/11. And it was only because of that suppression that the threat to the world from ISIS then became possible. Graham said at a November 11, 2014 interview in Florida:
“There continue to be some untold stories, some unanswered questions about 9/11. Maybe the most fundamental question is: Was 9/11 carried out by 19 individuals, operating in isolation, who, over a period of 20 months, were able to take the rough outlines of a plan that had been developed by Osama bin Laden, and convert it into a detailed working plan; to then practice that plan; and finally, to execute an extremely complex set of assignments? Let’s think about those 19 people. Very few of them could speak English. Very few of them had even been in the United States before. The two chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton, have said that they think it is highly improbable that those 19 people could have done what they did, without some external support during the period that they were living in the United States. I strongly concur…. Where did they get their support?”
This question has still not been answered in satisfactory manner. The passing of the JASTA Act (Justice Against State Sponsors of Terrorism) in the U.S., the disclosure of the 28 previously classified pages of the Joint Congressional Inquiry report into 9/11 that were kept secret for so long, and the lawsuit that the families of the 9/11 victims filed against the Saudi government delivered sufficient evidence of the actual financial support for the attacks. But the investigation of all these leads was delayed with bureaucratic means.
The only reason the inconsistencies around 9/11 are mentioned here, is to point to the fact that the entire definition of the enemy in this war was, in fact, wrong from the start. In a white paper on Afghanistan published by the BüSo (Civil Rights Movement Solidarity in Germany) in 2010, we pointed out that a war in which the goal has not been correctly defined, can hardly be won, and we demanded, at the time, the immediate withdrawal of the German Army.
Once the Washington Post published the 2,000-page “Afghanistan Papers” in 2019 under the title “At War with the Truth,” at the latest, this war should have ended. They revealed that this war had been an absolute disaster from the start, and that all the statements made by the U.S. military about the alleged progress made were deliberate lies. The investigative journalist Craig Whitlock, who published the results of his three years of research, including the use of documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and statements from 400 insiders demonstrated the absolute incompetence with which this war was waged.
Then, there were the stunning statements of Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the Afghanistan czar under the Bush and Obama administrations, who in an internal hearing before the “Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction” in 2014 had said: “We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan—we didn’t know what we were doing. … What are we trying to do here? We didn’t have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking…. If the American people knew the magnitude of this dysfunction … who would say that it was all in vain?”
After these documents were published, nothing happened. The war continued. President Trump attempted to bring the troops home, but his attempt was essentially undermined by the U.S. military. It’s only now, that the priority has shifted to the Indo-Pacific and to the containment of China and the encirclement of Russia that this absolutely pointless war was ended, at least as far as the participation of foreign forces is concerned.
September 11th brought the world not only the Afghanistan War but also the Patriot Act a few weeks later, and with it the pretext for the surveillance state that Edward Snowden shed light on. It revoked a significant part of the civil rights that were among the most outstanding achievements of the American Revolution, and enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, and it undermined the nature of the United States as a republic.
At the same time, the five principles of peaceful coexistence, which are the essence of international law and of the UN Charter, were replaced by an increasing emphasis on the “rule-based order,” which reflects the interests and the defense of the privileges of the trans-Atlantic establishment. Tony Blair had already set the tone for such a rejection of the principles of the Peace of Westphalia and international law two years earlier in his infamous speech in Chicago, which provided the theoretical justification for the “endless wars”—i.e., the interventionist wars carried out under the pretext of the “responsibility to protect” (R2P), a new kind of crusades, in which “Western values,” “democracy” and “human rights” are supposed to be transferred—with swords or with drones and bombs—to cultures and nations that come from completely different civilizational traditions.
Therefore, the disastrous failure of the Afghanistan war—after the failure of the previous ones, the Vietnam war, the Iraq war, the Libya war, the Syria war, the Yemen war—must urgently become the turning point for a complete shift in direction from the past 20 years.
Since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic at the very latest, an outbreak that was absolutely foreseeable and that Lyndon LaRouche had forecast in principle as early as 1973, a fundamental debate should have been launched on the flawed axiomatics of the Western liberal model. The privatization of all aspects of healthcare systems has certainly brought lucrative profits to investors, but the economic damage inflicted, and the number of deaths and long-term health problems have brutally exposed the weak points of these systems.
The strategic turbulence caused by the withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan, offers an excellent opportunity for a reassessment of the situation, for a correction of political direction and a new solution-oriented policy. The long tradition of geopolitical manipulation of this region, in which Afghanistan represents in a certain sense the interface, from the 19th Century “Great Game” of the British Empire to the “arc of crisis” of Bernard Lewis and Zbigniew Brzezinski, must be buried once and for all, never to be revived. Instead, all the neighbors in the region—Russia, China, India, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and Turkey—must be integrated into an economic development strategy that represents a common interest among these countries, one that is defined by a higher order, and is more attractive than the continuation of the respective supposed national interests. This higher level represents the development of a trans-national infrastructure, large-scale industrialization and modern agriculture for the whole of Southwest Asia, as it was presented in 1997 by EIR and the Schiller Institute in special reports and then in the study “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” There is also a comprehensive Russian study from 2014, which Russia intended to present at a summit as a member of the G8, before it was excluded from that group.
In February of this year, the foreign ministers of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan agreed on the construction of a railway line from Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan, via Mazar-e-Sharif and Kabul, Afghanistan, to Peshawar in Pakistan. An application for funding from the World Bank was submitted in April. At the same time, the construction of a highway, the Khyber Pass Economic Corridor, between Peshawar, Kabul and Dushanbe was agreed to by Pakistan and Afghanistan. It will serve as a continuation of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a showcase project of the Chinese BRI.
These transportation lines must be developed into effective development corridors and an east-west connection between China, Central Asia, Russia, and Europe as well as a north-south infrastructure network from Russia, Kazakhstan and China to Gwadar, Pakistan on the Arabian Sea, all need to be implemented.
All these projects pose considerable engineering challenges—just consider the totally rugged landscape of large parts of Afghanistan—but the shared vision of overcoming poverty and underdevelopment combined with the expertise and cooperation of the best engineers in China, Russia, the U.S.A., and Europe really can “move mountains” in a figurative sense. The combination of the World Bank, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) New Development Bank, New Silk Road Fund, and national lenders could provide the necessary lines of credit.
Such a development perspective, including for agriculture, would also provide an alternative to the massive drug production plaguing this region. At this point, over 80% of global opium production comes from Afghanistan, and about 10% of the local population is currently addicted, while Russia not so long ago defined its biggest national security problem as drug exports from Afghanistan, which as of 2014 was killing 40,000 people per year in Russia. The realization of an alternative to drug cultivation is in the fundamental interest of the entire world.
The Covid-19 pandemic and the risk of further pandemics have dramatically underscored the need to build modern health systems in every single country on Earth, if we are to prevent the most neglected countries from becoming breeding grounds for new mutations, and which would defeat all the efforts made so far. The construction of modern hospitals, the training of doctors and nursing staff, and the necessary infrastructural prerequisites are therefore just as much in the interests of all political groups in Afghanistan and of all countries in the region, as of the so-called developed countries.
For all these reasons, the future development of Afghanistan represents a fork in the road for all mankind. At the same time, it is a perfect demonstration of the opportunity that lies in the application of the Cusan principle of the Coincidentia Oppositorum, the coincidence of opposites. Remaining on the level of the contradictions in the supposed interests of all the nations concerned— India-Pakistan, China-U.S.A., Iran-Saudi Arabia, Turkey-Russia—there are no solutions.
If, on the other hand, one considers the common interests of all—overcoming terrorism and the drug plague, lasting victory over the dangers of pandemics, ending the refugee crises—then the solution is obvious. The most important aspect, however, is the question of the path we as humanity choose—whether we want to plunge further into a dark age, and potentially even risk our existence as a species, or whether we want to shape a truly human century together. In Afghanistan, it holds true more than anywhere else in the world: The new name for peace is development!
“Sublime” is the only fitting word to describe Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s deep and beautiful presentation and the atmosphere she created in the audience of 60 participants (full room capacity) at the Schiller Institute/EIR seminar held in Stockholm on January 11th, under the title “Donald Trump and the New International Paradigm.” Her speech moved the audience to address the fundamental epistemological, deeper meaning of the New Silk Road, and the meaning of the development of mankind in the universe. This deeper meaning even touched the diplomats present. An ambassador from an important Asian country started to discuss exactly the need to address these broader cultural and human implications, during the question period.
Hussein Askary (EIR)
In all, there were seventeen diplomats present, among them seven ambassadors. Four European countries were represented, nine from Asia, and four from Africa. Among the other participants, there were contacts from different Swedish associations working for friendship with Russia, Ukraine, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and the Baltic Sea area, and another group working to leave the EU.
The Chairman of the Schiller Institute in Sweden, Hussein Askary, moderated, and welcomed the participants. Helga Zepp-LaRouche then gave the keynote address, in which she evaluated the ongoing struggle to turn around the election of Donald Trump by the outgoing neoconservatives and mainstream media. She pointed to the broad reaction to the neoliberal-instigated disaster as the real basis for the election of Trump, as well as other such reactions around the world, and said that is the place to look for the reason why Trump was elected, and not any hacking of computers. As the audience members were mainly new people, she presented the history of the Schiller Institute, which is also the history of the New Silk Road policy. She described how the economy evolves from one platform to another, and pointed to the Chinese policy for pushing for the next platform of the economy with Moon-based industrial development, for the further development of mankind as a non-Earth-bound species. The Chinese motivations for their worldwide policy came up in the discussion period, in the context of Africa. Helga then stressed, with her background of long study of China’s history and Confucian thought, that her conclusion is that China is really pursuing a “win-win” policy based on the Confucian notion of pursuit of wisdom and harmony. She stressed the need for a Classical renaissance for the New Paradigm to succeed, and that this is something we cannot leave to Trump.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Good day, ladies and gentlemen. We are indeed in very, very fascinating times. And I think there is much reason to be hopeful. I know that for the last sixteen years, most people in the United States and Europe thought there is no great future. But I think that there are accumulations of strategic realignments which have shaped up over the last three years, but especially in the last year, where one can actually see that the potential for a completely new kind of relation among nations is on the horizon, and that we may actually have the chance to bring a peaceful world.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche at the Stockholm event (EIR)
Now, obviously, in the system of globalization as we have known it, especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union, that system is completely unhinged and this is cause for a lot of freaked-out reactions by those people who were the beneficiaries of that system of globalization, but I will hopefully be able to develop that this is a temporary phenomenon, and it will be replaced by some more optimistic developments.
What we see right now is a completely new paradigm emerging, a system which is based on the development of all, a “win-win” potential to cooperate among nations, and obviously the idea for what was the axiomatic basis of the globalization system since 1991 to insist on a unipolar world, is failing, or has failed already. And with that, a system which tried to maintain this unipolar world with the policy of regime change, of color revolution, or humanitarian intervention, or so-called humanitarian intervention to defend democracy and human rights, obviously has led the world to a terrible condition, but this is now coming to an end.
So obviously, the statement by Francis Fukuyama at the end of the Soviet Union that this was the “end of history” and that there would be now only democracy, was really premature; because you have a complete backlash right now, which takes different forms in different in different parts of the world against this system of globalization, and in the Asian countries it takes the form of more and more countries joining with the New Silk Road perspective offered by China, the offer to work together in a “win-win” cooperation with the Belt and Road Initiative which is now already involving more than 100 nations and international organizations; and is already engaged in the largest infrastructure project in the history of mankind.
This new paradigm economic system already involves 4.4 billion people; it is already, in terms of spending, in terms of buying power in today’s dollars, twelve times as big as the Marshall Plan was after the Second World War, and is open for every country to join, including Sweden, including the United States, and including every other country on the planet. And I will talk about that in a little while.
And in the trans-Atlantic sector you have a different kind of anti-globalization revolt, which is still ongoing; it’s not yet settled how this will turn out. It started in a visible form with the vote of the British population in June last year for the Brexit, which was the first real upset; everybody was taken totally unawares, except a few insiders. This anti-globalization revolt was obviously continued with the election of President Donald Trump in the United States; it was continued with the “no” to the Italian referendum organized by Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, to change the Constitution. And what’s common to all of these developments, Brexit, Trump, the “no” to the referendum in Italy, is they are caused by a fundamental feeling of injustice of ever-larger parts of the population which were victims of that system, which increasingly made the rich richer, made more billionaires richer, but destroyed increasingly the middle range of society, and made the poor poorer. It is my deepest conviction that that revolt will continue until the causes of this injustice are removed, and it will continue—it will hold the measuring rod to President Trump, whether he will fulfill his election promises; and if he does not do that, I believe the same people would turn against Trump as they turned against Hillary.
What Is the Future of the Euro?
So that means that the future of the European Union and the euro is very doubtful. We have elections coming this year in France in April. This election, as of now, is completely up in the air. There is no firm prediction possible. You have a very tumultuous situation in Italy, where a coup was just attempted by Beppe Grillo and Verhofstadt in the European Parliament, which failed. They were trying to get the Five Star Party into the liberal group ALDE in the European Parliament, which was rejected by the liberal group, so it failed. Then you will have elections in Holland, and in September in Germany, where the star of Mrs. Merkel is also no longer as shiny as it may have been a while ago.
So we are looking at dramatic changes.
Now, let me start with the Trump election. In my whole political life, which is now becoming quite long, several decades—I have never in my whole political life, seen such hysteria on the side of the neocons, on the side of the mainstream politicians, and on the side of the liberal media, as concerning Trump. Now, admittedly, Trump does not fulfill the behavior code of Baron von Knigge, who was a German in the 18th century who developed the code for good diplomatic behavior. But what caused Trump’s victory, is that he simply promised to end the political paradigm which was the basis of eight years of George W. Bush and eight years of Barack Obama, which was a direct continuation of the Bush-Cheney policy.
Barack Obama and George W. Bush
And it was a good thing, because it was very clear that if Hillary Clinton had won the election in the United States, that all the policies she was pursuing—including a no-fly zone over Syria, and an extremely bellicose policy towards Russia and China—would have meant that we would have been on the direct course to World War III. If you have any doubts about that I’m perfectly happy to answer questions about that, in the question and answer period.
So the fact that Hillary did not win the election was extremely important for the maintenance of world peace. And I think that of all the promises that Trump made so far, the fact that he said that he will normalize the relationship between the United States and Russia, is, in my view the most important step. Because if the relationship between the United States and Russia is decent, and is based on trust and cooperation, I think there is a basis to solve all other problems in the world. And if that relationship were adversarial, world peace would be in extreme danger.
So from my standpoint, there is reason to believe that this will happen. The Russian reaction has been very moderate, but optimistic that this may happen. If you look at the appointments, you have several cabinet members and other people in high posts who are also for improving the relationship with Russia, such as Tillerson who is supposed to become Secretary of State, and General Flynn, who is a conservative military man but also for normalization with Russia, and many others, so I think this is a good sign.
Now, if you look at the reaction of the neocon/neoliberal faction on both sides of the Atlantic to this election of Trump, you can only describe it as completely hysterical. The Washington Post today has an article, “How To Remove Trump from Office,” calling him a liar, just about every derogatory term you can possibly imagine, just on and on: unbelievable! The reaction in Germany was—von der Leyen, the Defense Minister, on the morning after the election said she was “deeply shocked,” this was “terrible,” this was a catastrophe, and it keeps going like that. So they have not recovered.And then naturally, you have the reports by the different U.S. intelligence services, Clapper, Brennan, Comey from the FBI—they all put out the claim that that it was Russian hacking of the emails of the DNC and Podesta which stole the election, because they allegedly shifted the view of the Americans to vote for Trump.
Now, I think this is ridiculous. Not only have many cyber experts, in Europe but also in the United States, already said that all the signs are that it was not a hacking but an insider leak got this information out. This is more and more likely, and there’s absolutely zero proof that it was Russian hacking. Naturally, what is being covered up with this story, is what was the “hacking” about? It was “hacking” of emails that proved that Hillary Clinton manipulated the election against Bernie Sanders! That is not being talked about any more; but I would say, look there, and there are many people who recognize it. For example, a very important French intelligence person, Eric Denécé, who is a top-level think tanker in France, said: Well, it is quite clear why they put out this story, because the neocons had to expect the great cleanup, and many of them would lose their positions, and this is why they all agreed on this story and changed the narrative.
Neoliberal Injustice
The real narrative is that it was the injustice of the neoliberal system of globalization which simply violated the interests of the majority of the people, especially in the “Rust Belt.” Hillary Clinton in the election campaign was so arrogant that she didn’t even go to Ohio or some of the other states which were formerly industrialized, where you have to see that the United States—contrary to what mostly is reported in the Western media in Europe—the United States is in a state of economic collapse. It has for the first time a falling life-expectancy; there is one indicator which shows whether a society is doing well or badly, and that is whether the life-expectancy increases or falls. In the United States it’s falling for the first time for both men and women. In the period of the sixteen years of Bush-Cheney and Obama, which you can take as one package, the suicide rate has quadrupled in all age brackets; the reasons being alcoholism, drug addiction, hopelessness, and depression because of unemployment. There are about 94 million Americans who are of working age who are not even counted in the statistics, because they have given up all hope of ever finding a job again. If you have recently travelled in the United States, the United States is really in a terrible condition; the infrastructure is in a horrible condition, and people are just not happy.
So the vote, therefore, the narrative—that was the reason why Hillary was voted out, because she was perceived as the direct continuation of these sixteen years, and so the attempt to change that narrative by saying it was “Russian hacking” is pretty obvious.
Now, however, we have nine days left, until the new President comes in. And this is not a period of relaxation, because again, in an unprecedented way, the old team of Obama is trying to create conditions for the incoming President Trump to force him to continue on the pathway of Obama. For example, just a couple of days ago, they started a deployment of U.S. and NATO troops to the Russian border in the Baltics, in Poland, and in Romania, through the German city of Bremerhaven, where 6,000 troops landed with heavy military equipment; for example: U.S. Abrams tanks, Paladin artillery, Bradley fighting vehicles, 2,800 pieces of military hardware, 50 Black Hawk helicopters. This involving 1,800 personnel, with 400 troops to be attached to the 24 Apache helicopters.
Now, obviously, the deployment of this is supposed to be a provocation against Russia, and it’s supposed to make it very difficult for Trump to start to improve relations.
A second area where you can see this effort to pin Trump down, is the question of the THAAD missiles in Korea, where now North Korea has claimed to be able to be able to launch their ICBMs anywhere, any time; and according to Chinese experts, the United States is entirely to blame for the fact that North Korea is behaving this way.
In South Korea, outgoing President Park Geun-hye, who may be impeached soon—actually in days or weeks—has agreed to accept a special task force of 1,000-2,000 which is supposed to eliminate the Pyongyang command under conditions of war, including Kim Jong-un; and obviously this is aggravating the situation, because given the history of such things, one is not sure when is the moment for such action.
Thirdly you can see it with the deployment of the U.S. aircraft carrier group USS Carl Vinson to the Western Pacific, in the vicinity of China. This aircraft carrier is of the nuclear-powered Nimitz class, and it will arrive exactly on 20th of January, the day Trump takes office. Global Times, the official Chinese newspaper, said that this deployment is set to disrupt potential talks between China and other countries in the region; naturally, it’s also supposed to put a sour note into U.S.-China relations.
There are other efforts to change and determine the narrative in the post-Obama period. Ash Carter, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, just gave a press conference where he said that it was only the United States which has fought ISIS in Syria. Now, it takes some nerve to say that, because everybody in the whole world knows that without President Putin’s decision to militarily intervene in Syria starting in September 2015, and the tremendous support of the Russian Aerospace Forces for the fighting of the Syrian troops, the present military situation in Syria would have never developed. And it was to the contrary, the very dubious behavior of the United States supporting various kinds of terrorist groups which prolonged this process and slowed it down.
But also in the attempt to pin down the narrative, it was John Kerry who, a week or so ago, gave a speech saying that it was the British Parliament which prevented a U.S. military intervention in Syria. Now—I mean, all of these people must think that the whole world has a very short memory, because I remember very vividly that it was Gen. Michael Flynn, in his capacity as head of the DIA [Defense Intelligence Agency], who had put out a public statement that it was the intention of the Obama administration to build up a caliphate in the region, in order to have regime-change against Assad, and he was then fired by [DNI] Clapper. And it is of a certain irony that, just last Friday, when Trump met with Clapper, Brennan and Comey in Trump Tower, where these three gentlemen wanted to impress Trump with their story about the Russian hacking,—the other person who was with Trump was General Flynn, who is now in the driver’s seat as the incoming National Security Advisor. In any case, you can expect the truth not be suppressed forever. And as a matter of fact, it was in the moment shortly before the U.S. military intervention in 2013, when the U.S. military action was prepared to occur Sunday evening; we had gotten that from well-informed circles in Washington,—and then at the very last minute, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, went to Obama and said: “You should not start a war where you don’t know how it ends. And if you don’t ask the Congress, you will be impeached, or you run the risk of being impeached.” And only because of that, did Obama go to ask the U.S. Congress. The U.S. Congress voted no, and the U.S. military intervention was prevented.
So this was quite different. And you know this attempt to fix the narrative will not be successful.
The Trump Administration
Now, I cannot tell you what this Trump administration is going to be. I think I mentioned the one point I’m pretty confident about: I think we will see probably only by February or even into March who will be actually in his cabinet, who will get approved by the Senate. But there are other interesting elements. For example: Trump had promised in the election campaign to invest $1 trillion into the renewal of the infrastructure in the United States. That is very good, as I said, because the United States urgently needs repair. It will, however, only function if at the same time, another promise by Trump, namely, what he promised in October in North Carolina, that he would implement the 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act, is also carried out, because the trans-Atlantic financial system remains on the verge of bankruptcy. You could have a repetition of the 2008 financial crash at any moment; and only if you have a Glass-Steagall law in the tradition of Franklin D. Roosevelt—what Roosevelt did in 1933 by separation of the banks, by getting rid of the criminal element of the banking system, and then replacing it by a credit policy in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton—can you remedy this situation. Otherwise, you cannot finance $1 trillion in infrastructure.
But one step in a positive direction is the fact that for example the former deputy foreign minister of China, and chairwoman of the Foreign Affairs committee of the National People’s Congress, Mme. Fu Ying, made a speech in New York, about six weeks ago, where she said that indeed the Trump infrastructure program can be a bridge to the New Silk Road program of China. And that is quite the case: Just yesterday, Trump met with Jack Ma, who is the chief executive of Alibaba, a Chinese e-commerce firm, and Jack Ma said that he can help Trump to create a million jobs in the United States by initiating a platform for U.S. small businessmen to sell to Chinese consumers over the next five years, and vice versa, how the Chinese can invest in the United States. Trump afterwards said this was a great meeting, we will do great things together; and Jack Ma said that Trump was a very smart man and they got along very well.
So this is very good, because the Schiller Institute in 2015 published a report calling for the United States to join the New Silk Road, which is a whole approach including how you have to have a fast train system for the United States. As you know, China has built 20,000 km of high-speed train systems. This high-speed network has doubled in only three years, and is expected to nearly double again by 2025, and reach 45,000 km in 2030. And the United States has none.
So the United States urgently needs a fast train system connecting the East Coast, the West Coast and the Midwest. Build some new science cities in the South, and get rid of the drought in the Southwest, California and the other states. So there are many, many things which urgently need to be done.
The Schiller Institute
Okay. Now, let me make a few remarks about the Schiller Institute, given the fact that many of you may not know much about us. And I want to underline the fact that we are not commentators on this whole question, but that we are responsible for many of the ideas which are now coming into effect.
The Schiller Institute was created by me in 1984. At that time we had the intermediate-range missile crisis, which brought the world to the verge of World War III; if you remember, we had the Pershing 2, and the Russians the SS-20, both on permanent alert, where there was a very short warning time, and the relationship between Europe and the United States was really in a terrible condition.
So I created the Schiller Institute with the idea that you needed an institute, a think-tank to put the relations among nations on a completely different basis. One of the most important aspects of the work was to work towards the establishment of a just, new world economic order, in the tradition of the Non-Aligned Movement. And there, my husband, in 1975, had proposed to replace the IMF with an International Development Bank, which would organize large credits for technology transfer from the industrialized countries to the developing sector, to overcome underdevelopment.
That proposal went into the Colombo Resolution of the Non-Aligned Movement in 1976 in Sri Lanka. So we had the idea that that policy had to come back on the agenda, that we had to create economic development in the southern hemisphere, so that every human being on this planet could have dignified potential for their lives, to develop all the potentialities embedded in them.
But from the beginning, we said that such a new world economic order can only function if it’s combined with a Classical Renaissance—that we have to reject the popular culture associated with modern globalization, because it is depraved and degenerate. And that we had to go back to the revival, a Renaissance, of the best traditions of every culture, and have a dialogue among them. For example, in Germany, obviously you would emphasize the German Classical culture of Schiller, Beethoven, and all of Classical music; in China, you would emphasize Confucius; in India you would emphasize the Vedic writings, Tagore, and so forth. So you would go and revive in every country simply what they have contributed to universal history, and make that known.
Now, the present Chinese policy of “win-win cooperation,” is exactly an echo of what we had proposed since 1984, to replace geopolitics with an approach for the common aims of mankind. In 1984, my husband, Mr. LaRouche, also uniquely predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union. He said if the Soviet Union stuck to its then-prevailing policies of the Ogarkov Plan, that it would collapse in five years. Now, there was nobody else who was saying the Soviet Union would collapse; it was completely unthinkable—but we observed the economic problems. And on Oct. 12, 1988, my husband and I held a press conference in Berlin, in the Bristol Kempinski Hotel, where we said that Germany will soon be unified—nobody believed that either at the time—and Germany should adopt the development of Poland as a model for the transformation of the Comecon through high technology.
Now, in 1989 therefore, when the Berlin Wall came down, we were the only ones who were not surprised. As a matter of fact, we immediately published a report, on how a unified Germany should develop Poland, and we called this program, the “Productive Triangle Paris-Berlin-Vienna,” which is an area the size of Japan. It had the highest concentration of industry, and the idea was to build development corridors from that Productive Triangle to Poland, Warsaw, Kiev, and the Balkans, and transform the Comecon that way. It was before the D.D.R. [East Germany] collapsed; and if that had been picked up, maybe the Soviet Union and the Comecon would not have collapsed.
But because you had Bush, Thatcher and Mitterrand, they did not like this at all. So in 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed, we immediately proposed to expand this program of the Productive Triangle into the Eurasian Land-Bridge: The idea that you would connect the population and industrial centers of Europe with those of Asia, through development corridors. The Iron Curtain was no longer there, so it was the natural thing to have infrastructure corridors to develop the landlocked areas of Eurasia.
Now we proposed this at the time to all the countries of Eurasia, and the only country which responded positively was China. So in 1996, they organized a very big conference in Beijing, called “The Development of the Regions along the Eurasian Land-Bridge,” and I was one of the speakers. And China at that point declared the development of the Eurasian Land-Bridge to be the long-term perspective of China through the year 2010.
As you know, then came the 1997-1998 Asia crisis and the Russian GKO crisis, so this whole development became interrupted. But that did not stop us from holding conferences about this proposal on five continents, in all U.S. cities, all European cities; and even in Latin America, in Sao Paolo and Rio; in New Delhi, and even in some African countries and Australia. We kept organizing for the idea that the natural next phase of the evolution of mankind would be the infrastructure connections of the entire planet.
Obviously, what also happened in 1999 was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in the United States, which unleashed unregulated speculation, leading to the present bubble.
China Re-Adopts the New Silk Road
Now, in September 2013, when Xi Jinping in Kazakhstan announced the New Silk Road, we simply took all the different studies we had made during those twenty-four years, and published them, and we called it The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge. This is a comprehensive proposal which has the yellow line there in the middle between China and Central Asia; this was the initial One Belt, One Road proposal by China, and we added simply—they also had the Maritime Silk Road—but we had a whole infrastructure program for Africa, for the South of Europe, the Balkans, with many corridors, including a Bering Strait Tunnel connecting the Eurasian infrastructure with the American system, with highways and high-speed trains all the way to Chile and Argentina. And eventually, when all of this is built, you will go by maglev train from the southern tip of South America to the Cape of Good Hope in Africa.
We published this proposal; and the actual book you can find at the book table, including an early report about this, from 1997. The first report we published in German, in 1991. This is not just about connection of infrastructure, but it has all the scientific conceptions of Mr. LaRouche’s notion of physical economy.
Mr. LaRouche is probably the only economist in the West who deserves that name, because all the neo-liberal economists have been so wrong in their predictions that they should probably take another job. Mr. LaRouche has given us his own scientific method, and in this report you will find such extremely important conceptions as the connection between energy-flux density in the production process, with the relative potential population density, which can be maintained with that energy-flux density, and there are other such important conceptions.
So this report was immediately published in China; the Chinese translated it into Chinese. We presented it in China in 2015. It was recommended by all the people who presented it, to all Chinese scholars, as the standard text on the Silk Road; and it has been sent to all major faculties and universities in China.
It was also published in Arabic, as you will hear from Hussein Askary. And it is now coming out shortly in Korean, in German, and we have requests for it to come out in other languages also.
So, while we were publishing these reports, the New Silk Road promoted by China has taken on a breathtaking dynamic. It has a few different names—first they called it “One Belt, One Road”; now they call it the “Belt and Road Initiative”; I always call it the “New Marshall Plan Silk Road,” so that people get an idea.
New Development Corridors Spring Up
In the meantime, many of these proposals are in different phases of realization. There is the Maritime Silk Road, as you see on the maps. And China is building six overland economic corridors—as I said, it involves 70 nations, and over 30 international large organizations, 4.4 billion people, and trillions in investments. And as I said, already now it’s 12 times bigger than the Marshall Plan was.
There is the original One Belt, One Road, connecting China and Central and West Asia through an economic corridor. In June 2015, China and the five Central Asian governments agreed to build that, and additional routes are being planned to go into Afghanistan. One is already going into Iran; when President Xi was in Iran last year, he promised—or they both promised—that they would extend this New Silk Road beyond Iran into Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Turkey.
There is the new Eurasian Land-Bridge which connects China with Western Europe, and it has already shortened the transport time for cargo, to two to three weeks from China, to different cities—from Chengdu, Chongqing, and Yiwu, to Duisburg, Lyon, Rotterdam, and Hamburg, from five weeks via ocean. Already by mid-2016, there were over 2,000 rail shipments from China to Europe, and it is picking up speed. All the cities in Europe that are termini, such as Madrid, Lyon, Duisburg, they’re all happy; they realize that they have tremendous benefits from it.
There is the China-Mongolia-Russia corridor. In June 2016, the three presidents signed a trilateral economic partnership, at the 11th Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting; and this corridor alone involves 32 projects.
There is the China-Pakistan economic corridor, which is creating 700,000 new jobs in Pakistan. It will produce 10,400 MW of power capacity, and the investment of $46 billion by the Chinese in this corridor equals all the foreign investment since 1970 in Pakistan.
There is the China-Myanmar-Bangladesh corridor. This is creating an express highway between India and China for the first time, and it goes through Bangladesh and Myanmar. This corridor will be 1.65 million square kilometers; it will encompass 440 million people.
There is the China-Indochina Peninsula corridor. This will be a highway/rail and high-speed transport system connecting the ten largest cities of the region.
In Africa, we have the Djibouti-Ethiopia route. Because, as we know, Europe has been in large part destabilized by the refugee crisis, and there is a very big incentive, one would think, for Europeans to help develop Africa. But so far it is not coming from Europe, it’s coming from China, India and Japan.
So, the Djibouti-Ethiopia railway just opened yesterday, so this is extremely good news. It opened yesterday, from Djibouti to Addis Ababa, 750 km, and it was built by China; it employed about 20,000 Ethiopians and 5,000 Djiboutians, and it will be connected to the standard gauge railway in Kenya, which again, created 30,000 jobs. And this will obviously, among other things, transform the port of Mombasa, and it will take cargo and passengers to the Ugandan border in one-tenth of the time it takes by road. A professor from the University of Nairobi School of Diplomacy, Prof. Gerishon Ikiara said, and I agree, that this whole program will “radically transform African participation in global trade in the next two decades and will catalyze the industrial transformation of Africa.”
Now, there is another extremely important project, which is the Transaqua project. There is a Memorandum of Understanding between the Lake Chad Basin Commission and the Chinese engineering firm PowerChina. Now PowerChina is the company which built the Three Gorges Dam and several other large projects, so they really know what they’re doing; and they agreed in this contract to do a feasibility study for the Transaqua project.
This is the largest infrastructure project ever entertained in Africa. It was developed in the late 1970s by the Italian firm Bonifica, and there, in particular, by Dr. Marcello Vichi. Mr. LaRouche has promoted this project since he got news of it, because it was a perfect way of solving many problems at the same time. As you know, Lake Chad is shrinking; it is presently only about less than 10% of its original size, and it affects the life of the entire people, 40 million people, in the Chad Basin. And naturally, it is already having drought effects and so forth.
The concept is simply to transfer water from the Congo River, using the unused discharge of the Congo River water going into the ocean. Now, the Congo River is the second largest river in the world, and it discharges 41,000 cubic meters/second into the ocean—unused. And the idea is to take only 3-4% of that water and bring it into Lake Chad. There was a big campaign trying to convince the people in the different states along the Congo River that it’s stealing their water, and so forth, but that was really an effort by the Greenies, and it has no substance to it whatsoever.
First of all, the idea is not to take the water from the Congo River, but from the west bank tributaries at an altitude that allows one to bring water by gravity into the Chad/Central African Republic watershed, which is at an elevation of 500 meters, and then pour it into the Chari River, which is a tributary of Lake Chad. So this way you would create a 2,400 km long waterway which would eventually bring 100 billion cubic meters of water per year into Lake Chad, and also create navigable infrastructure.
Obviously, the Democratic Republic of Congo would be also a big beneficiary, because it would obtain access to a navigable waterway, electricity production, regulation of rivers and so forth.
PowerChina is now financing a feasibility study for a first phase of the project which would involve building a series of dams in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo, and the Central African Republic. It would also potentially generate 15-25 billion kilowatt-hours of hydroelectricity through the mass movement of water by gravity; it would potentially create a series of irrigated areas for crops and livestock, of an area of 50-70,000 sq km in the Sahel zone in Chad, in the northeast of Nigeria, in the north of Cameroon, and in Niger. It would also make possible an expanded economic zone, creating a new economic platform for agriculture, industry, transportation, and electricity for twelve African nations.
So PowerChina has put up $1.8 million for the first phase of the feasibility study, and if the construction starts, this is a big project, so it’s not expected to be finished overnight, but it will take generations: But it will create livelihoods for 40 million people in the basin. And this is just one project, but there are many others. For example, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is just on a five-nation tour through Africa, and was already in Madagascar and Tanzania, and is going to Zambia, Nigeria, and Republic of Congo, and he’s inviting all African nations to join the Belt and Road Initiative.
We have proposed an expanded program of railways and nuclear power, just transforming the entire African continent.
In Latin America
There are development plans for Latin America, high-speed railway routes in Latin America, which the Schiller Institute has proposed. In 1982, when Mr. LaRouche was working with President Jose Lopez Portillo of Mexico on these projects, he called it “Operation Juarez,” to refer back to the best traditions of Mexican-American cooperation. And these are all projects which are obvious. If you look at a map of Africa or Latin America, you don’t see that kind of infrastructure! If you see some railway, you see it as a small line from a mine to the port to exploit the raw materials, but you don’t have infrastructure. And we had this idea, which Alexander von Humboldt, by the way, proposed in 19th Century, so it’s not that revolutionary; it’s sort of obvious.
EIRNS
The Chinese have made various proposals since the BRICS summit in Brazil in July 2014. There is a northern route of the Brazil-Peru transcontinental rail line. This was already agreed upon between the governments of Brazil and China a year ago; but then they had the coup in Brazil, Dilma Rousseff was impeached, so this came to a halt; also the new government in Peru is very reluctant. But there’s a big movement: I just addressed a conference of economists in the Amazon region two months ago, and there’s a whole movement, also associated with the Fujimori party, who absolutely want to fight for that rail line because it is the step to the future.
There are three additional lines. One line would include Bolivia in this rail line, and there are three additional lines through Argentina and Chile; China also wants to build three tunnels between Chile and Argentina to connect the Pacific and the Atlantic.
This is the Nicaragua Canal, which is in the early stages of completion, also built by China. This will increase the speed of global shipping between Belem and Shanghai, and cut the time of the current route across the Atlantic and around Africa by 10%.
So I can only mention the most important projects. There are many, many others. For example, China and Ecuador are building a science city in Ecuador. President Correa, during the recent state visit of President Xi Jinping, said that the collaboration between Ecuador and China will mean that Ecuador soon will be on the same level as all industrialized countries. They have the idea of overcoming poverty forever. The science city is going to do work in the most advanced fields of science.
Bolivia, which used to be a coca producing country, is now cooperating on space projects with China, with Russia, with India. So there is a completely new mood!
A Completely New Mood
I talked with many Africans—there was a big conference in Hamburg just a couple of months ago, where the Africans said that there is a completely new mood in Africa, there is a new paradigm: China, Japan, India are all investing, and the Europeans, if they don’t shape up, will become marginal and irrelevant. So there is a completely new optimism caused by this dynamic.
Now, just on the diplomatic level, this process of integration is going absolutely rapidly, especially since September of last year, when you had on Sept. 2-3, the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, where the integration of the Eurasian Economic Union and the Belt and Road Initiative was on the table. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe participated in that conference, and Japan is now massively investing in the Far East of Russia, in terms of energy cooperation. Putin was just in Japan, on a state visit; Abe will go on a state visit to Russia this year. They’re talking about settling the conflict concerning the Northern Islands, the Kuril Islands. They’re talking about a peace treaty between Russia and Japan, and obviously there is a complete strategic realignment going on. President Duterte changed the role of the Philippines from being the aircraft carrier for the United States in the South China Sea, to now collaborating with China on economic cooperation, and also with Russia. The same, by the way, goes for Turkey, which is now shifting and working with Russia, Iran and Syria, to bring peace to the region.
So there is a complete strategic realignment going on, and the Western media and Western politicians have just not got it yet. But this is very, very interesting.
So then this momentum continued. From Vladivostok, immediately afterwards, on Sept. 4-5, to the G20 Summit in Hangzhou, where China took real leadership in saying the future recovery of the world economy must be based on innovation and Xi made very clear that this innovation must be shared with the developing countries, so as not to hold up or hinder their development.
So, it’s a completely new paradigm, and I’ll say something about that in a second.
Then you continue to the ASEAN meeting in Laos, the BRICS meeting in Goa, India, in October, the APEC meeting in Lima in November, and it involves all of these organizations and is spreading very fast.
Why doesn’t Europe join this? Look, Europe is in bad shape. The EU is collapsing, the people in Italy by now hate the European Central Bank, they hate Merkel, they hate Schäuble, they hold Merkel responsible for the suffering of the population in Italy, which is now reaching dimensions like Greece; Greece was destroyed—one-third of the Greek economy was destroyed by the austerity policy of the Troika. And you know, there’s nothing left of the idea of unity in Europe. There are borders being built, the Schengen policy is dead; look at the Eastern European countries—the Eastern European and Central European countries are reorienting towards China! The 16+1 are the Central and East European Countries; they have extensive infrastructure cooperation with China. China is building up Piraeus port in Greece; they’re building a fast railway between Budapest and Belgrade, and many other projects.
The Problem in Europe
But the problem with Europe, is that at least the European EU bureaucracy and some governments, like the German government, are are still on the old paradigm, the geopolitical paradigm of globalization, of neoliberal policies, and they don’t understand that by what China has proposed, and what is now the basis of a very close and determined strategic partnership between Russia and China—they have put on the agenda a different model: To overcome geopolitics by a “win-win” strategy. Now, most people, at least in Europe and in the United States, have a very hard time understanding that. They cannot imagine that governments are for the common good, because we have not experienced that for such a long time. The common idea of all the think-tanks, or most think-tanks, is “China must have ulterior motives”; “China is just trying to replace Anglo-American imperialism, with a Chinese imperialism.” But that is not true! I mean, I’m not naive: I have studied this extensively. I was in China for the first time in 1971, in the middle of the Cultural Revolution. I have seen China as it was then, I travelled to Beijing, Tianjin, Qingdao, Shanghai, and to the countryside, and so I know what an enormous transformation China has made in this period.
I went back to China in 1996, after 25 years; already then it was breathtaking. But if you look, the Chinese economic model has raised 700 million people from extreme poverty to a decent living standard; China is now committed to developing the interior region as part of their building of the New Silk Road, to eliminate poverty from China totally by the year 2020—and there are only 4% left in poverty right now.
Now, China is offering their Chinese economic model to all participating countries in this New Silk Road conception, and it is in the interest of Sweden. It would be in the interest of Germany, because Germany is still—despite the Green insanity which has deformed many brains—is still a productive country. The German Mittelstand (small and medium industry) is still producing, I think, the third largest number of patents in the world. It is their natural interest to find cooperation not only in bilateral cooperation, but in investments in third countries. It would be in the best interest of Germany: if Germany is freaked out about the refugees, which really has meant a complete destabilization of the country, then why is Germany not cooperating with Russia, China, India, and Iran, in the reconstruction of the Middle East? Now the Syrian government has started to rebuild Aleppo, at least to rebuild the hospitals and the schools. The Schiller Institute proposed in 2012, a comprehensive proposal for the development of the entire Middle East, from Afghanistan to the Mediterranean, from the Caucasus to the Gulf States, and it would be in the absolute self-interest of Germany because—sure you have to destroy ISIS and the terrorists with military means—but then you have to create conditions where young people in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yemen, have a reason to become doctors, scientists, and teachers, so that they have a future, in that way you drive out terrorism forever!
And if all the big neighbors would cooperate—Russia, China, India, Iran, Egypt, Turkey, Italy, France, Germany, and Sweden—you could change this region in no time! And you will hear about that soon from Hussein.
The same for Africa. The only minister in Germany who is reasonable is Development Minister Gerd Müller, because he travels all the time to Africa and he says there will be the need for many millions of jobs for the young people of Africa in the next years; if we don’t create these jobs, many, many millions of people will flee from hunger and war and epidemics.
So would it not be in their self-interest that all the European nations join hands with the Chinese Silk Road initiative, and help to reconstruct and build up the economies of Southwest Asia and Africa? I think that that mission would also really help to overcome the disunity of Europe, because you will not solve that problem by looking at your navel; but you will solve that problem by a joint mission for the greater good of mankind.
So, I think that this is all possible. It can happen this year, it can start this year, because China has committed itself to have two big summits this year—one summit will involve all the heads of state of the Belt and Road Initiative, and it can be the year of consolidation of the new paradigm.
Now there are a couple of elements which are also important for this new paradigm, because we are not just talking about infrastructure and overcoming poverty. The next phase of the evolution of man is not just to bring infrastructure to all continents on this planet, but to continue that infrastructure into nearby space around us. This was formulated in this way for the first time by the great German-American space scientist and rocket scientist Krafft Ehricke, who made fundamental contributions to the Apollo project. He had the beautiful vision that if you look at the evolution over a longer period of time, life developed from the oceans with the help of photosynthesis; then you had the development of ever higher species, species with a higher metabolism, higher energy-flux density in their metabolism.
Eventually man arrived. Man first settled at the oceans and the rivers; then with the help of infrastructure, man developed the interior regions of the continents; and we are now with the World Land-Bridge picture—this will be, when it is built, the completion of that phase of the evolution of mankind, by simply bringing infrastructure into all the landlocked areas of the world, and with the help of new methods to create water, with modern technologies, we will create new, fresh water. For example, if you have peaceful nuclear energy, you can desalinate huge amounts of ocean water; through the ionization of moisture in the atmosphere, you can create new water to solve the problem of desertification. Right now all the deserts are growing; with these new technologies you can reverse that, make the deserts green, and just make this planet livable for all human beings!
But this is not the end: Mankind is not an Earth-bound species. Mankind is the only species which is capable of creative discovery, and the collaboration of all nations for space exploration and space research is the next phase of our evolution. Now China has a very ambitious space program. It landed the Yutu rover on the Moon in 2014. Next year it will go to the far side of the Moon, and eventually bring back helium-3 from the far side of the Moon, which will be an important fuel for fusion power economy on Earth. Right now, we are very close to making breakthroughs on fusion power. The Chinese EAST program [Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak] has reached 50 million degrees in plasma for 60 seconds under high confinement. And just a couple of days ago, the plasma configuration in the stellarator in Greifswald, Germany, was proven accurate to one part in 100,000. But it means that in a few years, we can have fusion power! And that will create energy security, raw materials security, on Earth.
The Next Platforms for Civilization
We’re looking at a completely new phase of civilization, and the far side of the Moon is very important because it will not have radio-frequency noise, as you have on the Earth-facing side of the Moon; this far side is shielded from a lot of this radio-frequency noise, so it will be possible to put up much better radio-telescopes, and so you will be able to look into Solar system, into the Galaxy, into other galaxies much, much farther than so far.
I don’t know if any of you have seen the latest pictures from the Hubble telescope: If you have not done that, please, go home and take the time to look at these pictures from the Hubble telescope. I saw them, and I was completely excited, because now we know that there are—at least—two trillion galaxies! Now, I have a good imagination, but I cannot imagine that. It’s just too big. And when you see the pictures which have already been taken, you have galaxies which look like the Milky Way; then you have totally different nebulas; you have all kinds of formations. And not one galaxy is like the other. Just imagine how big the Universe is!
And we know very, very little! But man is the only species which can know! No donkey will ever know about the great galaxies or—no dog will ever be able to breed rabbits to have a better breakfast. They all want a better breakfast, but they don’t know how to do it. Man is capable of overcoming every limitation, and the mind of man is a physical force in the Universe. We’re not outside of the Universe, but what our mind invents or discovers, is part of the Universe. And that is a very exciting thing.
And there is lots to be found out about what is the origin and essence of life. What governs the laws of the Universe? What is the role of the mind in the Universe? I mean, these are all extremely exciting questions, and they all prove that man is not an Earth-bound species. So there is no need to be a Greenie, because we can apply man’s knowledge to expand our role in the Universe. Even the European Space Agency is now talking about a “Village on the Moon.”
Krafft Ehricke had said that building an industrial center on the Moon will be important as a stepping stone for further travel in space. And you now see the shaping up of new economic platforms. Mr. LaRouche has developed this notion of an economic platform to signify a period of economic development which is governed by certain laws, like for example, the development of the steam engine created a new platform; the development of the railway created a new platform; fission is creating a new platform. And the platform is always governed by the most advanced technologies of that time.
You can already see that in the infrastructural development of nearby space, the first platform is simply that man is able to reach Earth orbit! That’s not self-evident. If you had told man in the Middle Ages that you will get on a spaceship and go into orbit, he would have said you’re crazy!
Now we can already see we have manned space travel, and we can now connect to where the Apollo project stopped after the assassination of Kennedy, 40 years ago; but now China, India, Russia, they are all continuing that process. India also has an extremely ambitious space project.
And so, the first economic platform will be simply to leave the planet Earth and to go into orbit; the second economic platform of space research will be to have an industrial base on the Moon, and to eventually start to produce raw materials from space. Because you will, as this continues, not always transport materials from the Earth for your space travel, but once you have fusion as a propulsion fuel where the speed will become much greater, you will be able to take materials from asteroids and from other planets, for your production and your requirements in space. And then longer space travel between planets as the third platform, which is already visible.
This is very exciting, and once you start to think about it, it shows that mankind is really capable of magnificent achievements, and that we should really overcome geopolitics. Geopolitics is like a little, nasty two-year-old boy who is not yet educated, and who knows nothing better than to kick his brother in the knee. That’s about the level of geopolitics.What Xi Jinping always talks about is that we have to form a “community of destiny for the common future of mankind,” and that is exactly what the Schiller Institute set out to do in 1984, when we said we have to fight for the common aims of mankind. And these common aims of mankind must come first, and no nation should be allowed to have a national interest or the interest of a group of nations, if it violates these higher common aims of mankind. And the areas of working together include a crash program for fusion, space cooperation, and breakthroughs in fundamental science.
All of this however must be combined with a Classical Renaissance, a dialogue of cultures on the highest level, and we have already very successfully practiced that at Schiller Institute conferences, where we had European Classical music: Bach, Beethoven, Verdi, Schubert, and Schumann; Chinese Classical music; Indian poetry. We will have this coming Saturday in New York, a beautiful event on dialogue of civilizations, of cultures, where we will have a Chinese professor talking about literati painting. You know, in Chinese painting, you have poetry, calligraphy and painting, in one. And for Westerners, it’s a complete revelation, because this does not exist in European painting. People get completely excited, because they discover that there are beautiful things to discover in other cultures! And once you study and know these other cultures, xenophobia and racism disappear! Because you realize that it’s beautiful that there are many cultures, because there are universal principles to be discovered in music. One musician will immediately understand another musician because it’s a universal language. Scientists speak a universal language; they understand each other.
And so the future of civilization will be a dialogue between Plato, Schiller, Confucius, Tagore, and many other great poets and scientists of the past. So, if you give every child access to these things, which is also in reach, I can see that we will have a new era, a new civilization of mankind. And I would invite all of you to not just look at it, but be part of it.
A truly beautiful and world historic event took place Saturday at the Tear-Drop Memorial in Bayonne, New Jersey. The Schiller Institute Chorus, following their performance of the Russian National Anthem at the Russian Consulate in Manhattan last week in memory of the 92 victims of the Tu-154 crash, and especially the death of 64 members of the Alexandrov Ensemble, organized a similar, broader event at the Tear-Drop Memorial, donated to America by the Russian government to honor those who died on 9/11. Attending and/or speaking at the event were representatives of the Russian Mission to the UN, the NYPD, the Bayonne Fire Department, the Bayonne American Legion, the 9-11 Families United for Justice Against Terror, and the Schiller Institute, who sang and/or spoke, in a winter storm, about the necessity of the people and governments of Russia and America to unite in honor of the deceased, while demonstrating that the common, human emotion that unites us to mourn those who have been taken from us, can and must also unite us in creating a better future for Mankind.
The transcript of the event follows:
Russians and Americans Join for Wreath-Laying at Tear-Drop Memorial To Remember Those Who Died in Tu-154 Plane Crash
LIEUTENANT TONY GIORGIO (Director of the NYPD Ceremonial Unit): Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Bayonne, New Jersey 9/11 Memorial, a gift from the Russian people after the tragic attacks at the World Trade Center in memory of both the February 1993 and Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
And we’re here this morning to pay homage and tribute to those Russian members that were killed on Christmas Day. Everyone please remain standing for the presentation of our colors, for the New York City Police Department Color Guard, the Bayonne Fire Department Honor Guard, and the American Legion Honor Guard; and the singing of both the Russian Federation National Anthem and the United States National Anthem, which will be performed by the Schiller Institute Chorus, directed by Diane Sare.
And now, our Anthems. … [after the National Anthems, presenting of the colors, and invocation, Lieutenant Giorgio introduced the First Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, Mr. Petr Iliichev].
MR. PETR ILIICHEV: Friends and colleagues, we gather today to honor the victims of the devastating crash of the Tupolev-154 that happened two weeks ago. We come together to commemorate 92 passengers including members of world famous Alexandrov Academic Ensemble of Song and Dance; the prominent charity worker and
humanitarian worker Dr. Liza Glinka; teams of Russian TV channels [Channel One?], Zvezda, NTV; as well as the crew of the plane.
Our thoughts and prayers are going to the families of the victims. The singers, the dancers, doctors, journalists, pilots and stewards, lived their lives for a purpose, especially the performers who used to cheer up huge audiences, but today we stay silent in their memory.
Today is the Orthodox Christmas Day, and on Christmas Day in every nation, we share life, love, we exchange support; we praise each other, we treat each other as being one family. And it’s very symbolic that today we gather to grieve at the Tear-Drop of grief that is very dear to the American people for their loss of 9/11.
On behalf of the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to all of you present here, to all of those who organized this event. It’s helpful when you’re grieving, and you are not alone, your friends are around to offer you their compassion, their heartwarming solidarity. We value very much your sympathy and your solidarity.
It’s said that when words fail, music speaks. Arts and culture are meant to bring peace to people. So once again, I’m very grateful for Schiller Institute Chorus for what they have done, and all of you who are present here. Thank you.
LT. GIORGIO: Thank you so much, Mr. Illichev. And now, I’d like to introduce the Chairwoman of the 9-11 Families United for Justice against Terror, Mrs. Terry Strada.
MRS. TERRY STRADA: Hello and thank you for having me.
Fifteen years ago I lost my husband Tom, in the September 11th terrorist attack against our nation. Today, on behalf of everyone standing here, and the American people, I would like to offer my sincere and heartfelt condolences, for the sudden, tragic and senseless death of your beloved Alexandrov Ensemble, your loved ones, and your fellow citizens.
Rich in history and pride, the Alexandrov Ensemble bolstered the spirits of the deprived soldiers defending the Warsaw Pact and under President Vladimir Putin, continued that tradition of patriot purpose. Their performances would provide a moral balance in difficult times, and on December 25th, they were travelling to Syria to lift the spirits of the Russian army during their time away from home.
Everyone here knows your pain, how deep your sorrow goes, and the feeling that you may drown in your tears. Grief like this is both physical and heartbreaking and the road to healing is long and difficult. Allow yourself to mourn, to cry and to be sad. Remember those you loved, and lost. Remember the beautiful music they made, and how it felt in your hearts when you heard their songs and the sound of their beautiful nstruments: They were a gift from God and they are gone, too soon.
I am standing here today to tell you to tell you and to show you, you will heal, you will never forget, but you will heal, and one day the pain you are feeling, this horrible pain, will subside. You will miss them, and they will always be with you in spirit.
Tragedies like this can bring a nation today. Today, it is bringing two nations together, and I hope you find comfort in knowing we feel your pain and mourn your loss, too. Russia wanted us, the American people, to have a memorial for the fallen heroes and the citizens lost and killed on 9/11, with a tear-drop, representing that the world cried with us. Thank you for your kindness and support. Today we offer you the same.
Thank you.
LT. GIORGIO: Thank you Mrs. Strada. And now, I continue with the Training Unit of the Bayonne Fire Department, Capt. Don Haiber.
CAPT. DON HAIBER (Training Unit of the Bayonne Fire Department): On behalf of the Bayonne Fire Department, the City of Bayonne, the State of New Jersey, and the United States of America, we wish to convey our deepest condolences to the people of Russia and the families that have been affected by this terrible tragedy. The loss of the members of the Alexandrov Ensemble, a gem of Russian culture, also known as the Red Army
Chorus, will be felt worldwide.
Being hear at the Tear-Drop Memorial is fitting, since the creator of this monument was the Russian sculptor Zurab Tsereteli. In the darkness after 9/11, this monument helped to bring hope and light to the many people who visited here. It is now our turn to repay that kindness back to Russia. This small token of our sympathy, hopefully, will bring a touch of hope and light back to the Russian people.
On a personal level, I’m honored to be here today, as I was actually at the Ground Zero, working with my brother firemen for a few days. And may the peace and hope that I feel when I am here be conveyed back to your country. It is at times like this that we are neither Americans nor Russians, but we are human beings who feel loss and genuinely wish peace and happiness to one another.
Our love and prayers are with you, and peace to all. Thank you.
LT. GIORGIO: Thank you, Captain Haiber. As the Captain mentioned, one of the reasons that we are here is not only is it the 9/11 memorial, but also we are commemorating those lost on Christmas Day, in that terrible plane crash. As a representative of the New York City Police Department, we, too, performed with the Russian choir at the 10th anniversary of 9/11 that was being held in Quebec City, and it was a wonderful performance that
night. But as Mr. Iliichev said, sometimes the words fail, but the music never fails. And even though we spoke two different languages, we spoke the universal language of music which always gives us hope, comfort, and peace, and that’s all we want in this world are those three things.
I now introduce the director of the choir, Mrs. Diane Sare.
DIANE SARE: First of all, let me assure everyone, we are not a group of Russian immigrants, as was said on YouTube.
On behalf of the Schiller Institute of Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, I would like to offer our deepest condolences to Russia and the people of Russia on the great losses you have recently suffered. First, your beloved Ambassador [to Ankara] Karlov was gunned down at an art museum. Then, only a few days later, on Christmas Day was the terrible plane crash, which took the lives of 92 people: Among them was a dedicated crew, a group
of very talented young journalists, Dr. Elizeveta Glinka, whom you mentioned who was bringing food and medical aid to children in Syria, and 64 members of the Alexandrov Ensemble and the wonderful soloist, Grigory Osipov who sang {God Bless America} to the New York Police Department on the 10th anniversary of 9/11.
The loss of the chorus was particularly great, because as everyone who sings in a chorus knows, the combination of our voices is greater than each of us individually, or each of us added up as parts. Each and every one of us is going to die. But we hope that mankind will be immortal. If we can each think of ourselves as unique voices in a great chorus which stands across generations and across continents, then the universe will resound with the beauty of mankind.
LT. GIORGIO: Thank you so much. And now, we’re going to ask to have the wreath presented, also with the list of passengers on that tragic flight, as the chorus performs a Christmas carol. [Schiller Institute Chorus sings {Adeste Fideles}]
Thank you so much. As we conclude today’s memorial and commemorative ceremony, again we want to thank the Schiller Institute Choir, we want to thank the City of Bayonne, New Jersey Fire Department for all they gave us here in hosting this event, and we ask those of you with the white roses to please, as you can, step forward to the Tear-Drop Memorial and place it for all those that we have lost and for the hope we have in the world as
we continue in their honor.
Thank you so much.
DIANE SARE: And, I wish to thank Lt. Tony Giorgio and the New York City Police Department Ceremonial Unit for all you have done.
Founder and President of the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche issued the following message:
Message of condolence to the Alexandrov Ensemble and the People of Russia
In the name of the International Schiller Institute, I wish to express our deep condolences for the tragic loss of the the 92 human beings who died in the plane crash on the way to Syria. This accident is all the more a cause for sadness, as the music and patriotic spirit characteristic of the members of the Alexandrov Ensemble would have brought a message of hope to the people of Syria. This is a population victimized by more than five years of the criminal policies of regime change and treated as the pawns in a geopolitical game in complete violation of their sovereignity.
The Alexandrov Ensemble has been an expression of the highest moral values of Russia and, like classical choral singing in general, speaks to the soul and the creative potential of the audience. It is therefore extremely important that Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announced that he is initiating auditions to pick the best talents to fully restore the Alexandrov Chorus.
The training of the singing voice is important for everybody, since a well-placed voice can express the creative intention of the composer and directly speak to the same faculty in the audience. It represents, therefore, an irreplaceable element of the harmonious development of the character. Let me therefore share with you the idea that, in addition to rebuilding the Alexandrov Ensemble, thousands of Alexandrov choruses be established in schools all over Russia to honor the heroic contribution of Russia in the liberation of Syria and, at the same time, broaden the uplifting effect of choral singing to the young generation.
There is a New Paradigm in the process of becoming as exemplified by the integration of the Eurasian Union and the New Silk Road Initiative, establishing a completely new kind of relations among nations. We need a dialogue of the best tradtions of each culture for this New Paradigm to grow into a new era of civilization—the knowledge of the best of another culture will lead to a love for it, and therefore supercede xenophobia and hatred with more noble emotions. In this new era, geopolitics will be overcome forever and the dedication to the common aims of mankind will establish a higher level of reason. It is a reason for consolation for all of us, that the tragic death of the victims of the plane crash contribute with their immortality to the building of that better world.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche
Chairwoman, International Schiller Institute
Musical Offering to the Alexandrov Ensemble and the People of Russia
Members of the NYC Schiller Institute Community Chorus sing the Russian National Anthem outside the Russian Consulate in New York in honor of the passengers, many of them members of the Alexandrov Ensemble, who died when their plane crashed enroute to Syria, Sunday, December 25, 2016.
Dec. 26 (EIRNS)—Decades-long efforts by the Transaqua authors and by the Schiller Institute have achieved a success, as Powerchina, the Lake Chad Basin Commission, and Nigerian authorities on Dec. 13 signed a Memorandum of Understanding for a water transfer project from the Congo Basin to Lake Chad. The project follows exactly the layout of Transaqua, the Italian project for a waterway from the Congo basin to the Lake Chad basin; it is aimed at replenishing Lake Chad and creating a Central Africa transport, energy, and agriculture infrastructure.
With this, the New Silk Road has reached Lake Chad!
According to a statement issued by the LCBC, the deal involves the initial stages of the Transaqua canal. Powerchina, the report says, will study the feasibility of “an African infrastructure project by opening a new corridor of development linking West and Central Africa, through:
Potentially transferring 50 billion cubic meters annually to the Lake Chad through a series of dams in D.R.C., Republic of Congo and the Central African Republic.
Potential to generate up to 15-25 billion kWh of hydroelectricity through the mass movement of the water by gravity.
Potential to develop a series of irrigated areas for crops, or livestock over an area of 50,000 to 70,000 square km in the Sahel zone in Chad, northeast Nigeria, northern Cameroon and Niger.
Creating an expanded economic zone by providing new infrastructure platforms of development in agriculture, industries, transportation, and electrical production, affecting up to 12 African nations.
The statement continues,
“The core idea is to increase the water quantity in the Lake Chad, improvement of water flow conditions, alleviate poverty within the basin through socio-economic activities, meet the energy needs of towns surrounding the two Congo, and to conduct an in-depth environmental impact assessment.”
Previous to the deal, detailed Terms of Reference and methodology for a feasibility study had been provided to the LCBC by a team of the Italian Bonifica engineering firm, led by engineers Marcello Vichi and Andrea Mangano, authors of the original Transaqua idea more than 35 years ago. LCBC Executive Secretary Abdullahi Sanusi Imran had acknowledged, in a communication to the Italians, that the Transaquaconcept “is much more appropriate for the situation of the Lake Chad than all other alternative solutions.” Both Vichi and Mangano had presented the idea at an EIR seminar in Frankfurt last March 23, with the participation of LCBC representative Mohammed Bila.
With Powerchina, a most powerful partner enters the constellation of forces. Powerchina is the Chinese state-owned company that built the Three Gorges Project, the largest hydropower project in the world.
In remarks reported by Nigerian media, the Vice-President of Powerchina, Mr. Tian Hailua, “explained that with the transfer of water to the lake, there is the potential to develop a series of irrigated areas for crops and livestock of over an area of 50,000 to 70,000 sq km in the basin.”
Nigerian Water Minister Suleiman Adamu”noted that the project is a generational project as it would take a long time to actualize, due to the huge capital involved and the complexity of the nature the project. He, however, called for concerted efforts from all to see that the project is achievable as this would save the livelihood of over 40 million people living within the basin.”
Although the volume of water transfer specified is half of the volume of the original Transaqua project to refill Lake Chad, it is expected that the Powerchina study will explore the feasibility of building a system of dams and waterways which can be extended southwards in the Democratic Republic of Congo, involving all the right-bank tributaries of the Congo River. In this way, the project will not only be a simple water transfer but also a major transport infrastructure connecting all nations of Central Africa.
“To be complete, the feasibility study should explore from the beginning the complete length of the water-transfer project,” Transaqua author Marcello Vichi stated, “even if the canal, obviously, should necessarily start from the north, in Central African territory, to proceed southwards as much as allowed by the available funds and by national will. The longer the canal, the bigger will be the water volume to be poured into the lake.
This is an edited transcript of a video presentation by the founder of the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, to the Sixth Annual International Conference on Fundamental and Applied Problems of Sustained Development in the “Nature-Society-Man” System at the Dubna International University of Nature, Society, and Man, in Dubna, Moscow Region, Russian Federation. The conference—“Designing the World’s Future”—took place December 19-20, 2016. This video message was prerecorded on December 5, 2016.
Helga Zepp LaRouche: Dear participants in the Dubna Conference, dear Professor Bolshakov:
I feel very honored that you are allowing me to again address your conference, especially at this extremely dramatic and exciting moment in history. We are experiencing right now a world revolution. We are seeing the collapse of the paradigm of globalization, and it is maybe an irony of history that this paradigm only lasted about 25 years. It started to come into being with the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, and it was characterized by the idea that there should be a unipolar world, and therefore that it would be legitimate to topple governments which would not submit to this unipolar world, by means of regime change, color revolution, or even wars based on lies, as we have seen so plentifully in the Middle East.
The economic side of this globalization went along with neo-liberal monetarism, which created the condition where the rich became so rich that they don’t know what to do with what they have accumulated; the middle class dropped into poverty; and for an increasing mass of poor people, they became so poor that despite many jobs or no job at all, they could not make ends meet.
This has been the reason that there was a revolt. First in June in Great Britain with the Brexit; this continued with the election of Donald Trump in the United States; and we just saw the “no” to the referendum in Italy, which had essentially the same reason: complete mistrust of the population against an establishment which has been completely out of sync with the interests of the common good and the common people. This revolution, I dare to predict, will continue until the injustices associated with it—which have killed many people either in war or by economic means—are corrected.
Alternative System Is Ready
The good news is that an alternative is already in place. You know that we were extremely engaged, in the same 25-year period, with the idea of building a Eurasian Land-Bridge, which we already in 1991 called the New Silk Road; that we have promoted this idea of a New World Economic Order based on principles of physical economy, as they were proposed by Mr. LaRouche for almost 50 years—that they should become the basis for a New World Economic Order.
Now after some many difficulties, finally, in September 2013, President Xi Jinping, in an address in Kazakhstan, put the New Silk Road on the international agenda. And what you have seen in the meantime is an unbelievable speed of cooperation among nations in Asia, but also in other parts of the world, all based on the principle of “win-win” cooperation, whereby naturally China is exporting the very successful Chinese model of economy. After all, China was able to develop its own economy in a period of only 30 years, to reach the point that the industrialized world needed almost 200 years to achieve. China is exporting this economic model, but it is doing so on the basis of a win-win conception; that is, the idea that all participating countries have equal benefits and advantages. It is the same idea as the Peace of Westphalia, that foreign policy can only succeed if it is in the interest of the “Other.”
I know that in the beginning, there was a certain amount of debate in Russia, about whether this would be against Russian interests. But in the meantime, I think a very successful process has developed. In the latest stage, at the Vladivostok Eastern Economic Forum in September, with the participation of [President Xi,] President Putin, Prime Minister Abe from Japan, and many others, and 2,500 delegates from many Asian countries, there was a big integration of the “One Belt, One Road” policy with the Eurasian Economic Union. That integration is moving forward very, very rapidly. It now already involves more than 100 nations and international institutions. It involves integration of infrastructure and high-technology cooperation, especially in the field of energy and nuclear energy; it involves space cooperation; and it has become a very attractive dynamic. After Vladivostok, this integration continued at the G-20 summit in Hangzhou; it followed with the ASEAN conference in Laos; then it went to Goa, to the BRICS annual conference, in India; and the latest example was the APEC conference in Peru, where many Latin American countries are now joining this development.
This is an economic model which is already reaching Europe, with the 16+1 countries of Central and Eastern Europe, which are now all cooperating with China on the development of infrastructure. But it is very clear that you cannot work with China from Central and Eastern Europe, without going through Russia, and without Russia being part of this, so that it becomes a real peace order. The EU has been extremely “stand-offish,” not taking up President Xi Jinping’s offer of win-win cooperation; they have also, naturally, not taken up President Putin’s many, many offers for cooperation in Eurasian integration from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
But now with the election of Donald Trump, there may be a change in the situation.
New Potentials
This is not yet decided, but it is a potential. One thing is very clear: If Hillary Clinton had been elected, we would in all likelihood have been on a very short road to World War III. Very hopefully, this is changing, because Trump already had phone conversations with President Putin and President Xi, and said that he wants to normalize the relationship between Russia and the United States. That obviously is not enough, but Trump had also promised that he would implement Glass-Steagall, the banking separation law of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and that he would invest, in his first 100 days in office, in a $1 trillion infrastructure program for the United States, to make the infrastructure in the United States the most modern in the world. To carry that out, he has a big job to do, given that the infrastructure in the United States is completely falling apart; but this is potentially the solution.
Because—after the Schiller Institute published the 370-page book, The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge—we added one more chapter—namely that the United States must join the New Silk Road, because the United States needs a massive infrastructure program. Now President-Elect Trump may understand that, for good reason—because he is a businessman, and as President Putin just noted, he has been successful, and probably will find his new responsibilities on a higher level. And as Madame Fu Ying, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National People’s Congress, said recently at a conference in New York, the proposal by Trump for a U.S. infrastructure program can be a bridge to the New Silk Road and the “One Belt, One Road” policies. If that program can be successfully put on the agenda, there is indeed hope.
LaRouche’s ‘Four Laws’
Mr. LaRouche—who would have liked to also send you greetings, but he unfortunately has a severe cold right now, but he greets you anyhow—he has been emphasizing that the only way the world can get out of this present crisis requires at an absolute minimum, the implementation of his four basic laws.
The First Law is to go back to the banking separation of Glass-Steagall of Franklin D. Roosevelt, doing exactly what Roosevelt did in 1933: separating the investment banks from the commercial banks—to isolate the derivatives and the bad debt, the unpayable debt, and just stop the casino economy. If the investment banks have to close, that’s all the better, because we really don’t need this casino aspect of the economy.
The Second Law goes back to the idea of the National Bank, which first was defined by Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, and which basically implies the Third Law—the idea that a sovereign government has the right to issue credit, provided it only goes into productive investment. I think this is a very important point in Russia right now, because of the various economic heritages coming from the Yeltsin period, and the question of where the power to generate credit is located. I think this idea, for Russia, is extremely important: that the sovereign government has the right to issue credit—and I don’t mean money, I don’t mean reserves, I don’t mean paper money on the financial open markets—I mean something completely different. I’m saying that the sovereign government has the right to issue credit lines for investment in those areas of the economy in which you would also invest if the economy were in good shape. This was exactly what not only Alexander Hamilton did, but also what Lincoln did with the greenbacks, but especially what Franklin D. Roosevelt did, by creating the New Deal, where the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, after the Glass-Steagall Act was implemented, issued credits for huge, large-scale infrastructure projects such as the Tennessee Valley Authority project and others, and with that, took the United States out of the Depression and made it, by the end of the Second World War, the most prosperous nation in the world. And it was exactly the same kind of credit mechanism which was used in Germany in the postwar period by the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, to finance investment and the reconstruction of Germany. And this led to the Economic Miracle, which everybody admired, in only a few years time.
In 1931, there was a presentation by Dr. Wilhelm Lautenbach before the Reichsministerium in Germany, which essentially proposed what Roosevelt proposed two years later in the United States. What Dr. Lautenbach said, is that you have the coincidence of a world depression and a world currency crisis, and the usual market mechanisms do not function any more. The only way this can be addressed is by the state: The state has the right and the power to issue credit, and provided that credit goes into real production, based on physical principles, then it is not inflationary, and that is the only way you can get the economy going.
That would also function in Russia today; there is no question about it: It would work if people left the idea of “money,” and instead went to the idea of physical economy only. The Fourth Law, which LaRouche insists is absolutely crucial, is that you have to have a crash program for the development of fusion power and international space cooperation, because the world economy lacks qualitative increases in productivity as a result of the paradigm of globalization. Investment in basic research and development in the last 25 years was neglected to the point that the world economy today is not in a position to take care of the existing world population. And you can only remedy that by a gigantic leap in productivity, which must be the result of higher levels of energy flux-density in the production process, and the absolutely necessary next step in this direction is fusion power.
Thermonuclear fusion solves several problems at the same time, and as you know, breakthroughs were made with the stellarator in Greifswald in Germany during the past year, but also in the Chinese EAST model. All it needs is appropriate funding to get such a crash program to lead to the success and potential commercial use of fusion power. Fusion power would give you energy and raw materials security for the entire world, and it would also solve the problem of getting mankind a new form of propulsion for space travel, and in that way shorten the time tremendously, which is absolutely necessary if you want to go into longer spaceflights such as to Mars.
The Chinese are very advanced; for example, they want to land on the far side of the Moon next year, and they have invited many, many countries to join them in the Chinese Space Station, which will be ready in the year 2022. They intend to mine helium-3 from the far side of the Moon as a fuel for a fusion economy on the Earth.
This is all very exciting, and I think that the idea that mankind is the only creative species, and, as Mr. LaRouche has said many, many times, we are the only known creative species in the universe so far (that does not mean that we may not eventually find other intelligent beings from other galaxies, since there are about 2 trillion galaxies, so that’s a big question), but I think we are on the verge of a completely new paradigm. If we go now for the kinds of scientific breakthroughs which are on the level of Albert Einstein—the question of what is the role of man in the universe, and how can we think about ourselves, our creative mentation, as the most developed aspect of the universe—then we can change the identity of humanity so that we become truly adult, and that we work together. Geniuses of different nations and different cultures can easily work together, like astronauts, who understand the common aims of mankind which we must pursue, and not geopolitical aims.
I think we are on the verge of such a new paradigm. I think if we all act together now, to use this potential of hopefully changing the United States, getting new cooperation between the United States and Russia, moving to a completely new model of economy, what many people have called the common destiny or common future of the one mankind, I think we have a great future ahead of us.
On Monday, December 12, Helga Zepp-LaRouche was the special guest speaker at a Schiller Institute/EIR seminar in Copenhagen entitled, “Donald Trump and the New International Paradigm.” Eight diplomats from six countries attended, including two ambassadors. There were nations from Western Europe, Southwest Asia, Western and Eastern Asia, and Africa. In addition, there were around 30 Schiller Institute members and contacts, as well as a few representatives of various Danish and international institutions.
Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche delivered the following keynote address to the XXIII National Congress of the Association of Economists of Peru, held in Pucallpa, Ucayali, in the Amazon region of Peru. The title of the Nov. 17-19 congress is “The Peru-Brazil Bioceanic Train: Impact on the Economy of the Amazon Region and the Country,” and Zepp-LaRouche’s presentation, delivered at the opening session on Nov. 17, was on “The New Silk Road Concept, Facing the Collapse of the World Financial System.” The Peruvian Economists’ congress was timed to coincide with the Nov. 19-20 APEC summit in Lima, Peru, with the expected participation of numerous heads of states, including China’s Xi Jinping and Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
Stop the Political Terror, Defend the Right to Life of Leaders of a Ukrainian Opposition Party!
To President of Ukraine P. Poroshenko
Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yu. Lutsenko
Chairman of the Security Service of Ukraine V. Hrytsak
Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine A. Avakov
Human Rights Ombudsmen of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine V. Lutkovska
Chairman of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine Committee on Human Rights, National Minorities and Ethnic Relations H. Nemyria
Representative office of the OSCE in Ukraine
Representative office of the European Union in Ukraine
Embassy of the United States of America in Ukraine
Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany in Ukraine
Embassy of France in Ukraine
Embassy of Italy in Ukraine
Embassy of the Republic of Poland in Ukraine
Embassy of the Russian Federation in Ukraine
Embassy of the Republic of Belarus in Ukraine
Embassy of Israel in Ukraine
Stop the Political Terror, Defend the Right to Life of Leaders of a Ukrainian Opposition Party!
Open Letter from Chairman of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine Natalia Vitrenko
2 November 2016
I am compelled to ask you to defend the political rights of members of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine (PSPU), which have been grossly violated, and to seek a halt to actions impeding the lawful activity of our party.
On 28 October 2016 at 16:30, a group of unknown persons, among whom were fighters of the Azov Battalion under the direction of A.E. Shatilin, forcibly seized the premises located at 3/7 Podgornaya/Tatarskaya St., Kyiv, which legally belong to Siver Ukraina LLC. These property rights were established by decision #18/519 of the Kyiv Commercial Court, dated 22 July 2003, and have not been revoked by any party up through the present time.
Since 2005 the PSPU has rented a part of the premises at the aforementioned address from Siver Ukraina LLC on the basis of a lease contract. In full compliance with the law and the lease contract, the PSPU makes the required payments. The contractual relations between the PSPU and Siver Ukraina LLC have not been revoked by any party.
The PSPU kept its party documents, including the originals of the Charter and Program of the PSPU, proceedings of its congresses, plenary sessions of its Central Committee, and sessions of the Presidium of its Central Committee, as well as the party archives, emblems and literature, in these rented premises. The party papers included the registration documents of the local, district and regional party organizations; the personal data of the local and central party leadership; originals and copies of numerous court rulings made during the 20 years in which the PSPU has been active; a large quantity of photo and video material from throughout the years in which the party has existed; computer and duplicating equipment; cameras and video recorders; household appliances; and personal property belonging to me, the chairman of the PSPU and a People’s Deputy of Ukraine in two convocations, to V. Marchenko, deputy chairman of the PSPU and a People’s Deputy of Ukraine in three convocations, and to several other party members. In addition, the rented premises housed our unique historical, legal, economic, political, sociological and statistics library; records related to meetings with citizens on personal issues; my scientific and analytical working papers (as a professional economist, a doctor of economics); and papers belonging to the editor-in-chief of the PSPU newspaper Dosvitni ogni, which are needed by V. Marchenko for his work as a journalist.
I note that neither the SBU [Security Service of Ukraine] nor the MVD [Internal Affairs Ministry] has made any claims of crimes against myself or V. Marchenko and has not initiated proceedings on such matters.
In the absence of a court decision authorizing eviction from the premises and in the absence of any officer of a court, what occurred on Friday, 28 October 2016 was a forcible seizure of the entire premises owned by Siver Ukraina LLC, including the premises rented by the PSPU. That is, there took place in addition an illegal seizure of the property, documents, equipment, literature and emblems of the PSPU.
A.E. Shatilin stated on Saturday, 29 October 2016 that the SBU had conducted a search in the Siver Ukrainia LLC premises, including the PSPU premises, and had removed two busloads of property, documents, literature, computer equipment, and so forth, which were essentially stolen from us. No warrants for the search and seizure of documents or party and personal property have been presented either to the owner of the premises, Siver Ukraina LLC, or to me as chairman of the PSPU.
I emphasize that on Friday, 28 October 2016, when the forcible seizure of our premises was carried out, I personally demanded of police officers and of investigator D. Soroka that they ensure the security and safe-keeping of our party property, documents, literature and equipment, as well as the personal possessions of the PSPU’s leaders and members. That is, to prevent outside parties from entering the premises rented by us. My demand was ignored, and the law enforcement agencies did not defend our rights.
On Monday, 31 October 2016, I personally, V. Marchenko, and representatives of other renters were barred from entering our places of work. We were compelled again to summon the police from the Shevchenko District of Kyiv, who recorded this instance of violation of the law.
I believe that the illegal seizure of the Siver Ukraina LLC premises and the entry into the premises leased by the PSPU were committed for the purpose of impeding the political activity of the PSPU, an opposition party, and of fishing for spurious grounds on which to ban our party, launch criminal prosecutions of myself and V. Marchenko as leaders of the party, and intimidate members of the PSPU and of society as a whole.
This political action is aimed at suppressing the freedom of speech and the freedom of thought and beliefs, and at legalizing dictatorial forms of combating the opposition. The harassment of the PSPU and the unlawful inaction of Ukrainian law enforcement agencies are particularly distinguished by the circumstances not only that the PSPU on reasonable ground criticizes the government’s socioeconomic and foreign policy, but also that our party takes an anti-fascist position and openly, providing evidence and invoking the norms and principles of international law, publicizes the collaboration of members of the OUN-UPA [Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and Ukrainian Insurgent Army] with Nazi Germany and exposes their crimes during the occupation of Ukraine by Hitler’s forces.
The inaction of the law enforcement agencies and the free hand allowed to the Azov fighters portend, in addition to a political crackdown on the PSPU, the threat of physical elimination of myself, V. Marchenko, and core PSPU activists.
Please give your urgent attention to this appeal, and defend the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine against discrimination and unlawful infringements on the part of agencies of state power and of radical guerrillas; I ask you, as well, to ensure the right of the citizens of Ukraine to take part in the lawful activity of the PSPU on the basis of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine “On Political Parties of Ukraine,” and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. I ask you to ensure the personal security of myself, V. Marchenko and members of the PSPU.
It is crucial that the General Assembly of the United Nations now convening in New York, build on the progress that the G20 Summit has achieved under China’s leadership. The course has been set toward a new financial architecture, and the chance is greater than ever that all nations can participate in the building of the New Silk Road on the basis of win-win cooperation, and that the productivity of the world economy will rise on the basis of innovation, while poverty and the consequences of war are overcome. The main problem, however, is that the West continues to cling to the status quo of a uni-polar world and the neo-liberal financial system, although both of those objectives have long been unachievable. The rise of Asia signifies that one nation cannot set the rules, but that solutions must be found through dialogue and negotiation. The neo-liberal system is in the throes of an existential crisis.
The first twin of globalization—the policy of regime-change and alleged humanitarian interventions—has cost the lives of millions of people, brought untold suffering to millions more, destroyed entire regions, created the breeding grounds for the spread of terrorism, and set off huge waves of refugees. The wars against Iraq and Afghanistan alone, according to the study of Professor Neta Crawford of Brown University, have cost five trillion dollars—and for what result?
The second twin of globalization—the system of maximum profit for the TBTF banks, which are supposedly “too big to be allowed to fail”—has led to an unbearable gap between rich and poor. And if certain banks have to pay the full sum of their fines for criminal methods, they must declare bankruptcy because their capital base is insufficient. Hence, a new meltdown threatens, with even more catastrophic consequences than the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008, now that central bank instruments are exhausted and no longer effective.
In that context, two reports released in Great Britain offer an extraordinary opportunity to re-assess and correct the current policy. After the Chilcot Report, which laid the blame on Tony Blair for the illegal Iraq war which was built on lies, a commission of the British Parliament has levelled no less scathing charges against former Prime Minister David Cameron for the war in Libya, which was carried out on “erroneous assumptions” and led to“political and economic collapse, inter-militia and inter-tribal warfare, humanitarian and migrant crises, widespread human rights violations, the spread of Gaddafi regime weapons across the region and the growth of ISIL in North Africa.”
On the role of the United States, the report states that“The United States was instrumental in extending the terms of Resolution 1973 beyond the imposition of a no-fly zone to include the authorisation of ‘all necessary measures’ to protect civilians. In practice, this led to the imposition of a ‘no-drive zone’ and the assumed authority to attack the entire Libyan Government command and communications network.”
That same overall review of the current policy should, of course, include the implications of the 28 pages of the official Joint Congressional Inquiry Report, which deals with the circumstances of the attacks of September 11, 2001, as well as the JASTA bill, which necessitate a completely new investigation.
In light of the horrendous suffering this failed policy has caused: the millions of dead and injured; the traumatized children and soldiers (including in the nations waging war); the destruction of cities, villages, infrastructure and irreplaceable cultural wealth; it is not only appropriate, but a moral obligation for the countries that took part in these wars in the different “coalitions of the willing,” to examine the political process in their parliaments and to fully participate in the reconstruction of the regions that have been devastated. This will not bring the dead back to life, but the admission of guilt and a genuine change of policy towards development would give the people living there today hope for a future.
The status quo cannot be maintained. As a result of both twins of globalization, there has been an enormous loss of trust among the population in the trans-Atlantic world. Right-wing populist and right-extremist parties are massively gaining strength; the conditions of the 1930s threaten to reappear in a new form; the European Union is crumbling; and the refugee crisis will not be solved by securing the external EU borders, but only relocated and removed from the news. The U.S. economy is collapsing, while the society is more than ever torn and overtaken by violence. Either this process will lead to an escalation of the confrontation with Russia and China, and to the extermination of mankind in a great war, or the leading politicians in the West will have the moral integrity to correct the errors of the past.
The Solution
To come back to the positive proposition in the beginning of this appeal, the course has been set toward a way out of this crisis of civilization since the G20 summit. Not only has China presented a new level of cooperation based not on geopolitics, but rather on a policy in the mutual interest of all, it has also pledged to industrialize Africa and other low-income countries, an approach that could both solve the refugee crisis and eliminate the terrorist environment. Clearly, the extension of the New Silk Road to the Middle East and Africa both requires and will bring about growth rates of 7 to 10%.
And just as promptly, the Club of Rome stepped in with a new report under the cynical title in the German translation of “One Percent Is Enough,” which would lead in consequence to population reduction, a fascist policy for which the Club of Rome is infamous. The UN recently stressed that Africa needs a growth rate of at least 7-8%. When one of the authors of the Club of Rome report, the Norwegian Jorgen Randers, comes out with the absurd statement, “My daughter is the most dangerous animal in the world,” because she consumes 30 times more energy than a girl in a developing country, it serves to show on what image of man the Club of Rome bases its argument, i.e. on a bestial one.
But man, in contrast to all other creatures, is able to use his creative potential to continually discover new insights into the laws of the universe; this is called scientific progress. The unlimited process of perfecting the human mind has a correspondence in the laws of the physical universe, which develops to ever higher energy-flux densities. We are not in a closed system on the Earth—as the Club of Rome and similar organizations claim—rather, our planet is an integral part of the Solar System, the galaxy and the universe, about which space research is discovering more and more. This research yields many advantages for Earth itself, and it is therefore fantastic that China announced at the G20 summit, that it would share with developing countries the most advanced research results for their space and lunar exploration projects.
Mankind has arrived at a crossroads. If we continue to walk the well-trodden paths with a policy of “more of the same,” the world threatens to come apart. If, on the contrary, we can agree on the common aims of mankind—an economic and financial order that serves the well-being of all mankind, and which makes possible a decent life for every person on this Earth; the securing of raw materials and energy through higher technologies such as thermonuclear fusion; the exploration of space to safeguard our planet and a renaissance of classical cultures—then we will be able to usher in a new, better era in the history of our species.
The General Assembly of the United Nations is the fitting place, where the new paradigm of our one mankind, based on that which comes before all the differences among nations, must be established and celebrated.
In the meantime, many of these proposals are in different phases of realization. There is the Maritime Silk Road, as you see on the maps. And China is building six overland economic corridors—as I said, it involves 70 nations, and over 30 international large organizations, 4.4 billion people, and trillions in investments. And as I said, already now it’s 12 times bigger than the Marshall Plan was.
There is the new Eurasian Land-Bridge which connects China with Western Europe, and it has already shortened the transport time for cargo, to two to three weeks from China, to different cities—from Chengdu, Chongqing, and Yiwu, to Duisburg, Lyon, Rotterdam, and Hamburg, from five weeks via ocean. Already by mid-2016, there were over 2,000 rail shipments from China to Europe, and it is picking up speed. All the cities in Europe that are termini, such as Madrid, Lyon, Duisburg, they’re all happy; they realize that they have tremendous benefits from it.
There is the China-Mongolia-Russia corridor. In June 2016, the three presidents signed a trilateral economic partnership, at the 11th Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting; and this corridor alone involves 32 projects.
So, the Djibouti-Ethiopia railway just opened yesterday, so this is extremely good news. It opened yesterday, from Djibouti to Addis Ababa, 750 km, and it was built by China; it employed about 20,000 Ethiopians and 5,000 Djiboutians, and it will be connected to the standard gauge railway in Kenya, which again, created 30,000 jobs. And this will obviously, among other things, transform the port of Mombasa, and it will take cargo and passengers to the Ugandan border in one-tenth of the time it takes by road. A professor from the University of Nairobi School of Diplomacy, Prof. Gerishon Ikiara said, and I agree, that this whole program will “radically transform African participation in global trade in the next two decades and will catalyze the industrial transformation of Africa.”
I don’t know if any of you have seen the latest pictures from the Hubble telescope: If you have not done that, please, go home and take the time to look at these pictures from the Hubble telescope. I saw them, and I was completely excited, because now we know that there are—at least—two trillion galaxies! Now, I have a good imagination, but I cannot imagine that. It’s just too big. And when you see the pictures which have already been taken, you have galaxies which look like the Milky Way; then you have totally different nebulas; you have all kinds of formations. And not one galaxy is like the other. Just imagine how big the Universe is!
