Schiller Institute leader Helga Zepp-LaRouche summarized the current strategic situation on Monday, as running along on “two tracks”: First, the track leading potentially to a positive resolution in Ukraine, with benefit for other zones of conflict; and the second track, of war preparation madness, leading to doom.
Zepp-LaRouche invited former CIA officer and intelligence analyst Larry Johnson to discuss the quickly changing and developing geopolitical situation in the wake of the phone call between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Other topics that will be discussed include Johnson’s trip to Russia with fellow journalists Judge Napolitano and Mario Nawfal to interview Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and the vote in the German Parliament for a change in the constitution to finance the ‘war economy’ in order to further the (nuclear) confrontation with Russia.
Larry C. Johnson is a former CIA officer and intelligence analyst, and former planner and advisor at the US State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. As an independent contractor, he has provided training for the US Military’s Special Operations community for 24 years. Since its founding in 1998, Larry has been managing partner of BERG (Business Exposure Reduction Group) Associates LLC, which specializes in investigating money laundering and counterfeit products, as well as providing financial analysis and counter terror strategy. Larry was a frequent guest on all major US networks from the 1990s to the late 2000s, but made the “mistake” of consistently offering candid insights and honest assessments, without deferring to establishment bias. As waging “Forever Wars” became the singular policy objective of 90% of the nation’s elected officials, and of the entire media, those voices offering independent and unbiased analysis were relegated to the wilderness, Larry’s along with them. Vilified by the establishment right, left and center, Larry must be doing something right. His take on global security, intelligence and geopolitics is regularly sought by businesses, by non-mainstream media, and by an organic and growing online cooperative of non-partisan dissident journalism and commentary. In 2024, Larry addressed the United Nations Security Council, and attended the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF). He appears regularly on various news sites, video blogs and independent online channels, including Sputnik, RT, Judging Freedom, Redacted and The Duran, among many others.
Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her weekly live dialogue to discuss the mobilization to end the ‘Special Relationship’ in celebration of the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Republic. Send your questions to questions@schillerinstitute.org
March 10, 2025 (EIRNS)—Changes in all directions are occurring by the day in the world strategic situation, and in people’s everyday lives. One historic pattern to be reckoned with, is the U.S.-Europe hostility. The dramatic feature of this is the mad rush in Europe for militarization—perpetrated in the name of defending Ukraine, and preparing to defend against war from Russia.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Schiller Institute founder and leader, noting this today, called the U.S.-Europe breach “worrisome and dangerous.” But she spoke not from the standpoint of recommending returning to the conformity among the nations on both sides of the Atlantic, which has gone on for decades, under horrible British geopolitics. She spoke today from the vantage point of ending that for good. On March 8, Zepp-LaRouche issued a statement of principle and action through the Schiller Institute titled, “Instead of Rearming for the Great War, We Need To Create a Global Security.” Her appeal warns the nations of Europe that “they are making a catastrophic historical mistake. If they then also attempt to finance the enormous lack of military capabilities by creating money outside the regular budgets, they are repeating German Reichsbank President Hjalmar Schacht’s policy of Mefo bills from the 1930s.”
Zepp-LaRouche’s statement concluded with eight points for action, beginning: “We call on European politicians to come to their senses! Do not repeat the mistakes of the 1930s!”
European circles on the warpath exceed even the wildest science and sociological fiction. Tomorrow in Strasbourg, EU functionaries Ursula von der Leyen, European Union Commission President, and Antonio Costa, European Council President, are to meet with the European Parliament to attempt to cheer them on for the mad EU “Rearm Europe” plan, mandating $860 billion in new arms funding, for Europe and Ukraine, to stand up against Russia. On March 20-21 the leaders of 27 EU countries are to have their second meeting on this multi-billion euro commitment in Brussels, likely with Volodymyr Zelenskyy on hand, Acting President of Ukraine.
This flight forward occurs at the very same time as the breakdown of Ukraine forces in the field is worsening rapidly. In its Kursk region, Russian forces have encircled some 6-10,000 Ukrainian incursion soldiers in a “cauldron” at Sudzha. The Russians conducted a surprise move to enter through nine miles of empty underground gas pipelines.
A meeting will take place tomorrow, March 11, in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, between Ukrainian and U.S. delegations. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio leads the Americans. Acting Ukrainian President Zelenskyy will be accompanied by Andriy Yermak, head of the Office of the Presidency.
The Schiller Institute posting of the Zepp-LaRouche March 8 “Global Security Architecture” statement, has a signature page for endorsements, and also welcomes any and all other initiatives acting in the same spirit and principles. For example, on March 9 in France, a statement was issued by former military officers and by sovereignists, opposing the extending and sharing of the French nuclear force, which French President Emmanuel Macron is proposing. Their statement is titled, “Nuclear Deterrence, in Essence, Is the Expression of a National Will and Cannot Be Shared.”
The Schiller Institute posting introduces Mrs. LaRouche’s statement as, “for immediate and widespread international circulation. It is being issued at a time when Europe is at an historic crossroads, where a different alternative must be urgently put on the table if a catastrophe is to be avoided. We encourage signatures of endorsement from all walks of life to force this issue out into the public debate as quickly as possible.”
Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her weekly live dialogue to discuss the mobilization to end the ‘Special Relationship’ in celebration of the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Republic. Send your questions to questions@schillerinstitute.org
The following statement was issued March 8 by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, for immediate and widespread international circulation and endorsement. It is being issued at a time when Europe is at an historic crossroads, where a different alternative must be urgently put on the table if a catastrophe is to be avoided. We encourage signatures of endorsement from all walks of life to force this issue out into the public debate as quickly as possible.
The European Union (EU) and most European governments are in the grips of a war hysteria that can only be compared to the warmongering madness that broke out before World War One. Astronomical sums are slated to be spent on rearmament: European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen wants to invest €800 billion(!) in the “Rearm Europe” plan, but by invoking Article 122 of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty to bypass the European Parliament. The likely next German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who had promised before the [Feb. 23] election that the CDU would not touch the debt brake, now says the exact opposite after the election: he proposes, to begin with, €400 billion(!) for arms buildup, and €500 billion for “infrastructure,” which will largely serve military purposes, but without setting an upper limit (!) for military spending—“Whatever it takes!” as Merz put it. Those are the infamous words Mario Draghi used during the euro crisis to signify that all the money floodgates should be opened. And this at a time when the German physical economy is in free fall, when some European countries are being crushed by gigantic mountains of debt and Europe has already been largely left behind economically.
And why such a sudden fantastic increase in money, as if there were no tomorrow? U.S. President Donald Trump is talking to Russian President Vladimir Putin and wants to bring the Ukraine war, which has long been lost militarily, to an end through negotiation, and thus end the horrific dying of Ukrainians and Russians. At the same time, Trump is pulling the world back from the brink of a thermonuclear world war, from which we were only a hair’s breadth away due to the escalation of the previous U.S. administration.
But rather than congratulating Trump and supporting him, the European Union—which was, after all, the winner of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize—as well as UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and Merz are attempting to continue the war in Ukraine “to the last Ukrainian,” even though experts estimate that it has already taken the lives of over one million Ukrainians and around 300,000 Russians.
The Europeans are thus attempting a repeat of the sabotage with which UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson torpedoed the Istanbul agreement between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in March 2022, which could have ended the war after a few weeks, and so is responsible for all the deaths since then.
At the same time, different secret services in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, etc. are producing forecasts that say Russia will allegedly have built up its military capabilities to such a point by 2029-30 that it will then be able to attack one or more other EU states. This is a purely geopolitically motivated assertion for which there is no evidence whatsoever, but which could turn out to happen if Europe continues to focus on confrontation, on the motto: “What I shout into the forest, will come back as an echo.”
Various institutes, such as the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, point out that neither the German Bundeswehr, nor the British or French armed forces are even remotely capable of engaging in a direct confrontation with the world’s strongest nuclear power—Russia. The Kiel Institute warned, for example, that at current procurement rates, it would take the Bundeswehr up to 100 years to reach the level of its 2004 stocks. The British Army has just 219 tanks, while Russia produces over 1000 per year. The British Royal Air Force has just 173 combat aircraft! Italy has an impressive 150 main battle tanks! Macron’s offer to use French nuclear weapons as a nuclear umbrella for the whole of Europe should be seen as a provocation of Russia more than as actual protection.
Tom Harrington, Professor Emeritus at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, aptly summed up the reaction of Europeans: “If you are a chihuahua and you play a Doberman for many years on TV, you can forget that you’re actually a chihuahua. That can lead to much delusion when the director calls off the production.”
If the EU and the individual European member states now sabotage Trump’s intention to end, together with Russia, the Ukraine war which was a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia from the beginning, then they are making a catastrophic historical mistake. If they then also attempt to finance the enormous lack of military capabilities by creating money outside the regular budgets, they are repeating German Reichsbank President Hjalmar Schacht’s policy of Mefo bills from the 1930s. At that point, the great war with Russia and with all the countries with which Russia is in a strategic partnership would become a self-fulfilling prophecy!
The European establishments have so far failed to reflect on their own strategic mistakes of recent decades, which have led to the current situation so unpleasant for them. Instead of seizing the great historic opportunity presented by the fall of the Berlin Wall and German reunification to establish a peace order that was absolutely possible at the time, all of Europe ended up following the policies of the Anglo-American neocons. Instead of dissolving NATO together with the Warsaw Pact in 1991, the West broke all the promises it had made to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and expanded NATO no less than six times—by a total of 1000 kilometers—up to the borders of Russia, thus creating the conditions for a reverse Cuban missile crisis. In addition, the policy of sanctions, regime change and interventionist wars, especially in Southwest Asia, created an enormous backlash throughout the Global South.
But the European establishments have so far been incapable of reflecting on their mistakes out of the obvious fear that it will profit their critics. Faced with the choice of joining Trump’s new U.S. peace policy, they are aligning behind the British policy—and thus the country leading the war policy!
Clearly, the European pro-Atlantic establishments have still not realized that the historical momentum has already shifted massively to Asia. Several nations there have growth rates that the European economy can only dream of. The economic success of China is due to its economic policy, which gives the priority to investment in infrastructure, the real economy, innovation, excellence in education and increased productivity through investment in cutting-edge technologies.
China’s trading partners benefit from this policy, which is based on win-win cooperation, as it is also economically beneficial for China. Organizations such as the BRICS, which now has 19 members and partners and many more hoping to join, as well as ASEAN, SCO, EAEU and others, now represent an attractive alternative to the unipolar “rules-based” order based purely on military alliances and geopolitical interests. Above all, it is by now well known that the application of these “rules” is a highly arbitrary matter.
Europe has reacted to Trump’s sudden signals for an end to the Ukraine war and a resumption of diplomacy with Russia with great panic—and cries for war. But there is still time to correct this potentially fatal course. If Europe wants to overcome its current economic misery, the way out lies in cooperation with the nations of the Global South, which has long since become the Global Majority.
Humanity has reached the point where it must overcome the old patterns of thought steeped in geopolitics and the Cold War and replace them with a new global security and development architecture that takes into account the interests of all nations on this planet. A positive example for this is provided by the Peace of Westphalia, which came about because the warring parties came to the conclusion that if the war continued, no one would be able to enjoy victory, since there would be no survivors. How much more convincing this argument is in times of thermonuclear weapons which, if used, would lead to the extinction of all mankind!
We call on European politicians to come to their senses!
Do not repeat the mistakes of the 1930s!
Humanity is at the most important crossroads in its history!
For a new paradigm: cooperation instead of confrontation!
For immediate negotiations on a new Peace of Westphalia!
For an end to the war in Ukraine through negotiations and diplomacy!
For an end to the war in Gaza through diplomacy, the recognition of the two-state solution and the economic development of the entire region!
No stationing of American medium-range missiles in Germany!
March 7, 2025 (EIRNS)—The 92nd consecutive online meeting of the International Peace Coalition (IPC) took place on Friday, March 7. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, opened the proceedings with a focus on Europe and Ukraine, where “things are going completely haywire.” President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen has announced a “Re-Arm Europe Plan” which will cost €800 billion.
Friedrich Merz, projected to be the next Chancellor of Germany, announced the end of the federal budget-limiting “debt brake” in order to have a military budget of €400 billion. (On Feb. 23, Merz’s party, the Christian Democratic Union, won the German federal election with a promise not to undo the debt brake.) The historical precedent for such an action is Nazi Economics Minister Hjalmar Schacht’s “Mefo bills,” which were set up in 1933 to finance purchases from armament manufacturers without leaving a paper trail. It is estimated that it would take up to 100 years for Germany to reach levels of armaments, military production, and troops equivalent to what they possessed in 2004.
There are many implications of United States President Donald Trump’s recent pronouncements, including a possible end to intelligence sharing by the U.S. with the British-dominated Five Eyes intelligence cartel. Although France has its own independent nuclear force, the U.K. is dependent upon U.S. technical support for use of its nuclear weapons.
European leaders, habituated to a litany of “let’s ruin Russia,” cannot adjust to Trump’s nascent peace initiative. If they were smart, they would reflect on how Trump’s election expresses public opposition to the last 35 years of failed neocon “unipolar world” policies.
In Southwest Asia, Egypt’s plan for Gaza reconstruction is “a baby step in the right direction” of the Oasis Plan. “You don’t get a two-state solution if you don’t change the entire dynamic of the region,” emphasized Zepp-LaRouche.
The next speaker was Dr. Mohammed S. Dajani Daoudi, founder of the Wasatia Movement in Palestine, and director of the Wasatia Graduate Academic Institute. He grew up as a Palestinian in Jerusalem and described how, over time, he switched his attitude from “us or them,” because he “started to see the human side of my enemy” after witnessing Israeli doctors treating Palestinian patients. He said the current problem is that both sides of the conflict want their own state “from the river to the sea,” which is a fantasy. We need a coalition of Israelis and Palestinians for peace. His goal is to create a culture of moderation, which is the meaning of “Wasatia.”
Zelenskyy Goes to London
Garland Nixon, veteran progressive radio and television talk show host, began by saying, “NATO is, shall we say, an imperial project.” He shared some things that are currently being discussed in Europe. For example, MI6 is good at playing divide and rule and setting up puppet governments, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is an MI6 project; “When he got punched around a little by Trump, he goes right to London, and they hug him.”
Nixon listed some developments which can work to the advantage of peace activists. Elon Musk is beginning to release videos of brutal conscription practices in Ukraine. Musk has also promoted a video of U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) boasting that the U.S. was behind the 2014 Maidan coup in Ukraine. He noted that Trump has admitted complicity, in that he provided Javelin missiles to Ukraine, and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio admits it is a proxy war. It must be recognized that the reality of the Ukraine war is complex, not a simple “good guys vs. bad guys” narrative in which former President Joe Biden created the problem and Trump will fix it.
Miguel Cabrera of the Dominican Republic, a journalist, author, former university professor and current host of the weekly TV program “Science, Technology, and Society,” praised Trump’s initiative for peace in Ukraine. He characterized the Trump Presidency as a “light at the end of the tunnel” because he is willing to talk to Russia. He stressed that the Ukraine war is not Russia vs. Ukraine, it is Russia vs. NATO. He also emphasized that Israel has carried out a massacre against Palestinian people. A long-time supporter of the Schiller Institute, he pointed to Lyndon LaRouche’s Oasis Plan as a solution to the Middle East crisis.
Excerpts were aired of an interview conducted by EIR’s Mike Billington with Dr. M.K. Bhadrakumar, a retired career diplomat with India’s Ministry of External Affairs, who held diplomatic positions in the Soviet Union, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, and Türkiye, where he served as India’s Ambassador. Dr. Bhadrakumar decried the West’s “wanton acts of motiveless malignity and hubris.” In regard to the U.K., he described how British intelligence is able to persuade American officials to believe that British policies are actually their own. Ukrainian attacks on Russian targets are actually planned by British intelligence. Ukrainian leaders who now speak of assassinating Trump were trained by MI6. He presented an unusual perspective that Iran is America’s natural ally in the region; the Iranian elite are pro-Western. The U.S. working with Iran could be as significant as normalization of U.S.-Russian relations.
An unannounced guest was Kirk Wiebe, a former senior intelligence official and whistleblower with the United States National Security Agency. He said that recent events have “set the stage” for the realization of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s New International Security and Development Architecture. No country today is prepared to go to war; all of our assets are stretched thin. The U.S. has $36 trillion in debt. He sees the possibility of negotiated peace.
In response, Zepp-LaRouche said that it will not be weeks and months, but rather years before Europe will be ready for war. But, contrary to neocon propaganda, there is no proof of any inclination on Russia’s part for a European war.
A participant asked Dr. Dajani how his plea for cooperation can work when the Israelis do not operate in good faith and they have made no concessions. He insisted that there are moderates and extremists on both sides, and we must teach our children to have “a heart of flesh, not a heart of stone.”
Discussion Period: The Continuing Problem of Colonialism
Zepp-LaRouche said that we need to examine the extent to which Western outlook is still colonial. The role of the British is starting to receive scrutiny in this regard, and the powers which instigated the Sykes-Picot Treaty are the ones behind the Ukraine war.
Garland Nixon said that the geopolitical fixation on Russia stems from colonialism: If you’re a colonial power, and you have a parasitic orientation, you are losing your hosts around the world, and Russia is the prize because of its vast resources.
A participant asked whether there are situations where the campaign for peace may come into conflict with the aspirations of colonized peoples, citing as examples Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Nixon said he didn’t believe such a conflict were necessary, and that we must look at outside powers involved, keeping in mind the history of colonialism.
Veterans for Peace leader Jack Gilroy praised the Oasis Plan as a template for similar solutions around the world, to which Zepp-LaRouche reminded that in 2014, the Schiller Institute published “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge” as a blueprint for rebuilding the world. [eir]
Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her weekly live dialogue to discuss the mobilization to end the ‘Special Relationship’ in celebration of the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Republic. Send your questions to questions@schillerinstitute.org
March 3, 2025 (EIRNS)—President Donald Trump has suspended the delivery of all U.S. military aid to Ukraine, according to multiplepressaccounts.
This decision comes as Zelenskyy continues to channel Greta Thunberg, acting like a scolding, scowling brat. In London on March 2, following the meeting of a U.K.-hosted “coalition of the willing” to support the destruction of the country Zelenskyy supposedly represents, he claimed that Ukraine could count on continuing U.S. support. And Zelenskyy said he’d put such “support” to good use—by prolonging the war that is absolutely devastating Ukraine. Peace with Russia is “very, very far away,” he said.
Trump was furious. “This is the worst statement that could have been made by Zelenskyy, and America will not put up with it for much longer!” he thundered on March 3.
“It is what I was saying, this guy doesn’t want there to be Peace as long as he has America’s backing,” Trump continued. “Europe, in the meeting they had with Zelenskyy, stated flatly that they cannot do the job without the U.S.—Probably not a great statement to have been made in terms of a show of strength against Russia. What are they thinking?”
Other steps toward ending the catastrophically dangerous conflict between NATO and Russia in Ukraine:
Trump advisor Mike Waltz points out the absurdity of debating the nature of security guarantees in Ukraine when there isn’t even a pathway to a peace.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth orders a halt to cyberattacks against Russia.
But despite the thawing relations between Russia and the United States, can those two countries on their own create a peaceful outcome?
“The Kiev regime and Zelenskyy do not want peace,” assessed Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov. “They want the war to continue. So in this situation, of course, only Washington’s efforts and Moscow’s readiness will obviously not be enough.”
There remains an apparent Anglo-French alliance for war against Russia, an alliance whose physical backing is far from adequate.
What role can the world play in preventing the intention for war, expressed by the U.K., France, and the Baltics, most notably?
Meanwhile, Trump’s useful instincts with respect to Ukraine clearly do not carry over to economics. He is applying and increasing tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China. And he plans to throw away government resources on crypto speculation, announcing a Crypto Strategic Reserve over the weekend. The announcement sent bitcoin prices up around 10%, a gain that completely evaporated by Monday evening. There were similar changes in the price people are willing to pay for other crypto “assets.”
Will Trump learn a lesson from the crypto antics of Argentina’s lunatic President Javier Milei?
If you want to work on “government efficiency,” scrap this crypto nonsense and get to work with building up U.S. infrastructure and productivity! An economy that is growing, in scale and technological advancement, will provide the basis for a strong currency and a means of servicing the ballooning federal debt.
For a comprehensive view of the world that could be, watch Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s interview with Diplomacy Talk in China: available here.
Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her weekly live dialogue to discuss the mobilization to end the ‘Special Relationship’ in celebration of the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Republic. Send your questions to questions@schillerinstitute.org
Zepp-LaRouche founded the Schiller Institute in 1984 at a time of intense geopolitical tension, particularly in Europe during the medium-range missile crisis. In her discussion with Diplomacy Talk, Zepp-LaRouche shared her inspiration for creating the institute, emphasizing the need for a new approach to foreign policy based on justice and a new economic order. “If every nation and every civilization goes back to their own best tradition, and has a classical renaissance, then you have a dialogue among these best traditions, and communication and friendship is very easy,” she explained. Her vision was not only to establish a just economic order but also to counter what she viewed as the excessive Americanization or homogenization of global culture by fostering deeper cultural exchanges, in a dialogue among the most profound cultural movements in the countries of the world.
Reflecting on her multiple visits to China, Zepp-LaRouche described the nation’s transformation as astonishing. Recalling her first trip in 1971, she noted how China had been largely agrarian and impoverished at the time. However, in the decades that followed, she witnessed rapid modernization. “Every time you come, you find new buildings, new technologies, new science,” she remarked. She particularly praised China’s advancements in infrastructure and space exploration, saying, “I keep telling people in Germany that if you go into a fast train, and you put a glass of water on the table, not one drop will ever jump out.” She believes that China serves as an inspiring model for other nations and urged the country to be more assertive in sharing its developmental strategies with the world.
Zepp-LaRouche strongly criticized the Western portrayal of China as a “threat,” arguing that such narratives stem from outdated geopolitical thinking. The would-be Euro-Atlantic hegemons “project what they are doing onto China,” she asserted, adding that the real issue is the unwillingness of some to accept the end of a unipolar world. “To be slandered like that is just an injustice. It reveals more about the mindset of those people who say China is a threat than about China,” she stated. She said that China has not engaged in war and has instead contributed significantly to global development, particularly in Africa. In her view, the Belt and Road Initiative exemplifies China’s commitment to global cooperation, improving the potential for long-overdue infrastructure development in regions that had long suffered from neocolonial economic policies.
On the question of civilization and global governance, Zepp-LaRouche dismissed Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” theory as mere propaganda, contrasting it with President Xi Jinping’s Global Civilization Initiative. She sees Xi’s approach as a necessary step toward resolving global tensions and fostering genuine cultural dialogue. “The idea that you have a group of nations who have the right to impose their will on another group of nations … this geopolitical outlook has caused two world wars,” she warned. Instead, she called for a new paradigm rooted in mutual respect and cooperation, arguing that embracing diverse cultural traditions can lead to a more harmonious global order.
“The most important task … is that we have to convince the countries of the West that it is in their interest and the interest of the whole world to cooperate with China,” she said.
The interview, conducted in English and subtitled in Chinese, is available on X, and as web postings with transcripts in English and Chinese.
March 1, 2025 (EIRNS)—The 91st weekly meeting of the International Peace Coalition (IPC) on Friday, Feb. 28 turned into a profound philosophical discussion on the true meaning of politics and diplomacy which must be established in order to prevent the descent into global war, and on the current extremely dynamic transformation taking place in the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump’s election and his forceful intervention to stop the surrogate war on Russia in Ukraine.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder of the Schiller Institute and convener of the IPC, opened the forum by pointing to the tectonic shift taking place, with the collapse of the collective West. The unipolar world, ruled by the West since the end of the Soviet Union, is disintegrating, and “is never to be fixed again.”
The war in Ukraine is lost, but the Europeans refuse to stop, preparing for a war they cannot win, and cannot afford. In a state of denial about reality, they sent French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy, to Washington to coerce Trump to continue the war, but totally failed. It is an “arrogance of power,” Zepp-LaRouche said, which is expressed by the 2007 Lisbon Treaty. That treaty was used by the EU leadership to effectively create a European constitution, including a provision to wage collective war, without the consent of the European people—after 2005 referendums in the Netherlands and France on the creation of such a constitution were soundly defeated.
Zepp-LaRouche emphasized the importance of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Feb. 27 declaration that the talks with the Trump administration are going well, and that the intention is to create global security for all countries—very much like the intention of the IPC and the Schiller Institute to create a new architecture for security and development for all nations. She warned that the situation in the Middle East is still treacherous, and that we must not finish our fight for peace until all the threats are resolved.
Peace Is Bad for the Military-Industrial Complex
Ray McGovern, a co-founder of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), posed the question: Will the Europeans be able to stop Trump’s peace effort? He warned that the media is a major weapon against peace, and “peace is bad for business.” He reported that former presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich and his wife had authored an article showing that with the breakout of peace talks in the U.S., the stock values of the military-industrial companies had begun a sharp decline, whereas in Europe, where the leaders are militarizing their countries, the military-industrial stocks are booming. He ridiculed the continuing anti-Russia hysteria, asking if Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky were merely pumping gas at a Russian “gas station.” Trump is not only saying “no more war in Ukraine,” he is also saying “no more NATO.” Europe can no longer depend on the U.S., he said. Nonetheless, the danger in the Middle East is still great, and we should recall what his friend, the late peace-activist Daniel Berrigan said: “The difference between doing something and doing nothing is everything.”
Dr. Jérôme Ravenet, a professor of philosophy in France, the author of a thesis on Chinese President Xi Jinping, and a Chinese scholar, pointed first to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s repulsive speech in Chicago in 1999 openly promoting Anglo-American imperial intervention in third countries, which became the basis and justification for the many regime-change wars by the U.K. and the U.S. in the following years. Sanctions and military interventions only escalate conflicts, not solve them, Ravenet said. Are they insane, he asked, or are they convinced that military intervention is necessary to counter a perceived evil?
The West has now worn out its power, with color revolutions and hubris. He then discussed the great philosophic minds of Western civilization, drawing from each a sense of justice. He pointed to Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza, who distinguished between power and inclusivity, showing that power proves to be impotent (as the failure of sanctions demonstrates, as well as the fact that regime-change wars only create chaos), whereas the Chinese policy of the Belt and Road Initiative shows the benefit of inclusivity. He said that the West has demonized China, denying that the concept of socialist democracy can even exist. Contrary to the Wolfowitz Doctrine of Western superiority and hegemony, the great philosophers pointed to common sense, and a multipolar world; that contradictions do not mean declaring others to be enemies—pointing to Nicholas of Cusa’s concept of the “coincidence of opposites.” China’s idea of a “win-win” policy, and Charles de Gaulle’s notion of a “third way” between communism and capitalism, are better approaches.
Zepp-LaRouche praised Dr. Ravenet’s “enlightened” presentation, and agreed fully that the Chinese concept of “socialist democracy” was a better approach. After all, she noted, “democracy is dead in Europe,” as evidenced by the Romanian cancellation of the election because the winner was against the war in Ukraine, then arresting him to prevent him from running again. Europe is tied to the “Deep State” in the U.S. She brought up the notion of synarchy—the idea that the oligarchy and the banking interests must have power over the will of the masses, pointing to former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s denunciation of the “deplorables” as an example.
Ray McGovern thanked Dr. Ravenet, saying that he felt like he was “back in grad school, taking notes.” He said that we must also consider the role of racism in the thinking of the oligarchy. He noted that he studied the Classics, and learned Greek, learning that there were two words for power—one meaning hegemony, the other relational, in which the interests of the other were important. He added that Jesus used the term for relational.
Dr. Ravenet added that in regard to anti-China racism, it was French Philosopher Montesquieu who introduced the notion of “Oriental despotism,” although he knew nothing about China. His concern was to oppose Gottfried Leibniz, who was working with the Jesuits who were in China. He concurred with McGovern that Jesus rejected the concept of power as hegemonism.
Mubarak Awad, a Palestinian-American who heads Non-Violence International, provided a video discussion with the Schiller Institute’s Gerald Belsky, in which he strongly endorsed the LaRouche Oasis Plan. He said Palestinians are “less interested in one state or two states, but that people cannot live without water.” He denounced the politicization of water, pointing to Israel’s cutting off the water supply as part of their war on Gaza. He said that Palestinians do not trust the West, since its leaders repeatedly say “peace” and “two-state solution,” but not a single U.S. President has enforced that policy, all saying that “it is up to Israel.” Other countries must be brought into the planning, such as Türkiye, India and African countries; not just Europeans, who had colonized the region.
A Shared Community of Mankind
In response to a question about what type of leadership was needed in Europe, Zepp-LaRouche said, “Not those who reject the common good.” She pointed to China’s notion of the “shared community of mankind.” Leaders must “inspire,” she said, which requires a love of poetry and of music. Such leaders existed in the past, such as Charles de Gaulle, the Prussian reformers who followed Friedrich Schiller and the Humboldts, the leaders of the 1955 Bandung Conference, Confucius, and Joan of Arc. “We need discussions of these ideas,” rather than the common use of “slogans and text messages.”
Dr. Ravenet expressed his delight that the Schiller Institute exists to discuss these issues. He said that he had taught the Chinese language for years, but that in France, there was an effort to marginalize the teaching of Chinese and other languages. Zepp-LaRouche responded that knowing other languages and cultures is crucial if we are to create a world worthy of all nations and all peoples.
Jacques Cheminade, the head of the French Solidarité et Progrès party, said that leaders must be willing to break from the “set rules of discourse” to seek the truth.
A question was raised as to whether Trump had the fortitude to counter the Deep State. IPC co-moderator Dennis Speed responded that the new U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi demanded that certain files be released, only to find that thousands of pages had been withheld. She has now demanded that they all be released immediately, and to reveal who had withheld them. Tulsi Gabbard, now the Director of National Intelligence, has countered the British demand that Apple create a “backdoor” on all their phones so that British intelligence can spy on everyone. These are the cases which will determine if the Deep State can win or not.
Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her weekly live dialogue to discuss the mobilization to end the ‘Special Relationship’ in celebration of the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Republic. Send your questions to questions@schillerinstitute.org
Feb. 24, 2025 (EIRNS)—Why is it in Americans’ national security interest, that President Donald Trump act to curtail the “special relationship” that presently exists between the British Imperial and Commonwealth intelligence services, and the United States military and military-intelligence? This week’s visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to Washington, D.C., undertaken in the vain hope of re-enlisting America as the financial and logistical “backstop” for further fruitless European posturing in an already-lost war in Ukraine, is the proper time to pose to the American people this question: What exact benefit does the United States gain from its so-called “special relationship” with Great Britain? Should a swift and solemn end be brought to the British-U.S. “special relationship,” in preparation for the upcoming celebration of the 250th anniversary of the United States’ Declaration of Independence?
It is time—past time—to re-commit the United States to the original purpose of the 1776-1783 American Revolution. That was, as was clearly re-stated by President Franklin Roosevelt during World War Two to an apoplectic Winston Churchill, to remove the foot of Portuguese, Dutch, Belgian, French and British imperialism from the throat of people all over the world. Instead, the United States, founded to be the opposite of the British Empire, has, especially in the “unipolar era” from 1990 until now, been acting against the interests of the American people, and the American Revolution itself, engaging in no-win wars and overthrowing governments always in the name of democracy, but waged in reality on behalf of an international financial elite, a trans-Atlantic “War Party,” operating under the codename “NATO.” Britain’s Keir Starmer visits Washington this week on behalf of that mission, and nothing else. …
This text is adapted from the draft of an upcoming report to be circulated by The LaRouche Organization.
Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her weekly live dialogue to discuss the mobilization to end the ‘Special Relationship’ in celebration of the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Republic. Send your questions to questions@schillerinstitute.org
Feb. 19, 2025 (EIRNS)—Russia’s leading news agency TASS interviewed Helga Zepp- LaRouche, the founder of the Schiller Institute, today on her evaluation of the significance of the just-concluded discussions in Riyadh between high-level diplomats from the U.S. and Russia. TASS published their report under the headline “U.S.-Russia Negotiations To Help Create Inclusive Security Architecture—Expert,” with the subhead: “The pathway laid out how to approach all problems on the table by taking into account the interest of all sides is very hopeful,” Helga Zepp-LaRouche said. The TASS article included the following quotes:
WASHINGTON, February 19. /TASS/. The Russian-U.S. discussions in Riyadh are a historic turning point that will help create an inclusive security framework in the world, said Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the International Schiller Institute.
“The outcome of this long awaited meeting between the high ranking delegations from Russia and the U.S. represents a relief for the entire world. The pathway laid out how to approach all problems on the table by taking into account the interest of all sides is very hopeful,” she told TASS.
“This was a game changer moment in history and hopefully a first step towards an all inclusive security and development architecture, which overcomes the disease of geopolitics forever.”
“There was no reason to invite the participation of the Europeans at this stage of the discussion, given the fact that they had at no point since the beginning of the war, which according to Jens Stoltenberg started in 2014, tried to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict,” she said.
“Even after it was clear that their aim to ‘ruin Russia’ had failed, there was no moment of reflection or change of mind. Even at the recent Munich Security Conference, the unrelenting Russophobia prevailed, led as usual by the British.”
“If this Russophobia is kept up, it will lead to a split-up of the EU, where the countries who want peaceful relations with Russia, will possibly disassociate themselves,” the expert said. “Given the fact that the Ukraine conflict is the result of a proxy war between NATO and Russia, it makes total sense, that it would be the U.S. as the dominant force in NATO and Russia would sit down at the negotiating table, and that the proxy forces come in at a later point.”
