Top Left Link Buttons
  • English
  • German
  • French
  • Russian
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Italian
  • Spanish
  • Arabic
  • Persian
  • Greek


Category Archives

Paris Schiller Institute to Stage Afghan Civil Society Protest Exposing UNESCO Sanctions Against Cultural Heritage Cooperation

Paris, Feb. 13, 2024 – On Thursday February 22, between 10:00 am and 1:00 pm CET, members and supporters of the International Schiller Institute, founded and presided by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, will gather peacefully in front of one of the main buildings of the headquarters of UNESCO in Paris (1, rue Miollis, Paris 75015). An appeal, endorsed by both Afghans and respected personalities of four continents, will be presented to the Secretary General and other officials of UNESCO.

How it started

Following a highly successful conference in Kabul last November by the Ibn-e-Sina Research & Development Center on the reconstruction of Afghanistan, a group of senior archaeologists of the Afghan Academy of Sciences (ASA), in discussion with the organizers and the invited experts of the Schiller Institute, suggested to launch a common appeal to UNESCO and Western governments to “lift the sanctions against cultural heritage cooperation.”

The call

We regret profoundly, says the call, “that the Collective West, while weeping crocodile tears over destruction of the world’s cultural heritage, has imposed a selective ban of scientific cooperation on nations mistakenly considered as ‘opposed to its rules and values.’ The complete freeze of all cooperation in the field of archaeology between France and both Syria and Afghanistan, is just one example of this tragedy.”

The dramatic neglect of international cultural institutions and donors to Afghanistan, the lack of sufficient funds in the field of cultural heritage protection, and the political treatment of international cultural heritage institutions have seriously endangered Afghanistan,” underscores the petition.

Specifically, “UNESCO, which should raise its voice against any new form of ‘cultural and scientific apartheid,’ has repeatedly worsened the situation by politicizing issues beyond its prerogatives.” To conclude, the signers call “on the international community to immediately end this form of ‘collective punishment,’ which creates suffering and injustice, promotes ignorance, and endangers humanity’s capacity for mutual respect and understanding.”

Living Spirit of Afghanistan

To date, over 550 signatures have been collected, mainly from both Afghan male (370) and female (140) citizens, whose socio-professional profiles indicate they truly represent the “living spirit of the nation”. Among the signatories: 62 university lecturers, 27 doctors, 25 teachers, 25 members of the Afghan Academy of Sciences, 23 merchants, 16 civil and women’s rights activists, 16 engineers, 10 directors and deans of private and public universities, 7 political analysts, 6 journalists, 5 prosecutors, several business leaders and dozens of qualified professionals from various sectors.

International support

On four continents (Europe, Asia, America, Africa), senior archaeologists, scientists, researchers, members of the Academy of Sciences, historians and musicians from over 20 countries have welcomed and signed this appeal.

Professor Pino Arlacchi, a former member of the European Parliament and the former head of United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), was the first to sign. Award-winning American filmmaker Oliver Stone is a more recent signer.

In France, Syria, Italy, the UK and Russia, among the signers one finds senior researchers suffering the consequences of what some have identified as a “New Cultural Cold War.” Superseding the very different opinions they have on many questions, the signatories stand united on the core issue of this appeal: for science to progress, all players, beyond ideological, political and religious differences, and far from the geopolitical logic of “blocs”, must be able to exchange freely and cooperate, in particular to protect mankind’s historical and cultural heritage.

Testifying to the firm commitment of the Afghan authorities, the petition has also been endorsed by the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Culture and Arts, and the Minister of Agriculture, as well as senior officials from the Ministries of Higher Education, Water and Energy, Mines, Finance, and others.

The 46th session of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee, to be held in New Delhi in July this year, offers UNESCO the opportunity to announce Afghanistan’s full return into world heritage cooperation, if we can have our voice heard,” says Karel Vereycken of the Paris Schiller Institute. “We certainly will not miss transmitting this appeal to HE Vishal V Sharma, India’s permanent representative to UNESCO, recently nominated to make the Delhi 46th session a success.”

For all information, interview requests in EN, FR and NL:
Karel Vereycken, Schiller Institute Paris

00 33 (0)6 19 26 69 38

Complete list of names of signers

Complete list of names of signers


Hussain Burhani, Archaeologist, Numismatist, Afghanistan;

Ketab Khan Faizi, Archaeologist, Director of the Academy of Sciences at the International Centre for Kushan Studies in Kabul, Afghanistan;

Storai Shams Mayar, Archaeologist, member of the Academy of Sciences at the International Centre for Kushan Studies in Kabul, editor in chief of the journal of this mentioned center, Afghanistan;

Mahmood Jan Drost, Senior Architect, head of protection of old cities of Afghanistan, Ministry of Urban Development and Housing, Afghanistan;

Ghulam Haidar Kushkaky, Archaeologist, associate professor, Archaeology Investigation Center, Afghanistan ;

Shawkatullah Abed, Chief of Staff, Afghan Science Academy, Afghanistan;

Sardar Ghulam Ali Balouch, Head of Afghanistan Balochs Union, Afghanistan;

Daud Azimi Shinwari, Ibn-Sina Research & Development Center, Germany;

Abdul Fatah Raufi, Ibn-Sina Research & Development Center, Kabul, Afghanistan;

Mirwais Popal, Dip, Master, Ibn-Sina Research & Development Center, Germany;


(Russia, China, USA, Indonesia, France, Angola, Germany, Turkiye, Italy, Mexico, Sweden, Iran, Belgium, Czech Republic, Syria, Congo Brazzaville, Yemen, Venezuela, Pakistan, Canada, Democratic Republic of Congo.)

Julio Bendezu-Sarmiento, Researcher at the National Scientific Research Centre (CNRS), Archaeologist specializing in Central Asia; Former director of the Delegation of French Archaeologists in Afghanistan (DAFA) (2014-2018), France;

Inès Safi, CNRS, Researcher in Theoretical Nanophysics, France;

Pierre Leriche, Archeologist, Director of Research Emeritus at CNRS-AOROC, Scientific Director of the Urban Archaeology of the Hellenized Orient research program, France;

Nadezhda A. Dubova, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Dr. in Biology, Prof. in History. Head of the Russian-Turkmen Margiana archaeological expedition, Russian Academy of Science (RAS), Russia;

Raffaele Biscione, retired, associate Researcher, Consiglio Nazionale delle Recerche (CNR); former first researcher of CNR, former director of the CNR archaeological mission in Eastern Iran (2009-2022), Italy;

Dr. Razia Sultanova, Professor, Cambridge University, UK;

Dr. Houmam Saad, Archaeologist, Directorate General of Antiquities and Museums, Syria;

Estelle Ottenwelter, Institute of Archaeology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Natural Sciences and Archaeometry, Post-Doc, Czech Republic;

Didier Destremau, author, diplomat, former French Ambassador, President of the Franco-Syrian Friendship Association (AFS), France ;

Wang Feng, Professor, South-West Asia Department of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), China;

Dr. Engin Beksaç, Professor, Trakya University, Department of Art History, Turkiye;

Bruno Drweski, Professor, National Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilizations (INALCO), France;

Maurizio Abbate, National President of National Agency of Cultural Activities (ENAC), Italy;

Patricia Lalonde, Former Member of the European Parliament, vice-president of Geopragma, author of several books on Afghanistan, France;

Pino Arlacchi, Professor of sociology, Former Member of the European Parliament, former head of United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Italy;

Oliver Stone, Academy Award-winning Film director, Producer, and Screenwriter;

Graham E. Fuller, Author, former Station chief for the CIA in Kabul until 1978, former Vice-Chair of the National Intelligence Council (1986), USA;

Prof. H.C. Fouad Al Ghaffari, Advisor to Prime Minister of Yemen for BRICS Countries affairs, Yemen;

Irène Neto, president, Fundacao Dr. Antonio Agostinho Neto (FAAN), Angola;

Luc Reychler, Professor international politics, University of Leuven, Belgium;

Pierre-Emmanuel Dupont, Expert and Consultant in public International Law, Senior Lecturer at the Institut Catholique de Vendée, France;

Dr. Ririn Tri Ratnasari, Professor, Head of Center for Halal Industry and Digitalization, Advisory Board at Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia;

Dr. Clifford A. Kiracofe, Author, retired Professor of International Relations, USA;

Bernard Bourdin, Dominican priest, Philosophy and Theology teacher, Institut Catholique de Paris (ICP), France;

Dr. jur. Wolfgang Bittner, Author, Göttingen, Germany;

Annie Lacroix-Riz, Professor Emeritus of Contemporary History, Université Paris-Cité, France;

Mohammad Abdo Al-Ibrahim, Ph.D in Philology and Literature, University Lecturer and former editor in chief of the Syria Times, Syria;

Jean Bricmont, Author, retired Physics Professor, Belgium;

Syed Mohsin Abbas, Journalist, Broadcaster, Political Analyst and Political Justice activist, Pakistan;

Eduardo D. Greaves PhD, Professor of Physics, Universidad Simón Bolívar, Caracas, Venezuela;

Dora Muanda, Scientific Director, Kinshasa Science and Technology Week, Democratic Republic of Congo;

Dr. Christian Parenti, Professor of Political Economy, John Jay College CUNY, New York, USA;

Diogène Senny, President of the Panafrican Ligue UMOJA, Congo Brazzaville;

Waheed Seyed Hasan, Journalist based in Qatar, former Special correspondent of IRNA in New Delhi, former collaborator of Tehran Times, Iran;

Alain Corvez, Colonel (retired), Consultant International Strategy consultant, France;

Stefano Citati, Journalist, Italy;

Gaston Pardo, Journalist, graduate of the National University of Mexico. Co-founder of the daily Liberacion, Mexico;

Jan Oberg, PhD, Peace and Future Research, Art Photographer, Lund, Sweden.

Julie Péréa, City Councilor for the town of Poussan (Hérault), delegate for gender equality and the fight against domestic violence, member of the Sète Agglopole Méditerranée gender equality committee, France;

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder and International President of the Schiller Institute, Germany;

Abid Hussein, independent journalist, Pakistan;

Anne Lettrée, Founder and President of the Garden of Titans, Cultural Relations Ambassador between France and China for the Greater Paris region, France;

Karel Vereycken, Painter-engraver, amateur Art Historian, Schiller Institute, France;

Carlo Levi Minzi, Pianist, Musician, Italy;

Leena Malkki Brobjerg, Opera singer, Sweden;

Georges Bériachvili, Pianist, Musicologist, France;

Jacques Pauwels, Historian, Canada;

Farhat Asif, President of Institute of Peace and Diplomatic Studies (IPDS), Pakistan;



Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, Deputy Foreign Minister, IEA;

Mawlawi Muhibullah Wasiq, Head of Foreign Minister’s Office, IEA;

Waliwullah Shahin, Member of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, IEA;

Sayedull Afghani, Member of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, IEA;

Hekmatullah Zaland, Member of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, IEA;

Shafi Azam, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, IEA;

Atiqullah Azizi, Deputy Minister of Culture and Art, Ministry of Information and Culture, IEA;

Ghorzang Farhand, Ministry of Information and Culture, IEA;

Ghulam Dastgir Khawari, Advisor of Ministry of Higher Education, IEA;

Mawlawi Rahmat Kaka Zadah, Member of ministry of Interior Affairs, IEA;

Mawlawi Arefullah, Member of Interior Affairs, IEA;
Ataullah Omari, Acting Agriculture Minister, IEA;

Mawlawi Hussain Ahmad, Head of office in Ministry of Agriculture, IEA:

Musa Noorzai, Member of Ministry of Agriculture, IEA;

Mawlawi Hussain Ahmad, Head of office, Ministry of Agriculture, IEA;

Mawlawi Shar Aqa, Head of Kunar Agriculture Administration, IEA;

Matiulah Mujadidi, Head of Communication of Ministry of Finance, IEA;

Zabiullah Noori, Executive Manager, Ministry of Finance, IEA;

Akbar Wazizi, Member of Ministry of Finance, IEA;

Nasrullah Ebrahimi, Auditor, Ministry of Finance, IEA;

Mir M. Haroon Noori, Representative, Ministry of Economy, IEA;

Abdul Qahar Mahmodi, Ministry of Commerce, IEA;

Dr. Ghulam Farooq Azam, Adviser, Ministry of Water & Energy (MoWE), IEA;

Faisal Mahmoodi, Investment Facilitation Expert, Ministry of Mines and Petroleum, IEA;

Rustam Hafiz Yar, Ministry of Transportation, IEA;

Qudratullah Abu Hamza, Governor of Kunar, IEA;

Mansor Faryabi, Member of Kabul Municipality, IEA;

Mohammad Sediq Patman, Former Deputy Minister of Education for Academic Affairs, IEA;



  • Jawad Nikzad, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Akram Azimi, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Najibullah Totakhel, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Germany 

  • Ghulam Farooq Ansari, Professor, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Imran Zakeria, Researcher at Regional Studies Center, Academy of Sciences of Afghanistan, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Subhanullah Obaidi, Doctor, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Germany ;

  • Ali Shabeez, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Germany ;

  • Mawlawi Wahid Ameen, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Shar M. Amir Zadah, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Sayed Rafiullah Halim, Professor, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul Afghanistan ;

  • Nazar Mohmmad Ragheb, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Ali Sina Masoumi, Ibn Sina R&D Centre Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Faisal Mahmoodi, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Fatima Basir, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Muneera Aman, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Shakoor, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Waris Ebad, Employee of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Afghanistan ;

  • Waisullah Sediqi, Ibn Sina R&D Centre, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Sayed Hakim Aria, Employee of Ministry of Information and Culture, Afghanistan ;

  • Nayebuddin Ekrami, Employee of Ministry of information and Culture, Afghanistan ;

  • Latifa Azimi, Former Employee of Ministry of Education, Afghanistan ;

  • Latifa Noori, Former Employee of Ministry of Education, Afghanistan ;

  • Habibullah Haqani, Employee of Kabul Municipality, Afghanistan ;

  • Shafiqullah Baburzai, Cultural Heritage, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdullah Kamawal, Cultural Heritage, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Rashid Lodin, Cultural Heritage, Afghanistan ;

  • Asef Nang, Cultural Heritage, Afghanistan ;

  • Awal Khan Shekib, Member of Afghanistan Regional Studies Center, Afghanistan ;

  • Mohammad Anwar Fayaz, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Farhad Ahmadi, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Fayqa Lahza Faizi, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Hakim Haidar, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Rahimullah Harifal, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Sharifullah Dost, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Eshaq Momand, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Khalil Rahman Barekzal, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Ghulam Haidar Kushkaki, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Ghulam Nabi Hanifi, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Marina Bahar, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Sayed Muhaidin Hashimi, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Majid Nadim, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Elaha Maqsoodi, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Khadim Ahmad Haqiqi, Lecturer, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Shahidullah Safi, Member, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Wahab Hamdard, Member, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Burhanullah Niazi, Member, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Alam Eshaq Zai, Member, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Ghulam Hasan Farmand, Member, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Zalmai Hewad Mal, Member, Afghanistan Science Academy, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Rahman Atash, Head of Afghanistan National Development Company (NDC), Afghanistan ;

  • Obaidullah, Head of Public Library, Afghanistan ;

  • Sayed Abdul Maqdam, Head of Khawar construction company, Afghanistan ;

  • Zaki Zarifi, Head of Zarifi company, Afghanistan ;

  • Jamshid Faizi, Head of Faizi company, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Yasin Farahman, Head of Agriculture Center, Afghanistan ;

  • Mawlawi Nik M. Nikmal, Head of Planning in Technical Administration, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Wahid Rahimi, Member of Bashtani Bank, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Daud Mangal, Head of Ariana Afghan Airlines, Afghanistan ;

  • Mostafa Yari, entrepreneur, Afghanistan;

  • Gharwal Roshan, Head of Kabul International Airfield, Afghanistan ;

  • Eqbal Mirzad, Head of New Kabul City Project, Afghanistan ;

  • Najibullah Sadiq, Vice-president of Afghan Chamber of Commerce and Indunstry (ACCI), Afghanistan ;

  • M. Yunis Mohmand, Vice-president of ACCI, Afghanistan ;

  • Khanjan Alikozai, Member of ACCI, Afghanistan ;

  • Mawlawi Abdul Rashid, Kabul Municipality, Afghanistan ;

  • Atiqullah Safi, Employee of Kabul Municipality, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Jalil Safi, Employee of Kabul Municipality, Afghanistan ;

  • Hujat Fazli, Head of Harakat, Afghanistan Investment Climate Facility Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Mehrab Hamidi, Member of Economical Commission, Afghanistan ;

  • Hamid Pazhwak, Economist, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Awaz Ali Alizai, Economist, Afghanistan ;

  • Shamshad Omar, Economist, Afghanistan ;

  • Helai Fahang, Economy Specialist, Afghanistan ;

  • Maryam Alikozai, Economy Specialist, Afghanistan ;

  • Dunya Farooz, Economy Specialist, Afghanistan ;

  • Soman Khamoosh, Economy Specialist, Afghanistan ;

  • Drs. Shokoria Yousofi, Bachelor of Economy, Afghanistan;

  • Sharifa Wardak, Specialist of Agriculture, Afghanistan;

  • M. Asef Dawlat Shahi, Specialist of Chemistry, Afghanistan;

  • Pashtana Hamami, Specialist of Statistics, Afghanistan;

  • Asma Karimi, Master of Management, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Ahmad Zaki Afghanyar, Vice-President of Herat Health committee, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Hashem Mudaber, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Hekmatullah Arian, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Abdul Wahab Rahmani, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Karima Rahimyar, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Sayeeda Basiri, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Emran Sayeedi, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Abdul Hadi Dawlatzai, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Ghani Naseri, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Nafisa Naseri, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Abdul Ghani Naseri, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Mohammad Younis Shouaib, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Halima Akbari, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Manizha Emaq, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Shafiq Shinwari, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Akbar Jan Foolad, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Haidar Omar, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Ehsanuddin Ehsan, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Abdul Wakil Matin, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Abdul Matalib, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Azizi Amer, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Nasr Sajar, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Humayon Hemat, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Humaira Fayaq, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Sadruddin Tajik, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Abdul Baqi Ahmad Zai, Surgery Specialist, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Beqis Kohistani, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Nafisa Nasiri, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Aziza Yousuf, Head of Malalai Hospital, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Yasamin Hashimi, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Zuhal Najimi, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Ahmad Salem Sedeqi, Medical Doctor, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Fazel Raman, veterinary, Afghanistan;

  • Khatera Anwary, Health, Afghanistan;

  • Rajina Noori, Member of Afghanistan Journalists Union, Afghanistan ;

  • Sajad Nikzad, Journalist, Afghanistan ;

  • Ahmad Suhaib Hasrat, Journalist, Afghanistan ;

  • Shar Aqa Karimi, Journalist, Afghanistan ;

  • Sayed Mohammad Suhrabi , Journalist, Afghanistan ;

  • Mohammad Nasir Kuhzad, Journalist and Political Analyst, Afghanistan ;

  • Fazel Menallah, Political Analyst, Afghanistan;

  • M. Wahid Benish, Political Analyst, Afghanistan ;

  • Mahmood Jan Shafizada, Political Analyst, Afghanistan ;

  • Fazel Rahman Orya, Political Analyst, Afghanistan ;

  • Zarghon Shah Shinwari, Political Analyst, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Ghafor Shinwari, Political Analyst, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Ahmad Yousufi, Dean, Kateb University, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Yayia Balaghat, Scientific Vice-President, Kateb University, Afghanistan ;

  • Chaman Shah Etemadi, Head of Gharjistan University, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Mesbah, Head of Salam University, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Pirzad Ahmad Fawad, Kabul University;

  • Dr. Nasir Nawidi, Dean of a Private University, Afghanistan;

  • Zabiullah Fazli, Dean of a Private University, Afghanistan;

  • Ramish Adib, Vice of a Private University, Afghanistan;

  • M. Taloot Muahid, Dean of a Private University, Afghanistan;

  • Ebrahim Ansari, School Manager, Afghanistan;

  • Abas Ali Zimozai, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Arshad Rahimi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Fasihuddin Fasihi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Waisuddin Jawad, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Murtaza Sharzoi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Matin Monis, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Mohammad Wahid Benish, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Hussian Iqbal, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Muhsin Reshad, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Mohammad Sadiq Baqori, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Mohammad Zahir Halimi, Univ. Lecturer , Afghanistan ;

  • Rohla Qurbani, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Murtaza Rezaee, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Ghulam Rasoul Qarluq, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Najim Wahidi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Rashid Iqbal, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Rahman Matin, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Mujtaba Amin, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Amanullah Faqiri, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Abuzar Khpelwak Zazai, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Belal Tayab, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Adel Hakimi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Wasiqullah Ghyas, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Faridduin Atar, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Safiullah Jawhar, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Amir Jan Saqib, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Ahmad Shekib Rahmani, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Gulzar Hashimi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • Taj Mohammad, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Hekmatullah Mirzad, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Haq Atid, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Fahim Momand, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Ahmad Fawad Ehsas, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Naqibullah Sediqi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Maiwand Wahidi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • M. Nazir Hayati, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Najiba Rahmani, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Abeda Baba Karkhil, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. M. Qayoum Karim, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Sayed Sharif Shabir, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Ahmad Walid Howaida, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Zalmai Rahib, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Sadiq Baqori, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Mir Zafaruddin Ansari, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Atta Mohammad Alwak, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Zabiullah Iqbal, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Hasan Fazaili, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • M. Jawad Jalili, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Mukhtar Ali Nasto, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Namatullah Nabawi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Ghulam Abas Noori, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Mustafa Anwari, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Fakhria Popal, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Shiba Sharzai, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Marya Hashimi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Nilofar Hashimi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Munisa Hasan, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Nazifa Azimi, Univ. Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Sweeta Sharify, Lecturer; Afghanistan;

  • Fayaz Gul, Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Zakia Ahmad Zai, Lecturer, Afghanistan;

  • Nigani Barati, Education Specialist, Afghanistan ;

  • Azeeta Nazhand, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Sughra, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Nadia Sharif, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Maryam Omari, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Masoud, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Zubair Ahmad, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Khalil Ahmad, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Khadija Omid, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Haida Rasouli, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Hemat Hamad, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Wazir Safi, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Mohammad Qasim, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Zamin Shah, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Sayed Qayas, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Mehrabuddin, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Zahidullah Zahid, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Akmal Mahros, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Sadia Mohammadi, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • Mina Amiri, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • M. Sajad Nikzad, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Mursal Nikzad, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Qadir Shahab, Teacher, Afghanistan;

  • M. Hasan Sahi, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Mirwais Haqmal, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Leeda Khurasai, Teacher, Afghanistan ;

  • Karishma Hashimi, Instructor, Afghanistan;

  • Majeed Shams, Architect, Afghanistan;

  • Azimullah Esmati, Master of Civil Engineering, Afghanistan;

  • Najibullah Hussaini, Engineer, Afghanistan ;

  • Burhanuddin Nezami, Engineer, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Hafiz Hafizi, Engineer, Afghanistan ;

  • Bahir, Engineer, Afghanistan;

  • Wali Bayan, Engineer, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Khaliq Najir, Engineer, Afghanistan;

  • Diana Niazi, Engineer, Afghanistan;

  • Imam Jan, Engineer, Afghanistan ;

  • Khalil Ahmad Nadem, Engineer, Afghanistan;

  • Sayeed Aqa, Engineer, Afghanistan ;

  • Edris Rasouli, Engineer, Afghanistan ;

  • Raz Mohammad, Engineer of Mines, Afghanistan ;

  • Nasrullah Rahimi, Technical Engineer, Afghanistan ;

  • Ehsanullah, Helmand, Construction Engineer, Netherlands;

  • Ahmad Hamad, Technologist, Afghanistan ;

  • Akmal Ahmadi, Technologist, Afghanistan ;

  • Ershad Hurmati, Technologist, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Akram Shafim, Technologist, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Akbar Ehsan, Technologist, Afghanistan ;

  • Raziullah, Technologist, Afghanistan ;

  • Zaki Khorrami, IT Officer, Afghanistan ;

  • Osman Nikzad, Graphic Designer, Afghanistan ;

  • Maryam Ayani, Carpet Weaver, Afghanistan ;

  • Be be sima Hashimi, Tailor, Afghanistan ;

  • Maryam Masoumi, Tailor, Afghanistan ;

  • Roya Mohammadi, Craftsman, Afghanistan ;

  • Nadia Sayes, Craftsman, Afghanistan ;

  • Nazdana Ebad, Craftsman, Afghanistan ;

  • Sima Ahmadi , Bachelor of Biology, Afghanistan;

  • Sima Rasouli, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Khatera Nawabi, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Haji Noor Agha Haqyar, Merchant, Afghanstan;

  • Husna Anwari, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Nargis Hashimi, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Shakira Barish, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Nasima Darwish, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Wajiha Haidari, Merchant of Jawzjan, Afghanistan ;

  • Shagul, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Fatima Nik Rasoul, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Haji Farid Alikozai, Merchant, Afghanistan;

  • Nigina Nawabi, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Masouda Nazimi, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Najla Kohistani, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Kerisma Jawhari, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Hasina Hashimi, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Husna Anwari, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Maaz Baburzai, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Freshta Safari, Merchant, Afghanistan;

  • Yalda Azimi, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Azim Jan Baba Karkhil, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Akhtar Mohammad, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Haroon Ahmadzai, Merchant, Afghanistan ;

  • Azizullah Faizi, Former head of Afghanistan Cricket Board, Afghanistan ;

  • Wakil Akhar, Prosecutor, Afghanistan ;

  • Akhtar M. Azimi, Prosecutor, Afghanistan;

  • Shabnam Noori, Prosecutor, Afghanistan;

  • Be be Abeda Wayar, Prosecutor, Afghanistan;

  • Madina Ahmad Zai, Prosecutor, Afghanistan;

  • Shakila Joya, Former Employee of Attorney General, Afghanistan;

  • Sardar M. Akbar Bashash, Member, Afghanistan Balochs Union, Afghanistan ;

  • Eng. Abdul Dayan Balouch, Spokesperson of Afghanistan Balochs Union, Afghanistan ;

  • Shah Mahmood Lahoti, Member of Afghanistan Balochs Union, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Khaliq Barekzai, Advisor, Afghanistan Balochs Union, Afghanistan ;

  • Salahuddin Ayoubi Balouch, Advisor, Afghanistan Balochs Union, Afghanistan ;

  • Faizuddin Lashkari Balouch, Member, Afghanistan Balochs Union, Afghanistan ;

  • Sayed Ishaq Gilani, head of the National Solidarity Movement of Afghanistan, IEA;

  • Haji Zalmai Latifi, Representative, Qizilbash tribes, Afghanistan ;

  • Gul Nabi Ahmad Zai, Former Commander of Kabul Garrison, Afghanistan ;

  • Ghulam Hussain Rezaee, Member, Habitat Organization, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Amani Adiba, Doctor of Liberal Arts in Architecture and Urban Planning, Afghanistan;

  • Ismael Paienda, Afghan Peace Activist, France;

  • Mohammad Belal Rahimi, Head of Peace institution, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Mushtaq Hanafi, Head of Sayadan council, Afghanistan ;

  • Sabira Waizi, Founder of T.W.P.S., Afghanistan ;

  • Majabin Sharifi, Member of Women Network Organization, Afghanistan;

  • Shekiba Saadat, Former head of women affairs, Afghanistan ;

  • Atya Salik, Women rights activist, Afghanistan ;

  • Fatima Mahmoodi, Women rights activist, Afghanistan;

  • Diana Rohin, Women rights activist , Afghanistan;

  • Amena Hashimi, Head of Women Organization, Afghanistan;

  • Fatanh Sharif, Former employee of Gender equality, Afghanistan;

  • Sediq Mansour Ansari, Civil Activist, Afghanistan ;

  • Sebghatullah Najibi, Civil Activist, Afghanistan ;

  • Naemullah Nasiri, Civil Activist, Afghanistan;

  • Reha Ramazani, Civil Activist, Afghanistan ;

  • Lia Jawad, Civil Activist, Afghanistan;

  • Arezo Khurasani, Social Activist, Afghanistan ;

  • Beheshta Bairn, Social Activist, Afghanistan;

  • Samsama Haidari, Social Activist, Afghanistan;

  • Shabnam Nikzad, Humans Rights Activist, Afghanistan;

  • Mliha Sadiqi, Head of Young Development Organization, Afghanistan;

  • Mehria, Sharify, University Student;

  • Shiba Azimi, Member of IPSO Organization, Afghanistan;

  • Nadira Rashidi, Master of Management, Afghanistan;

  • Sefatullah Atayee, Banking, Afghanistan;

  • Khatira Yousufi, Employee of RTA, Afghanistan;

  • Yalda Mirzad , Employee of Breshna Company, Afghanistan;

  • Izzatullah Sherzad, Employee, Afghanistan;

  • Erfanullah Salamzai , Afghanistan;

  • Naser Abdul Rahim Khil, Afghanistan;

  • Ghulam Rasoul Faizi, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Mir Agha Hasan Khil, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Ghafor Muradi, Afghanistan;

  • Gul M. Azhir, Afghanistan;

  • Gul Ahmad Zahiryan, Afghanistan;

  • Shamsul Rahman Shams, Afghanistan;

  • Khaliq Stanekzai, Afghanistan;

  • M. Daud Haidari, Afghanistan;

  • Marhaba Subhani, Afghanistan;

  • Maazullah Nasim, Afghanistan;

  • Haji Mohammad Tayeb, Afghanistan;

  • Ali Sina Masoumi, Afghanistan ;

  • Sweeta Sadiqi Hotak, Afghanistan ;

  • Khatira Anwari, Afghanistan ;

  • Fatima Sharzad, Afghanistan ;

Momen Shah Kakar, Afghanistan ;

  • Shah Rukh Raufi, Afghanistan ;

  • Hanifa Rasouli, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Qudsia Ebrahimi, Afghanistan ;

  • Mahmood Haqiqat, Afghanistan ;

  • Nasir Abdul Rahim Khan, Kabul, Afghanistan ;

  • Abdul Hamid Ahmadzai, Afghanistan ;

  • Sardar Khan Sirat, Afghanistan ;

  • Zurmatullah Ahmadi, Afghanistan ;

  • Yasar Khogyani, Afghanistan ;

  • Shar Sha Lodi, Afghanistan ;

  • Ahmad Shah Omar, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Azam Khan Ahmad Zai, Afghanistan;

  • Nadia Farooq Sharzoi, Afghanistan;

  • Shar Ali Tazari, Afghanistan ;

  • Mayel Aqa Hakim, Afghanistan ;

  • Khatira Hesar, Afghanistan ;

  • Tamim Mehraban, Afghanistan ;

  • Lina Noori, Afghanistan ;

  • Khubaib Ghufran, Afghanistan ;

  • M. Yasin Farahmand, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Mir M. Ayoubi, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Namatullah Nabawi, Afghanistan ;

  • Abozar Zazai, Afghanistan ;

  • Atiqullah Rahimi, Afghanistan ;

  • Fahim Ahmad Sultan, Afghanistan ;

  • Humaira Farhangyar, Afghanistan ;

  • Imam M. Wrimaj, Afghanistan ;

  • Masoud Ashna, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Yahia Baiza, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Besmila, Afghanistan ;

  • Ehsan Shorish, Germany;

  • Irshad, Omer, Afghanistan;

  • Musa Noorzai, Afghanistan;

  • Lida Noori Nazhand, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Abdul Masood Panah, Afghanistan;

  • Gholam Sachi Hassanzadah, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Sayed Ali Eqbal, Afghanistan;

  • Hashmatullah Atmar, Afghanistan;

  • Ahmad Matin Safi, Afghanistan;

  • Ahmad Helmand, Afghanistan;

  • Ehsanullah Helmand, Afghanistan;

  • Izazatullah Sherzad, Afghanistan;

  • Hafizullah Omarzai, Afghanistan;

  • Hedayatullah Hilal, Afghanistan;

  • Edris Ramez, student, Afghanistan;

  • Amina Saadaty, Afghanistan;

  • Muska Hamidi, Afghanistan;

  • Raihana Ahmadi, Afghanistan;

  • Zuhal Sherzad, Afghanistan;

  • Meelad Ahmad, Afghanistan;

  • Devah Kubra Falcone, Germany;

  • Maryam Baburi, Germany;

  • Suraya Paikan, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Fatah Ahmadzai, Afghanistan ;

  • Dr. Mohammad Zalmai, Afghanistan ;

  • Hashmatullah Parwarni, Afghanistan ;

  • Asadullah, Afghanistan;

  • Hedayat ullah Hillal, Afghanistan;

  • Najibullah Zazai, Afghanistan;

  • M. Yousuf Ahmadi, Afghanistan;

  • Ahmad Reshad Reka, Afghanistan;

  • Sayed Ahmad Arghandiwal, Afghanistan;

  • Nooria Noozai, Afghanistan;

  • Eng. Fahim Osmani, Afghanistan;

  • Wafiullah Maaraj, Afghanistan;

  • Roya Shujaee, Afghanistan;

  • Shakira Shujaee, Afghanistan;

  • Adina Ranjbar, Afghanistan;

  • Ayesha Shafiq, Afghanistan;

  • Hajira Mujadidi, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Zahir Shekib, Afghanistan;

  • Zuhra Mohammad Zai, Afghanistan;

  • Razia Ghaws, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Sabor Mubariz, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Khaliq Ferdows, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Shakoor Salangi, Afghanistan;

  • Nasir Ahmad Basharyar, Afghanistan;

  • Mohammad Mukhtar Sharifi, Afghanistan;

  • Mukhtar Ahmad Haqtash, Afghanistan;

  • Yousuf Amin Zazai, Afghanistan;

  • Zakiri Sahib, Afghanistan;

  • Mirwais Ghafori, Afghanistan;

  • Nesar Rahmani, Afghanistan;

  • Shar M. Amir Zadah, Afghanistan;

  • Yasin Farahmand, Afghanistan;

  • Faizul Haq Faizan, Afghanistan;

  • Khaibar Sarwary, Afghanistan;

  • Ali Sina Masoumi, Afghanistan;

  • Hamidullah Akhund Zadah, Afghanistan;

  • Dr. Benish, Afghanistan;

  • Hayatullah Fazel, Afghanistan;

  • Faizullah Habibi, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Hamid Lyan, Afghanistan;

  • Abdul Qayoum Qayoum Zadah, Afghanistan;

  • Qazi Qudratullah Safi, Afghanistan;

  • Noor Agha Haqyar, Afghanistan;

  • Maryan Aiany, Afghanistan;


  • Odile Mojon, Schiller Institute, Paris, France ;

  • Johanna Clerc, Choir Conductor, Schiller Institute Chorus, France ;

  • Sébastien Perimony, Africa Department, Schiller Institute, France ;

  • Christine Bierre, Journalist, Chief Editor of Nouvelle Solidarité, monthly, France ;

  • Marcia Merry Baker, agriculture expert, EIR, Co-Editor, USA ;

  • Bob Van Hee, Redwood County Minnesota Commissioner, USA ;

  • Dr. Tarik Vardag, Doctor in Natural Sciences (RER), Business Owner, Germany;

  • Richard Freeman, Department of Physical Economy, Schiller Institute, USA ;

  • Liliana Gorini, chairwoman of Movisol and singer, Italy;

  • Ulrike Lillge, Editor Ibykus Magazine, Berlin, Germany ;

  • Michelle Rasmussen, Vice President, Schiller Institute in Denmark, amateur musician;

  • Feride Istogu Gillesberg, Vice President, Schiller Institute in Denmark;

  • Jason Ross, Science Department, Schiller Institute, USA ;

  • Dennis Small, Director of the Economic Department, Schiller Institute, USA ;

  • Robert “Bob” Baker, Agriculture Commission, Schiller Institute, USA ;

  • Dr. Wolfgang Lillge, Medical Doctor, Editor, Fusion Magazine, Berlin, Germany ;

  • Ulf Sandmark, Vice-Chairman of the Belt and Road Institute, Sweden ;

  • Mary Jane Freeman, Schiller Institute, USA ;

  • Hussein Askary, South West Asia Coordinator, Schiller Institute, Sweden ;

  • David Dobrodt, EIR News, USA ;

  • Klaus Fimmen, 2nd Vice-Chairman of the Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität (Büso) party, Germany;

  • Christophe Lamotte, Consulting Engineer, France ;

  • Richard Burden, EIR production staff, USA ;

  • Rolf Gerdes, Electronic Engineer, Germany;

  • Marcella Skinner, USA ;

  • Delaveau Mathieu, Farm Worker, France ;

  • Shekeba Jentsch, StayIN, Board, Germany;

  • Bernard Carail, retired Postal Worker, France ;

  • Etienne Dreyfus, Social Activist, France ;

  • Harrison Elfrink, Social Activist, USA ;

  • Jason Seidmann, USA ;

Letter of the minister of Information and Culture (Afghanistan)

Letter of the minister of Information and Culture

As Western researchers, based on what happened in the past, wondered about the current Afghan government’s actual policy on the issue of preservation of cultural and historical heritage, the Ibn-e-Sina Research and Development Center questioned the relevant authorities in Kabul.

At the end of January 2024, the Minister of Arts and Culture, in a hand-signed letter, provided them and the world with the following response, which completely clarifies the matter.

Transcript below, with bold as in the original.

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

Ministry of Information and Culture

Letter N° 220, Jan. 31, 2024

To the attention of Ibn-e-Sina R&D Centre, International experts and cultural organizations and to those it concerns:

The ministry of Information and culture of the Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) has, among others, the following tasks in its portfolio:

–To establish a suitable environment for the growth of genuine Afghan culture;

–To protect national identity, cultural diversity, and national unity;

–To preserve tangible and intangible cultural heritage;

–To support the development of creativities, initiatives and activities of various segments of the society in general and of the Afghan youth in particular;

–To support the freedom of speech;

–Development of tourism industry;

–Introduction and presentation of Afghan culture regionally and internationally, to transform Afghanistan into an important cultural hub and crossroads in the near future.

We would like to confirm that with preservation of tangible and intangible cultural heritage we mean all Afghan cultural heritage belonging to all periods of history, whether it belongs to Islamic or non/pre-Islamic periods of history.

This ministry expresses its concerns that due to insufficient means it is not able to preserve the Afghan cultural heritage sufficiently.

Therefore this ministry asks UNESCO and other international organizations, working on preservation of the world’s tangible and intangible cultural heritage, to support Afghanistan in preservation of its tangible and intangible cultural heritage, including the ones belonging to Islamic and non/pre-Islamic periods of its history. The cultural heritage of Afghanistan does deserve to be preserved without any political motivations.

Besides, this ministry also confirms it is ready for all kind of cooperation with all national and international organizations, working on preservation of world cultural heritage.

The ministry of Information and culture of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) supports and appreciates all efforts of the Ibn-e-Sina R&D centre and their international experts in appealing for urgent attention of national and international organizations and experts to resume their support and cooperation with Afghanistan to preserve its cultural heritage, an important part of world cultural and historical heritage.


Mowlavi Atiqullah Azizi

Deputy Minister of Culture and Art

IPC Meeting: Only Through Development Will Mankind Defeat the ‘Structures of Sin’

by Kevin Gribbroek

The opposite of destruction is love. And what more loving could you do than to create the conditions for every living human being on the planet to fulfill the potential of their life.

Helga zepp-larouche

The 38th meeting of the International Peace Coalition (IPC), convened on Feb. 23, was a demonstration of why this deliberative body is uniquely suited to address and solve the crises threatening to plunge mankind into a prolonged new Dark Age or even thermonuclear Armageddon. Whereas most forum discussions on the issues of Gaza, Ukraine or any other conflict—be it mainstream or alternative media—are reduced to explanations of why one side is good and the other evil, much of the IPC meeting was devoted to deliberation over the true definition of good and evil from a philosophical standpoint. This proved very fruitful in helping participants to reach a higher-level understanding of why the Oasis Plan and economic development per se are so crucial to the survival of the human race.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche opened the proceedings by focusing on the incredible rift taking place between the Global South and the “tiny minority” of the Global North over particularly the conflict in Gaza. Exemplary of this rift is the recently concluded G20 meeting in Brazil where the U.S. and other Western countries refused to sign a common declaration because both Brazil and South Africa insisted that it include language denouncing the genocide in Gaza. Another highlight of this rift is the ongoing hearings at the World Court, where one nation after another has condemned Israel for its actions against the Palestinians. Ma Xinmin, Legal Advisor to the Chinese Foreign Ministry, called Palestine “a litmus test for the collective conscience of humanity….”

Zepp-LaRouche continued by pointing out the insanity of Western leaders, who, despite the impossibility of Ukraine winning the war, are demanding that more long-range weapons be sent to the Zelensky regime for striking deep inside Russian territory. These leaders seem incapable of thinking about the consequences of their actions; that this could lead to World War Three! Because the strategic situation is so dangerous, it requires that the IPC mobilize that much harder to “offer solutions to an otherwise seemingly unsolvable conflict.” The way to free Palestine is the Oasis Plan because it would transform the entirety of Southwest Asia into a prosperous economic hub between Asia, Africa and Europe—a solution of optimism in the best interests of Israel, Palestine and all their neighboring countries. A similar approach is needed for Ukraine. Only a new paradigm of cooperation on economic development is capable of ending the cycle of violence.

The next speakers, Alan Rivera and Gerardo Castilleja of the Schiller Institute in Mexico, recounted a recent intervention they made at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, where they went from classroom to classroom briefing students and professors on the Oasis Plan. One professor even allowed them to show the Oasis Plan video. They then attended a campus ceasefire rally where they encountered a group of old American “lefties” repeating the same empty-headed “anti-imperialist” slogans from 40-years past with no comprehension of how to overturn the system to which they are opposed.

Dr. Mohammad Toor, Chairman of the Pakistani American Congress, stressed the necessity of peace through economic development. Weak countries must develop themselves so they do not fall prey to stronger nations. There are enough resources on the planet so that every nation can develop and become prosperous.

A university professor in Michigan spoke of the fear that permeates campuses, particularly concerning the Gaza issue. Despite a very large Arab and Muslim student body in the state, students and faculty alike feel they cannot express their emotions and feelings—they can’t advocate for what they feel is right. A large number of the students are Palestinian or have friends that are Palestinian, many of whom have lost family members in Gaza. To help people overcome this fear, the professor is organizing an arts and cultural event with the belief that, under conditions of oppression, the only way to speak up is through the arts.

The next speaker, Jack Gilroy of Veterans for Peace, reported on an initiative to deliver a document that outlines the crimes committed by Israel and the U.S. in Gaza to every State Department office in the U.S. The document warns State Department officials that they are complicit in criminal activity—the murder of thousands of people in Gaza—and could be prosecuted for these offenses.

During the discussion period, a profound dialogue was initiated by Father Harry Bury on the nature of good and evil. He challenged two fundamental beliefs that he views as obstacles to bringing about the objective of peace through development: The first is that there are evil people in the world. Father Bury believes that this is false; that there are good people that do evil things because they don’t know any better. These people must be educated to know what is good. The second belief is that the best way to prevent evil is through punishment. This is proven wrong by a worldwide recidivism rate of 80-85%. “Justice is not vengeance; justice is not getting even; justice is restoring the evil doer” according to Bury. Zepp-LaRouche, although agreeing in principle that people are fundamentally good, had one point of disagreement: Given that the human species is endowed by the Creator with free will, why is it that some people are quite capable of comprehending that what they are doing is evil but do it anyway? Why have they decided to be on the side of Satan?

The Michigan professor offered an idea, expressed in a book titled Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil by Hannah Arendt, that evil is the absence of empathy; the inability to see others as equal with oneself. Zepp-LaRouche fully concurred with this view and explained Friedrich Schiller’s belief that only through the aesthetic education—education rooted in noble and sublime concepts—are people elevated to the level of reason.

Dennis Small of the Schiller Institute pointed out that to defeat evil one must put the City of London/Wall Street financial system through a complete bankruptcy reorganization, because that entire system is evil—what Pope John Paul II called the “structures of sin”—and creates the circumstances for evil policies to be carried out. As long as that system prevails, it will obstruct the potential to bring about the good in people. While the Boycott-Divest-Sanction (BDS) movement is fine, if you really want to go after the root of the problem you must take on the financial system.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche concluded the meeting by expressing her profound belief that “poverty is the greatest violation of human rights you can imagine”—children growing up hungry with no education are being robbed of their humanity. The only way to solve the crises of Gaza and Ukraine is through a discussion of how to develop these impoverished regions, something which is eminently doable. In history’s past, the areas of Central and Southwest Asia were developed: Baghdad was the greatest city in the world; Afghanistan was the land of a thousand cities; Syria was part of the Silk Road. “If we connect this great tradition of the past with a vision for the future, if that becomes the motivation of all the people involved, I think we can bring this to a much more beautiful epoch in history.

International Peace Coalition Meeting

A Transformation of the Moral Universe is Required

Feb. 9—This week’s online meeting of the International Peace Coalition began with moderator Anastasia Battle observing that the Coalition has now met for 36 consecutive weeks without interruption. She announced that a major focus of the Coalition’s activity will be to build a mass mobilization to restore funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), which has been the target of undocumented allegations by the Likud regime in Israel and its neocon supporters in the US, UK and elsewhere. 

Opening remarks were made to the meeting by Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche. She said that the most breathtaking and horrible development in Gaza has been Netanyahu’s rejection of the offer by Hamas for a release of hostages, and the announcement that the IDF will attack the town of Rafah. 1.5 million Palestinians who have been forcibly displaced from other parts of Gaza have been herded into a small area in Rafah, from which there is no escape. An IDF assault on these refugees will result in dreadful carnage. Zepp-LaRouche also commented on the efforts to disable UNRWA, noting that UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called it “irreplaceable” and that if you defund it, you “condemn the people who depend on it to death.” 

Even in U.S. establishment circles, she said, there is some recognition that this can’t go on forever. She mentioned an article in Foreign Affairs titled “Israel’s Self-Destruction,” which concludes by saying that Israelis must reach out to Palestinians, and to each other (because of the highly factionalized situation in Israel.) 

Zepp-LaRouche reminded the participants that although the Palestinian situation is most urgent, we must keep in mind that there is a danger of escalation to global war unless we can implement a new security and development architecture like the one she proposed in November of 2022. Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó recently warned of this exactly: if one more major conflict is added to the ones in Ukraine and Southwest Asia, it can mean global war. Zepp-LaRouche said that the most significant aspect of the celebrated Tucker Carlson interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which has already been viewed by at least 120 million people, is that Putin and Russia have at no point closed the door to cooperation with the West. 

Greetings to the attendees were offered by South Africa’s ambassador to Mexico, who was thanked by the members of the Coalition for South Africa’s important contribution to the pursuit of justice for Palestine. 

Former CIA analyst and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) cofounder Ray McGovern presented an analysis of the Tucker Carlson interview. He reminded the participants that U.S. President Eisenhower had warned that the military-industrial complex will succeed in dominating American policy if Americans are uninformed. Further, he said, one man who succeeded in making a dent in the otherwise pervasive climate of enforced ignorance was Julian Assange. Tucker Carlson has now made an additional, important contribution. 

A significant aspect of the interview was Putin’s reminder that there had been an agreement in early 2022, concluded in Istanbul, to end the Ukrainian war. The U.S.and U.K. intervened to throw those signed documents into the dustbin of history. What followed was the unnecessary killing of up to a half million of the flower of Ukrainian youth. 

Carlson asked Putin for his opinion on who’s in charge in Washington. Putin responded by saying that he didn’t know, but it was certainly not the president. McGovern said that Putin should necessarily be concerned about who really controls the nuclear button, and noted the contrast between Putin and Biden, pointing out that the Department of Justice has just said, in effect, that Biden can be excused for untruths because he is old and “not all there.” 

The meeting heard from a number of clergy and religious activists. A Christian minister from Dearborn, Michigan was outraged that the American media say that Israel is waging war on Hamas, while in fact, it’s a war on the civilians of Palestine. People who speak the truth are labeled antisemitic, he said. A recent commentary in the Wall Street Journal, which labeled Dearborn a jihadist city, provoked an outraged response from the city’s mayor who then ordered an increase in security due to the danger of Islamophobic violence. The clergyman warned of the danger that Israel will extend the war into Lebanon and other surrounding countries, and said that Israel’s blocking of humanitarian aid should be a major issue. He concluded by saying that the killing of civilians by the IDF will cause further recruitment to Hamas, and the cycle of violence will cause yet more extremist, Netanyahu-like leaders to come to power in Israel. 

Other religious leaders discussed citations from Christian, Jewish, and Islamic scripture that bear on the present strategic crisis, concluding that “a total shift in the moral universe has to happen.” They reported on recent activism and discussed plans for the future. Pax Christi has numerous actions planned for tax day against American arms manufacturers, the “merchants of death” who receive a stupendous amount of U.S. tax dollars. Activists from Mexico and New York reported on successful embassy visits, urging funding for UNRWA and support for South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice. Rallies were also held outside the embassy of nations which had cut their funding for UNRWA.

 U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare, who was actually participating remotely in the IPC meeting while attending such a rally, said that she was optimistic about the future because she sees that young people are becoming active. But, she asked, what is next? What should the world actually look like? The rotten old empire is dead; what replaces it? 

During the informal discussion, participants commented further on the Tucker Carlson/President Putin interview, saying that it shows Russia remains willing to be in a dialogue with the West. The former president of Guyana, Donald Ramotar, observed that the interview demonstrates that Putin knows he can have a military settlement, but he prefers a political, negotiated settlement. He went on to hail the government of South Africa for acting as the conscience for humanity as a whole. He said that they have ripped the mask off the face of the “genocide actors in Israel and the U.S.” He defended the Yemeni Houthis, saying their actions against Israel-related shipping constitute solidarity, not terrorism. 

In her concluding remarks, Helga Zepp-LaRouche emphasized that the Rafah situation must be viewed with utmost urgency, but at the same time the entire world is changing. No one can speak of a “rules-based order” after the West has condoned what is happening in Gaza. Are we going to live by the law of the jungle, or by the universal principles in the UN charter? These ideas must guide our activism in the weeks ahead.

“Knew or Should Have Known”: Governments Complicit in Genocide Will Not Be Able to Plead Ignorance at the Coming Nuremberg Tribunal

February 4, 2024–We summarize the strategic situation, and what must be done to immediately reverse the current rush to genocide and global war, as follows:

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on Jan. 26, 2024 that it is plausible that genocide is actively being carried out by Israel against the Palestinian people in Gaza, as charged by the government of South Africa.

South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor explained on Jan. 31 that the ICJ’s order means that “Third States must, therefore, also act independently and immediately to prevent genocide by Israel and to ensure that they are not themselves in violation of the Genocide Convention by aiding or assisting in the commission of genocide. This necessarily imposes an obligation on all States to cease funding and facilitating Israel’s military actions, which are plausibly genocidal.”

ICJ rulings are binding on participating governments and responsible officials in those governments, and Israel was given 30 days to report back to the Court and document its compliance with the Court’s Order.

Instead of following the Court’s requirements, Israel and its principal international allies have arrogantly flouted those rulings from the moment they were issued on Jan. 26, 2024.

On Jan. 26, the very day that the ICJ Order was issued, the governments of Israel and the United States colluded to suspend all funding to UNRWA, which provides the vast majority of the life-and-death humanitarian aid for Gaza, doing this on the basis of a questionable Israeli dossier charging a dozen UNWRA employees (out of 13,000 in Gaza and 30,000 in the region) with working with Hamas, a secret dossier which has yet to be made public.

A total of 17 countries plus the European Union (United States, Germany, Sweden, Japan, France, Switzerland, Canada, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Australia, Italy, Austria, Finland, New Zealand, Iceland, Romania, Estonia, and the European Union) have now frozen their funding of UNRWA, guaranteeing that the threatened famine now besetting 2.3 million people in Gaza will become an actual famine with hundreds of thousands of deaths, as UNRWA’s funding totally disappears by the end of February.

On Jan. 30, the Israeli Defense Ministry announced that they were flooding the tunnels in Gaza with seawater, which will predictably not only kill Hamas and hostages alike but also destroy the possibility of having any fresh water or agriculture in the region for decades.

As of Feb. 4, the forces of the IDF are poised at the outskirts of Rafah in southern Gaza, preparing to launch a full-scale military assault on the over one million desperate Palestinians whom the IDF has driven there from other parts of Gaza, in order to impose a policy that the ICJ has characterized as “plausible genocide” and which therefore could end up being the “final solution to the Palestinian problem.”

The combined military forces of the United States and the United Kingdom – the two countries most directly responsible for financing, arming and unleashing today’s Israeli depopulation war against Palestine – launched air strikes over the weekend of Feb. 3-4 against selected “enemy targets” in Yemen, Iraq and Syria, with a manifest intent of sending a “Shock and Awe” message to terrify the entire world into submission.

These developments now threaten to spread the war in Southwest Asia to Iran and engulf the entire region in war, which could rapidly become a nuclear World War III. Therefore, the following immediate actions are called for:

  1. DEMONSTRATIONS: Demonstrations should be held world-wide in front of the embassies or consulates of the 18 countries which have frozen funding for UNRWA, demanding that they immediately restore that funding, vastly increase the flow of humanitarian aide to Gaza, bring about an immediate and permanent cease-fire, and convene an international conference to develop concrete steps towards establishing a two-state solution for the region based on mutually-beneficial economic development.
  2. CEASEFIRE RESOLUTIONS: City Councils and state legislatures across the United States, and elected bodies in all countries around the world, should follow the example of the City Council of Chicago, the third largest city in the U.S., which on Jan. 31 passed a resolution, which stated that they “support the United Nations implementation of Resolution 377, known as ‘Uniting for Peace,’ which called an emergency session of the General Assembly which voted in favor of ‘immediate humanitarian ceasefire’ in Gaza.”
  3. CONTACT REPRESENTATIVES: Every Congressman and Senator in the U.S. should be told that they will be thrown out of office if they do not publicly express their adherence to both the Constitution of the United States and to international law to which our nation has subscribed (including the decisions of the ICJ), both of which now demand action to stop the genocide before it goes any further. Elected officials in other countries should also be called on to abide by their corresponding legal and moral obligations.

All governments around the world, all public officials, are now on notice: Not only is it the case that they “should have known” what was happening in Gaza on their watch; they now know. And history – and a likely coming Nuremberg Tribunal – will judge them accordingly.

Webcast: Urgent Mobilization Against the Unipolar War Machine

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her Weekly Live dialogue Jan. 31., 11am EDT/5pm CET and help usher in the Year of the New Paradigm for all Humanity. Send your questions, thoughts and reports to or ask them in the live stream.

If historians will have the opportunity to look back on the human race in 2024, they will undoubtedly identify this period as a defining moment in history. No, not because of a showdown between “democracy” and “autocracy,” nor over “liberal” versus “traditional” values. Nor because of a “culture war” or a fight over our national or personal identities. This moment will be a defining period because it’s the end of a system which can no longer continue to exist, no matter which culture, ideology, or political system takes power. The oligarchical system is dying, and resistance to it, along with a passionate commitment to build a better future, is growing.

The political and moral failure of this system has never been in more of a stark, if horrific, relief, providing a window of clarity for those prepared to act. The special statement released yesterday, “‘Knew or Should Have Known’: Governments Complicit in Genocide Will Not Be Able To Plead Ignorance at the Coming Nuremberg Tribunal,” is the leading edge for the kind of political action needed now.

Citizens of the world are encouraged to organize for the following immediate actions:

1) Demonstrations should be held worldwide in front of the embassies or consulates of the 18 countries which have frozen funding for UNRWA, demanding that they immediately restore that funding, vastly increase the flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza, bring about an immediate and permanent ceasefire, and convene an international conference to develop concrete steps towards establishing a two-state solution for the region based on mutually-beneficial economic development;

2) City Councils and state legislatures across the United States, and elected bodies in all countries around the world, should follow the example of the City Council of Chicago, the third largest city in the U.S., which on Jan. 31 passed a resolution which stated that they “support the United Nations implementation of Resolution 377, known as ‘Uniting for Peace,’ which called an emergency session of the General Assembly which voted in favor of ‘immediate humanitarian ceasefire’ in Gaza.”

3) Every Congressman and Senator in the U.S. should be told that they will be thrown out of office if they do not publicly express their adherence to both the Constitution of the United States and to international law to which our nation has subscribed (including the decisions of the ICJ), both of which now demand action to stop the genocide before it goes any further. Elected officials in other countries should also be called on to abide by their corresponding legal and moral obligations.

What will you be able to answer when you’re asked: What did you do in the great crisis of 2024?

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her Weekly Live dialogue Jan. 31., 11am EDT/5pm CET and help usher in the Year of the New Paradigm for all Humanity. Send your questions, thoughts and reports to or ask them in the live stream.

IPC Statement: Gaza Genocide Denounced at the World Court; Now We Must Stop It!

The government of Algeria announced over the weekend that it has requested that the UN Security Council be urgently convened this coming Wednesday, Jan. 31, to give “binding effect” to the historic Jan. 26 decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the matter of South Africa’s charges of Israeli genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. UN Security Council resolutions—if they can get past U.S. and British vetoes—are in fact internationally legally enforceable. ICJ decisions are legally binding on the parties, but the Court has no enforcement mechanism of its own.

The perpetrators and accomplices of the ongoing Gaza genocide are now loudly whistling past the graveyard, trying to convince the world of the lie that the ICJ somehow gave Israel a green light. The Wall Street Journal called the World Court’s decision “a rare win for Israel”; the Jerusalem Post said it was “a big win for Israel”; and the State Department announced that “the ICJ did not make a finding about genocide or call for a ceasefire in its ruling,” and that “we continue to believe that allegations of genocide are unfounded.”

But the reality is that, with South Africa’s presentation of its airtight legal case against Israeli genocide in Gaza, along with the ICJ’s finding that there are sufficient grounds to fully investigate that charge of genocide, the veil has finally been lifted for all to see. For that, the world owes a debt of gratitude to the Republic of South Africa, and perhaps to Nelson Mandela personally, whose life continues to give meaning and strength to millions who have come after him. The role of the BRICS nations, of which South Africa is one of the original members, in supporting and strengthening South Africa’s resolve, should also be noted.

But ours is not to comment on the ins and outs of the ICJ’s ruling, but rather to escalate the fight to actually stop the genocide. Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche addressed the broader implications of the ICJ ruling in her remarks to the 34th weekly meeting of the International Peace Coalition (IPC) on Jan. 26, which led to a discussion of the next steps to be taken.

Participants expressed their gratitude for the ruling of the International Court of Justice, which was quite remarkable, and took note of the fact that this is an enormous step forward. No matter what Israel is now intending to do, they have to take into account what was stated by the Court, because they have international friends that also have to live with the consequences of it. The big question is what the effect will be on the United States and Germany, for example, that had argued that the South African case was “meritless.”

The wording of the Court’s ruling was in fact very strong, even if it did not call for an immediate total ceasefire. Furthermore, the final document repeated large parts of South Africa’s charges, and therefore it is necessary to get the exact text of what was read out in The Hague by the presiding judge Joan E. Donoghue of the United States, and get that out to all social media, all city councils, churches, mosques and synagogues, with the demand that they should pass resolutions that there must be an immediate ceasefire, acting on the basis of the ICJ ruling. This is all the more urgent because the mainstream media will have a tendency to play it down, and try to get it out of the news cycle as quickly as possible.

The participants in the IPC meetings, and all others who want to end the carnage, should make a commitment to get the word out about the ICJ ruling as widely as possible. This will send a message of support to the South African government, and it will keep a maximized sense of mobilization internationally.

Israel has one month before they have to report back to the ICJ on what they have done to ensure no genocide occurs. Every single day, every single hour and minute, people are still dying in Gaza. Maximizing our efforts, especially now, is more important than ever before.

Further Reading:

Pamphlet: Peace Through Development for Palestine and Israel — The LaRouche Oasis Plan

International Court of Justice Mandates: The Arc of the Moral Universe Bends Towards Justice!

When, today, the nation of Algeria calls upon the United Nations Security Council to give “binding effect” to the just-released mandates of the International Court of Justice regarding the “plausible case” of genocide being committed by the Israeli military in Gaza, will the United States and Britain degrade the citizens of their respective nations, and the world, by their expected exercise of a veto? That would be, in effect, to veto the near-unanimous vote of the highest court in the world. Will the United States and Britain do that this time in the name of “defense of the rule of law?”

Will the United States and Britain, as they and other nations did with the meticulously researched and detailed South Africa petition, decry as “without merit” the legal conclusions and mandates of the panel of judges from Russia, Slovakia, France, Morocco, Somalia, China, India, Jamaica, Lebanon, Japan, Germany, Australia, Brazil, South Africa—and the United States itself? In addition to the souls of Palestine, the ghosts of the United Nations personnel who have already given their lives in this mad conflagration will be watching, as will be the eyes of the world.

Now that the International Court of Justice has unequivocally established mandates upon the nation of Israel, a signatory on the 1948 Genocide Convention, with which that government is required to comply within 30 days of the January 26 ruling, it is clear to any reasonably sane person that that could only be done under the conditions of a permanent ceasefire. The shabby attempts by the Wall Street Journal, Jerusalem Post and other publications to say that no cease-fire was explicitly proposed by the court, suggests more about the now-rampant illiteracy of the twenty-first century press, than it does about what the content of the ruling clearly states. For example, if even the first two of the six ICJ mandates’ provisions are considered—“1.) The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular:

(a) killing members of the group;

(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical

destruction in whole or in part; and

(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;” and

“2.)The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above,” —it should be clear to any honest person that these measures can only be accomplished through the immediate cessation of conflict in Gaza.

In addition, there is no longer any escaping the fact, that a significant portion of the elected representatives of the governments of the Trans-Atlantic nations and NATO have placed themselves on the record in supporting the practice of genocide as that has now been identified. The Center for Constitutional Rights, in a November 3 letter warning the American Congress against voting for military aid to Israel, said, “ Please take notice that should you vote in favor of that package, you risk facing criminal and civil liability for aiding and abetting genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity under international law, and may face investigation and prosecution at the International Criminal Court, and in third-states under the principle of universal jurisdiction.” They also appended the following footnote: “Federal Criminal Law. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1091—which was enacted to comply with the United States’ obligation under the Genocide Convention—whoever commits, incites, attempts, or conspires genocide in or outside the United States, is eligible for punishment. See War Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2441 (a) and (b).”

Yes, the United States Congress and other American individuals {can} be held accountable. This is, of course the job of the American people, as it will be the job of people in all of the countries throughout the world where governments seek to force compliance with genocide upon their populations, as happened only 80 years ago. The courageous stand of Nelson Mandela’s South Africa on behalf of humanity, and therefore of the Palestinians, must now be adopted by all of us, as we shame the Anglo-American Establishment, and its accomplices, into exposing themselves to the world. And while it is they who are the perpetrators of war and genocide, it is we who are the preventers of it—should we choose to do so.

No business as usual! Cease-fire now! Bring all Nuremberg Criminals to justice! Remember; “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.”

Keynote Address – 2024 and 2074: A New Paradigm for the Next Fifty Years

International LaRouche Youth Movement Statement in Support of South Africa

On Saturday, January 20, 2024, the Schiller Institute hosted an International Youth Dialogue to discuss the “10 Principles for A New Development and Security Architecture,” proposed by Schiller Institute Founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Over the course of the dialogue, youth leaders from nations across the globe discussed the historical and epistemological precedents of—as well as the required solutions for—the current, expanding world military and economic crisis, which now threatens to become a global, potentially thermonuclear, catastrophe.

The participants of that youth dialogue now release this statement of unequivocal solidarity with the application of South Africa in the International Court of Justice, which suit has unmistakably helped to bend the course of universal world history towards Justice.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche noted that, “According to Friedrich Schiller, the great German Poet of Freedom, after whom the Schiller Institute is named, there is no contradiction between being a patriot of your own country and thinking and acting as a world-citizen.”

We young women and men—from Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Kenya, Nigeria, Togo, Tanzania, Germany, France, Nicaragua, Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina, El Salvador, Bangladesh, the U.S.A. and several other countries—affirm this elevated conception of patriotism, and recognize that it must be at the core of any substantial development towards international peace, in Southwest Asia and around the world.

Patriotism and world-citizenry combine in the dual invocation of both Nelson Mandela and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in South Africa’s application. South Africa did not take up its suit as merely an “exceptional” country ready to use its “forces” in order to “police” its cousin Israel. Rather, in the spirit of 1776, South Africa raised its voice as one sovereign nation among many. In the redemptive dimension of its particular history, South Africa represents the species-characteristic capacity of the whole of humanity: the capacity for progressive perfection through moral, cultural and economic development.

Having the sublime courage not to deny its own history of legalized injustice, and accepting the heavy responsibility of its accession to the 1948 Genocide Convention, South Africa has swiftly demonstrated to the world, through the universality of its individual intention, how One can become Many and Many become One; in so doing, South Africa has triumphed over the “logic” of permanent war, through the power of Reason and agapic Love.

In 1963, King warned the United States of an impending “spiritual death,” the result of “this business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into veins of people normally humane.” King’s warning was given new form by Pope John Paul II, in 1987, when he wrote of “a world which is divided into blocs, sustained by rigid ideologies, and in which instead of interdependence and solidarity different forms of imperialism hold sway.” Pope John Paul II called this “a world subject to structures of sin.”

The illusory power of these “structures of sin” has been radically challenged by the moral authority of South Africa’s suit, confirming Mandela’s statement that “the march towards freedom and justice is irreversible.”

With the aid of South Africa’s moral guidance, we refuse—as King refused—to be “mesmerized by uncertainty.”

We soberly reaffirm Mandela’s imperative:

“Let each one of you and all of our people, give the enemies of peace and liberty no space to take us back to the dark hell of apartheid. It is only disciplined mass action that assures us of the victory we seek. Go back to your factories, schools, mines, and communities; build on the massive energies that recent events in our country have released by strengthening disciplined mass organization. We are going forward.”

Transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s introductory remarks

The following is an edited transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s introductory remarks to an online Schiller Institute International Youth Conference, Jan. 20, 2024.

Hello; let me first of all greet all of you. It is really a big joy to talk to young people from over 20 countries, because right now we are in the most incredible moment in history ever. I know you can say that for many moments of history, but I think we have never been at a time where, on the one side, the dangers to the very existence of mankind have never been so great, but, at the same time, it is also a very joyful and hopeful moment, because we are in a transformation in which one system—the old neo-liberal order, the so-called rules-based order—is clearly failing. We are seeing the emergence of a completely new paradigm which promises to become a much better basis for the relations among countries internationally.

Let me first speak a little bit about what to do about this war danger. The fact is, that, because you have the collapse of the neo-liberal order, those forces that want to keep a unipolar world, or at least a world in which the old system of the rules-based order keeps dominance over the rest of the world—that clearly is not working. We indeed have the danger that the present crises which we see in Ukraine and very emphatically in Southwest Asia, both unfortunately have the potential of getting out of control and, in the worst case, becoming a global nuclear war. If it would come to that—and we must do everything possible to prevent it—it would mean the annihilation of civilization. Because once you have the exchange of nuclear weapons—and I completely refute the idea that something like a tactical, regional nuclear war is possible. Because it is the logic of nuclear war that once one nuclear weapon is used, the likelihood that the entire arsenal of all nuclear forces will be unloaded is extremely high. That would mean that, following such a nuclear exchange, there would be a nuclear winter of about a minimum of ten years, in which all life on Earth would die because of a lack of sun, a lack of food. So, this is why I think the young people, you who have your entire life hopefully ahead of you, have to have a stronger voice in making clear that the powers that be stop a course which is so threatening to the very existence of humanity. 

Therefore, what the Schiller Institute has been trying to do since the war danger has become so absolutely acute—essentially since the war in Ukraine started—we have emphasized very much that we have to teach people in every country on the planet to think about the one mankind first, before thinking about any particular national interest. To think about the one humanity is not a contradiction to being a good patriot, because, according to Friedrich Schiller, for whom the Schiller Institute is named—the great German poet of freedom—there is no contradiction between being a patriot of your own country and thinking and acting as a world citizen.

Now, I have coined a slogan, “World Citizens of All Countries, Unite!” Some of you who are familiar with Karl Marx may remember that he coined the notion “Proletarians of All Countries, Unite!” Since I have the privilege to have been born in the same city as Karl Marx, the oldest city in Germany, Trier, I have just changed that into “World Citizens of All Countries, Unite!” That is not just a slogan. I believe that as we see the tendency of the Global Majority becoming more prominent, we are also in an era in which, while sovereignty is extremely important and will be important for quite some time to come, nevertheless we are already in a period in which you can see that there will come a time in history where nations will be less important. They will not disappear, because culture, language, tradition, art will always play a very important role, but we for sure as a human species will eventually reach an identity that makes us much more conscious of being the one humanity. I will return to that later on.

There is also one philosophical foundation upon which one can think [about] the one humanity; it’s a philosophical method which has been developed by one of my favorite philosophers, Nicolaus of Kues, who was the founder of modern science in Europe, the founder of the sovereign nation-state. He lived in the 15th Century. He developed a method of thinking which he called the Coincidentia Oppositorum, the Coincidence of Opposites. The main idea behind that, is that the human mind, empowered with creative reason, can always think of the higher one than the many. Nicolaus of Cusa was a Cardinal in the Catholic Church and the Foreign Minister of the Vatican of his time. He arrived at this idea from theological considerations; that the one God has more power than all the many He created. But it’s also something you can access if you are not religious, because in mathematics you have also the idea that there can be always a mathematical power which has more power than the many. I think that that is very helpful, and we should discuss this maybe in the discussion period. It’s a very helpful device, especially in a world where you have some people saying, “America first!” Other people say, “My country is the chosen country.” I, coming from Germany, in the meantime am extremely reluctant whenever somebody says, “My country is the best,” because we in Germany did not have such great experiences with that.

But to come at this consideration of thinking about the interest of the one humanity first, I think, is of existential importance when it comes to the danger of nuclear war. Right now, we are in a situation where many people in the West are talking about the coming inevitable war with Russia, with China. You have people in Sweden, Finland, Germany who are saying the war with Russia will come in two years, in three years, on Swedish territory. Just yesterday, the head of the Military Committee of NATO, Admiral Rob Bauer, said that, in NATO, we must have a red alert because of the coming inevitable war with Russia. I think this is obviously propaganda; it’s a narrative, because there is no inevitable danger of a war with Russia. If you look at the reason why people are saying this, it has nothing to do with the actual behavior of Russia or China. It has a lot to do with geopolitics.

If you ask yourself, “How did we come to a situation where the danger of nuclear war is being earnestly discussed, like the head of NATO saying that, or one of the heads of NATO. You have to take it back—and you could take it back a lot longer—but I want to take it back to the end of the so-called Cold War. This was 1989-91, the period of German unification when the Soviet Union disintegrated. At that time, we already were extremely active as the LaRouche Movement, the Schiller Institute, because we had a clear conception, and when the Soviet Union disintegrated, we proposed the Eurasian Landbridge as the basis for a peace order, uniting Europe and Asia through development corridors, which we already called at that time The New Silk Road. That would have been an absolutely realizable conception, because there was no more “enemy”; the communism of the Soviet Union had just disappeared. It would have been possible to at least design a European common house, as [Soviet President Mikhail] Gorbachev at the time talked about. I will spare you the many aspects of it, but the reality was that our proposal was rejected, because, in the United States and Great Britain, you had the neo-cons, who said, “Oh, wonderful! The Soviet Union is no longer there, now we have won the Cold War, and we can establish a unipolar world, where only we are the dominant power.” There was one fellow in particular who designed this, [Paul] Wolfowitz, one of the defense experts of the United States. He coined the Wolfowitz Doctrine, which was the idea that, now that the West supposedly had won the Cold War, the United States would not allow any other country or group of countries to ever bypass the United States economically, socially, militarily, or otherwise. Unfortunately, that policy went into effect. At that time you had an American historian named [Francis] Fukuyama, who said that this was the end of history. What [these circles] meant by that, was that, given the fact that communism supposedly had failed, the whole world would adopt the neo-liberal economic model and the liberal model of social policy. They basically said, that will mean there will be no more war, there will be the end of history.

The Pope at that time, John Paul II, warned that the West had not won, because the whole world was still under the rule of the structures of sin; that the structures of sin did not only exist in the Soviet Union, but they also existed in the West. The Pope said, if you don’t believe it, look at the condition of the Third World to see the under-development, the poverty that these structures of sin still rule.

In the beginning of the 1990s, there was no Russia being an enemy, because [Russian] President Yeltsin, who completely implemented the neo-liberal policies, the liberal economic reforms, did exactly what the Western oligarchy wanted from him. So, there was no problem from their standpoint with Russia—except that the demographic curve of Russia collapsed by one million per year, and the Russian economist Sergei Glazyev called that genocide, because the intention was to reduce the Russian population, ruin Russia already then, under the guise of liberal policies. 

China was not an enemy, either, because China was still developing, having made already incredible progress, but it was not yet anywhere near challenging the United States. But then, China became a member of the  [World Trade Organization] WTO, which the Western forces had invited China to join. They did so, because they thought that once China was part of the WTO, they would also adopt the liberal model and become part of “us.” 

That all started to change when [Russian President Vladimir] Putin came to replace Yeltsin, because Putin was determined to undo the liberal reforms, re-establish Russia as a global power, which, under Yeltsin, had basically collapsed. Then they started to say, Putin is really an enemy. And naturally, when China became part of the WTO, it really meant that China all of a sudden had access to all the advanced technologies of the West. It started a big jump in productivity in lifting altogether 850 million people out of poverty in China, which was an incredible civilizational contribution. But eventually, China did not adopt the liberal model of the West, but to the contrary, China turned back to its 5000-year cultural tradition. The Chinese called this “socialism with Chinese characteristics.” Naturally, then China was making incredible motion forward. Finally, in 2013, China felt economically strong enough—it had tried earlier, but not succeeded—to offer the rest of the world to participate in the Chinese model. This was when President Xi Jinping, in Kazakhstan, announced the Belt and Road Initiative. Then, the economic development started to spread from China. They offered many economic cooperation agreements with the countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. By about 2017, the West really started to treat China as an adversary.

We observed this very closely, because we had our own plan for a World Landbridge, for a Eurasian Landbridge extending into all continents, which we published in 2014 as a book called The New Silk Road Becomes the World Landbridge. We were quite surprised that, for the first four years, there was almost no coverage about the New Silk Road in the Western media. But then, at the end of 2017, all the security papers [strategic reports and analyses—ed.]—of the US first, and then all the European allies—started to treat China as an adversary, as a competitor, but also more and more as a threat.

The effort to maintain the unipolar world was expressed by, among other things,  altogether five eastward extensions of NATO. While the West had promised that NATO would not move an inch to the east after the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO moved 1000 kilometers to the east; closer and closer to the borders of Russia. In 2014, the Western powers made the Maidan coup, which was a fascist coup financed by—among others—the US State Department for $5 billion. This was admitted to by [then Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs] Victoria Nuland. The idea was that NATO would extend into Ukraine. From the standpoint of the security interests of Russia, this was unacceptable, because it would be like during the Cuban Missile Crisis [in 1962], when the Soviet Union brought their missiles, which were nuclear-armed, to Cuba. It came to a similar crisis. It should be obvious to anybody that, if NATO is trying to do the same thing the other way around by bringing offensive weapons systems to the border of Russia, this would be a reverse Cuban Missile Crisis. This is when the war in Ukraine really started; it started actually in 2014.

After that, the sanctions regime against Russia became more brutal all the time. Eventually, this even led to the weaponization of the dollar after Russia’s special military operation had started on February 24, 2022. At that point, we entered the present showdown phase of the situation. The Western democracies—and I almost have to put the word democracies in quotations—tried all the time to pull the majority of the Global South countries of Africa, Latin America, and Asia into the camp of the so-called democracies. But the countries of the Global South looked at this whole situation, and, since they had been the victims of colonialism for almost 600 years, they did not buy the narrative put out by the US and European media. They refused to take the side of the West, basically insisting they would remain neutral. From that time, there was an absolute explosion in the tradition and memory of the Non-Aligned Movement. The spirit of Bandung, the first Afro-Asian conference of 1955, came back with a vengeance, one can say. The countries of the Global South more and more were being encouraged by China, because they had for the first time an alternative for development. For all these years before, the West had not given them credit to build infrastructure. Why did the Europeans not, in the years after the Second World War, give them long-term, low-interest credits to build infrastructure—ports, railways, industrial parks? They did not. Instead, they had the IMF conditionalities, which meant that the so-called Third World countries would have to spend the money they made from exporting raw materials, not to invest in health systems, not to invest in infrastructure, but to pay their debt to the banks of the Paris Club first.

So, therefore, what then happened is that the Global South became stronger and stronger; the countries of the BRICS—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—became more active. Eventually, at the end of last year, in the BRICS summit in Johannesburg, they decided to become the BRICS+. From January 1st of this year, it’s the BRICS-10. Ethiopia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia (which is in the process of becoming a member), the Emirates, and Iran are all members of the BRICS. And about 30–40 more countries have already applied to become part of the new economic system, which is also intending to create a new reserve currency, to have their own economic system. After the weaponization of the dollar, when the US and European banks confiscated about $300 billion of Russian assets, and $9.5 billion of Afghanistan assets, these countries started to think maybe it’s not such a safe thing to have your assets in dollars; maybe we should have trade in our own currencies—rupees, reals, rubles, and others. 

Basically, that is where we are right now, because this year Russia has the chairmanship of the BRICS+, and I absolutely expect that in the present situation the BRICS will make a gigantic step forward to become a new economic system. This is a system which is very different than the so-called rules-based order, because they do not have a secretariat, they do not have a common policy they want to impose on the rest of the world, but among them, they respect each other’s sovereignty, the different social systems, that every country can choose their own path for development.

I think there has to be another point in the picture. With the recent suit by South Africa against Israel for committing genocide in Gaza, this is a world-historic event, because, as it has been stated by many people, how can you deny that there is genocide going on in Gaza when the TV stations of the whole world are streaming live what is going on in Gaza every day? When you seal off a tiny strip of land, and you make sure that for three-plus months no food, no electricity, no medicine, no water is coming in, and even the United Nations is saying that it is expected that the number of people dying from disease as a result of this will be much higher than the number of those who will have died from the bombings, the intent is very clear. So, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the South African government presented this case with 84 pages documenting what is going on in Gaza. I watched the first three hours of the presentation and some of the second three hours. I have never seen such an airtight legal argument, not only showing the dimension of the humanitarian crisis, but also the clear intent. When you have all the top officials of Israel talking about the Amalek, talking about animals, that nobody should survive, and then seeing the soldiers dancing in a frenzy— Anyway, I think the significance of this is historic, because it proves that the country of South Africa, which went through apartheid and overcame a system of racism of the worst kind, has taken the leadership for the whole world, while the West, those countries with the so-called high moral standard talking about democracy and human rights, when confronted with this incredible situation in Gaza, are covering up and not bringing it to the ICJ. It was South Africa which saved the honor of humanity. That is symptomatic of the kind of change we are seeing in the world right now. I think this will have reverberations, because the whole Global Majority is siding with South Africa. And I’m very sad to say that Germany took the wrong side in this battle by siding with the United States and Israel, with the mistaken argument that, because Germany committed a genocide more than 80 years ago, that we have to stand by the side of Israel, no matter what they do. This is a wrong idea, and I’m very saddened by it. Hopefully, we can remedy it.

I hope we can remedy it, because there is something positive to be reported from Germany. That is that—actually, almost unexpectedly—a couple of weeks ago, the German farmers started to take to the streets to protest against cuts in their various budgets and subsidies for fuel which threaten to bankrupt them. They are now on the streets; they had on one day more than 100,000 tractors out. They basically blocked all the main highways. They had one full week of demonstrations, and it is not stopping. They are now uniting with the truckers, who are also protesting, as well as many other segments of the population also supporting them, because their own existence is at stake as well. The bakers, the restaurant owners, other categories. Hopefully, the industrialists will realize they are in a similar position, because this present neo-liberal system is threatening Germany to crash completely against the wall.

Now, let me make another point. I think what we see right now with the fight of the German farmers and the fight of the Global South, is actually the same fight. Now, that may not be apparent to people in Bavaria or people in Somalia; they may not look at it this way. But actually, if you really understand what is going on, it is the same fight. Because, what are the countries of the Global South fighting against? They are fighting against a system of control of the terms of trade. They are now demanding that every country of the developing sector has the right, not only to develop their own resources, but to increase the production chain, the value chain in their own countries by developing industry, agriculture, infrastructure, building new cities, going into new areas of science and technology. In other words, becoming a middle-income country in the near future. Who is trying to block that? It’s the institutions of finance, of Wall Street, the City of London, it’s the military-industrial complex of the North, of NATO, and the food cartels. If you look at the charts of who are the powers that be in Wall Street, in the City of London, and other financial centers, these complexes finance military-industrial and food cartels and reinsurance companies. They are so interwoven that you cannot separate them one iota.

Therefore, the farmers who are fighting against these same cartels and the developing countries are fighting against that same thing. They have much more in common than meets the eye. One of the things we want to accomplish is to match these two powerful motions to become one, because the only way, in my view, to get out of this crisis, is by uniting the people of Europe and the United States with the people of the Global South. I cannot see any other solution, because that is the one New Paradigm we have to accomplish. We have to come to this New Paradigm by ending the 600 years of colonial rule for the Global South. 

Let me quickly introduce my Ten Principles, because about two years ago, I started to suggest a new security and development architecture which has to replace the present geopolitical order. I would like if some of you have thought about it already, that we discuss how to actually put such a new security order on the table. The Ten Principles which I proposed: First of all, the absolute sovereignty of every country needs to be respected. There must the absolute eradication of poverty on the whole planet. A universal health system in every country; universal education for every newborn child and adult. A credit system which can finance that. A World Landbridge to bring infrastructure to all corners of the planet. And then three philosophical ideas—namely, this method of the Coincidence of Opposites as a method of solving problems, and the discussion of how to find out the truth. How do you differentiate between opinion and narrative, and the actual truth? And there is a method which natural science gives us right now as a way of indeed finding the truth and the effect of ideas in the physical universe. And finally, the discussion about the image of man; that man is good by nature. That is not too long a discussion, but we can come back to it in the Q&A. 

Let me introduce one other train of thought. That is, I want to encourage all of you, and actually excite you and interest you to study the ideas of my late husband, Lyndon LaRouche. Because the fact that our movement exists at all is a miracle. We were supposed to be smashed and not exist, eradicated from the face of the Earth. Why? Because Lyndon LaRouche had developed a method of thinking which is the way to set people free. It’s how to unleash your own creativity and to give you the key that actually almost everybody can become a genius; however, it requires a certain amount of industriousness, it’s not falling like manna from heaven. But it does require work. 

Let me give you a couple of ideas of why I’m saying that. Our movement is based on the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche, who developed a method of thinking which is based on physical economy, it’s based on a method of identifying the axioms of thinking, not just going by what people say, but immediately looking at it analytically. Identify the axioms and assumptions on which certain statements are made. That way, you find an unmistaken key to every area of knowledge. That method of thinking enabled him to already make a prognosis about the present situation today, where we have a systemic collapse of the neo-liberal order. He already identified that in 1971, when President Nixon decoupled the dollar from the gold standard and introduced floating exchange rates. He recognized that the taking down of the old Bretton Woods system—the credit system which was established in the postwar period—and replacing it with a system which was entirely oriented towards profit maximization and therefore the disrespect for the common interest of the general population, would lead inevitably to a new depression, a new fascism, and the danger of a new nuclear war, unless you would replace this system with a completely different economic order. 

I can only encourage you to look into the writings of what we have published in the last 50 years to see how absolutely accurate he was in predicting every turn of the present financial system to the worse. Many newspapers and liberal economists had insisted that no economist could ever know that the world financial system would enter the present crisis. We can prove that that is not true, because all the steps which occurred, he identified with absolute precision. The reason why the United States economy is in such a poor condition, except for its military-industrial complex, is because they did the out-sourcing of their production to cheap labor markets. They shifted from an orientation of the common good to a shareholder-value society. They changed from having full-chain production in your own country; they changed to the just-in-time mode. They went more and more to the idea that money makes money, which ended up in the derivatives trade, which now amounts to $2 quadrillion in outstanding derivatives contracts, which are unpayable. That is why we are right now in danger of a total collapse of the financial system.

LaRouche’s method of thinking is very much associated with understanding what is it that moves society forward. What is the source of wealth? Namely, that is entirely the creative powers of the individual which are able again and again to come up with new ideas, identifying qualitative breakthroughs in science, in great art; identifying principles which give us new insight in how the physical universe works. When we apply these principles in the production process, it leads to an increase of the productivity of the people, of the industrial capacity, and the productivity in general, leading to an increase in physical wealth again and again. So, it is not the possession of raw materials; it is not the control of the terms of trade—what the free market economists are saying. It is entirely the ability of the human mind to use its creative powers to make discoveries of physical principles, qualitatively new principles. Then applying them in production and in this way increase the power of man over nature and over the universe. That is the right which has been denied to the developing countries until the recent struggle, in which the Global South is insisting that you have to apply your innate right to apply this principle to your own economies.

This is basically associated with the image of man. The ecologists are trying to convince people that man is a parasite; that man is a burden to nature. Some even go so far as to say that women should not have children anymore, because every newborn child is a burden to nature. There are books like that in Germany and the US. Some other people are saying that man is only the steward of nature, and should phase in not being different than the other species; that even plants have an equal right to human beings. I think this is a fundamentally wrong conception, and Lyndon LaRouche, already very early in his creative work, which lasted, actually, I would say eight decades—that’s about right—very early on, he recognized the importance of space travel. This is very important for the young people today, because we have a huge cultural crisis. There are studies everywhere that young people have a concentration span like a grasshopper; they are married to their electronic devices, and are increasingly incapable of interacting socially; and thinking about a year in their own life which is not located in the here and now. 

Lyndon LaRouche made many speeches about why it is so important to lift the eyes and the mind to the stars and start to think about space science, space travel. The obvious fact which everybody who starts to look into it is aware of, is that our planet Earth will not be livable forever. Because of certain processes in the galaxy and the cycle of Milky Way, sometime in about 2 billion years, our planet will not be so livable anymore. We have to think about expanding in the universe at large. This poses all the right challenges. Just yesterday, the Japanese landed an object on the Moon; it may not function perfectly, but they are now the fifth nation to do so. It is very clear that our present phase of space exploration is just in the baby shoes. Think about two, three, four generations from now, that the idea once we conquer different fuels for space travel, like fusion for example, the travel time to Mars and other planets will become much shorter. Therefore, it will be much more realistic that we explore nearby space. The moment we leave Earth, we are leaving the gravity zone of Earth, and therefore we are entering a relativistic space and time. That completely changes the kinds of physical laws we have to deal with, which Einstein enabled us to even think about. And even before, [Arab philosopher and physician (980–1037)] Ibn Sina had similar ideas, but that’s a different discussion.

If you think about the fact that we, with our lives, not only have to solve the problems of the present transformation of an old order, which is still colonial, into a New Paradigm where the one humanity will be the first consideration. Later, when we think about space travel, the concept of one humanity will become much more obvious. We should not think about who controls the Moon or other such silly headlines you can read these days, or who will weaponize space to better conduct war on Earth from space. No, this comes to the very question of the identity, of who are we in the universe? When you look, for example, at what the Hubble Telescope found, or now the James Webb Telescope, there are at least two trillion galaxies. This, for me, is one of the most mind-boggling ideas. When you look up to the stars, and you think there are so many stars. But this is just a tiny tip of the iceberg. Two trillion galaxies—we are just at the very beginning of exploring what the universe is all about; how it functions, and how we can maintain the existence of the human species in an immortal way.

Obviously, each of us is mortal. We are born, and we die. And the short span between these two occurrences, most people are wasting it, because, before they even get to the idea that they could contribute something lasting with their life, they become old and senile and they have missed the opportunity to do so. But, the reality is, that once you understand that our identity as human beings is not limited to our biological existence, but that when we truly develop our creative potential and contribute some knowledge to the existing body of knowledge of mankind as a whole, and in this way increase the ability of mankind for a durable existence, this exists even after we are dead. In this way, we are creating immortal ideas in science, in art, that we contribute to the immortality of the human species at large, but also participate in that immortality if we produce such valid ideas.

I have an absolutely optimistic view about the future of mankind, because I think that once we create a world where geopolitical confrontation is overcome by the idea that we have new relations among nations respecting the other and bringing forward the best traditions; that we have a dialogue of civilizations and cultures where each nation and each civilization actualizes the best they have ever produced in terms of culture, poetry, science, all the beautiful things people in past generations have produced; and we enter a dialogue with the other nations to bring forward the best they ever have produced, then we will really grow up. The present situation in the world I always compare with four-year old boys. I have a horror of those four-year old boys, because they tend to kick each other. We, as nations, should not behave like four-year old boys. When we develop our creativity in the way I was trying to convey before, relating to the creative potential of the other person, the other nation, and vice versa, we will enter the age of adulthood of mankind. There is absolutely no limit to what we can accomplish as the only creative species known in the universe so far.

I think that is where we are, on the verge of reaching this. This is why I’m saying this is the most exciting moment in history. While the danger of complete extinction in a nuclear war has never existed as now, at the same time, if we overcome this present difficulty—because in the long arc of history, it’s not more than a difficulty—and actually truly realize what we are as a creative species, I think that we will enter a period of a new renaissance which will be much more human and much more beautiful than anything we have experienced so far. And I want to invite you to be part of it, and think about yourself as shaping it, of not just sitting there watching how it develops. Become an active part in making our world more human, more livable, and more beautiful. Thank you.

Webcast: Dying Tricks of a Dying System

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her Weekly Live dialogue Jan. 24, 11am EDT/5pm CET and help usher in the Year of the New Paradigm for all Humanity. Send your questions, thoughts and reports to or ask them in the live stream.

‘You can fool all people some of the time and some people all the time. But you can never fool all people all the time.’ Abraham Lincoln

“We are in a period of tectonic changes, and when you are in a period of the collapse of one system and the emergence of a new one, the rules of the so-called ‘rules-based order’ somehow don’t function anymore. The method of manipulation of the population is quickly reaching the point which Lincoln talked about, that you cannot fool all the people all of the time, and this is one of those moments coming true.Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Jan 22nd 2024

A contrived protest movement has now broken out across Germany, with hundreds of thousands of people coming out to protest the threat of “fascism” and a supposed right-wing takeover—the same narrative that has recently been used against the completely justified protests by farmers and producers. The trail of this smelly operation leads back to some of the worst oligarchic networks and governmental operations in the world, and is a clear attempt to stop the groundswell against the policies of death and collapse which are gripping Western countries.

Despite that, the wave of farmer protests is continuing to sweep across Europe, and over the past few days, there have been demonstrations in Austria, Italy, and France, with more on the way in Spain and the Netherlands soon. In each case, the farmers have actual popular support, as they contribute to the true well-being of all citizens in their countries, and are demanding that they be allowed to continue to do so. Despite dirty operations against it, it is not something that is going to be swept under the rug.

In the same category is the attempt by the British to cordon off American policy to an inevitable war with Iran, as a Jan. 21 article in the City of London’s infamous mouthpiece The Economist tries to do. The Biden Administration is facing an intractable dilemma in the region, it writes: “do nothing and America looks weak; retaliate and the President risks a new war in an election year.” Notably, The Economist insists that it is “a problem without a solution,” completely ignoring the fact that there is an ongoing genocide occurring in Gaza which is inflaming regional tensions (and which could certainly be stopped), nor the fact that two previous enemies—Iran and Saudi Arabia—signed an agreement last year with China for a restart of relations under China’s different approach of diplomacy. Peaceful relations on the level of a win-win paradigm is not an option for the British, who insist only that, eventually, “the administration is going to have no choice but to strike at the IRGC,” Iran’s Islamic Republic Guard Corps…

However, as the situation in Germany and Europe shows, the failure of this system is becoming increasingly difficult to hide, and the old tricks are not working as well anymore—including in NATO-land itself. The challenge is to get people to understand the connection between the collapse and the emergence of a new system increasingly taking shape around the world, as is being spearheaded by the BRICS and the Global South….

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her Weekly Live dialogue Jan. 24, 11am EDT/5pm CET and help usher in the Year of the New Paradigm for all Humanity. Send your questions, thoughts and reports to or ask them in the live stream.

Webcast: BRICS on the Move To Replace the West’s ‘Law of The Jungle’, Jan. 17, 11am

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her Weekly Live dialogue Jan. 17, 11am EDT/5pm CET and help usher in the Year of the New Paradigm for all Humanity. Send your questions, thoughts and reports to or ask them in the live stream.

BRICS on the Move To Replace the West’s ‘Law of The Jungle’

The world is in the throes of a tectonic shakeup, which is not about to come to a halt anytime soon, Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche told associates on Jan. 15. We are at the end of an era, and 2024 will be decisive in determining what the outcome will be.

The open calls for preparing full-scale war against Russia and China are growing in the NATO nations, she said, as seen in the recent comments of German, Finnish and Swedish authorities who have announced that their countries must prepare for war with Russia on European territory in the next few years….

… In Southwest Asia, not only is the brutal war in Gaza escalating, despite the stunning legal case against Israeli genocide that South Africa presented last week at the International Court of Justice in The Hague (see info box below), but it now threatens to spread to the Red Sea, with the United States and the United Kingdom launching missile and other strikes against the Houthis in Yemen. As an editorial in China Daily put it: “Washington should rein in the bloodlust of Tel Aviv if it wants to stop the attacks on ships in the Red Sea. The fact that it hasn’t already done so … suggests that Washington intends to take advantage of the Gaza conflict to create turmoil in the region once again.”

Unchecked, this trajectory will take mankind back to the law of the jungle, to the war of each against all—which, in the nuclear age, means the likely annihilation of the human species.

That trajectory, however, is not proceeding unchecked. With London and Washington on a rampage for further wars, as they discredit and dismantle essential world institutions such as the UN and its ICJ, the BRICS process is on the march, creating and strengthening new institutions to meet the common needs of Mankind. And that is intersecting unprecedented political ferment in Germany, with the farmers’ protests, and growing anti-war demonstrations in other Western nations, and in fact across the world….

… Contrary to Henry Kissinger’s racist dictum that “history is not made in the South,” the leading force for global change is now coming from that very Global South.

As Helga Zepp-LaRouche stated in her remarks with associates, our task is to get forces that are in motion into a full strategic discussion of the solutions to the crisis. British geopolitics must come to an end, and the West must sit down to negotiate and reach agreements with the Global Majority—not try to impose the law of the jungle upon them.

An entirely new paradigm must be forged, using the Ten Principles proposed by Zepp-LaRouche as a jumping off point for the kind of in-depth policy discussions required.

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her Weekly Live dialogue Jan. 17, 11am EDT/5pm CET and help usher in the Year of the New Paradigm for all Humanity. Send your questions, thoughts and reports to or ask them in the live stream.

We encourage you to watch the presentations made by South Africa and Israel to the ICJ, or to read the transcripts.

Page 1 of 126123...Last