General

Speakers to include:
Ray McGovern, former senior analyst, U.S. Central intelligence Agency (CIA); founding member, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
Garland Nixon, Veteran Radio and TV Political Analyst
Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and leader of the Schiller Institute

The Schiller Institute, in accordance with its campaign to promote discussion about the principles necessary for the establishment of a new international security and development architecture, will convene a symposium Saturday, January 14. That symposium will explore how to resurrect the mission of “nonviolence or non-existence” to stop thermonuclear war, a mission of the late Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Robert Kennedy, and President John F. Kennedy.

Dr. King became, in the last year of his life, and in the face of clear personal risk, an uncompromising opponent, not only of thermonuclear war, but of modern warfare in any form. In his Christmas message of 1967, he said plainly: “Wisdom born of experience should tell us that war is obsolete. There may have been a time when war served as a negative good by preventing the spread and growth of an evil force, but the very destructive power of modern weapons of warfare eliminates even the possibility that war may any longer serve as a negative good. And so, if we assume that life is worth living, if we assume that mankind has a right to survive, then we must find an alternative to war….”

It would be tragic indeed if the United States, whose last several presidential administrations, going back to at least the time of President George W. Bush, have explicitly rejected Dr. King’s ideas, including his “creative nonviolent direct action” in the realm of foreign policy, would now go unchallenged, when that was exactly what King demanded be done in 1967. Rather, it is the duty of all who would follow what King actually said and taught, to now rise in full “troubling opposition” to the Anglo-American doctrine of “foreign policy through warfare” now promulgated in the trans-Atlantic nations. This is especially true as that criminal force doctrine, masquerading as “the rule of law,” pertains to the present NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.

Dr. King’s formulation, that “the choice is no longer between violence and non-violence; the choice is now between non-violence and non-existence,” echoed the words of Pope Paul VI at the United Nations in 1965: “No more war!! War never again!!” They also echoed President John F. Kennedy’s admonition that “mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind.” That formulation was accompanied by “action proposals” for joint work with America’s “mortal enemy” the Soviet Union, particularly in the realm of space, in Kennedy’s September 20, 1963, speech at the United Nations General Assembly.

In this symposium, however, we particularly wish to look at the international forces of violence that have been used to decapitate nations and institutions whose leaders have stood up not only in opposition to lethal, destructive policies, but in favor of economic development as the only sure path to peace. Recent revelations in the United States concerning the possible involvement of certain intelligence institutions in the assassination of President Kennedy, as well as the dissatisfaction of the King family with the official explanation of the MLK assassination, make this a particularly timely occasion to investigate these concerns.

Finally, it should be noted that Dr. King, not an economist, but a “drum major for justice,” insisted that the plight of the poor had to be put at the center of politics, that “people come first.” He insisted, against the advice of his advisers, to conduct his 1968 Poor People’s Campaign simultaneously with his assault on the war in Vietnam, in order to dramatize his assertion that “national budgets are moral documents,” and that the wealth of nations should be spent on improving the general welfare, not the accuracy of weapons of mass destruction. The Schiller Institute’s “Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture” are a precise articulation of that aspect of King’s great vision, which has been generally either disregarded, or little noted. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would not only have opposed the war in Europe; he would have proposed an alternative. We can honor his vision of humanity by doing no less.

Excerpt from a webinar by Diane Sare on January 8, 2023 Watch the full event https://rumble.com/v24xb2c-sare-for-senate-webinar-can-nuclear-war-be-avoided.html

Thank you, Diane. I’m in particular very happy to make sure your campaign becomes known internationally, because right now, where many people in the world are extremely concerned about the war danger, and really think that nuclear war and global war could happen. Many people are in complete despair about the United States, because if you look at the mass media, it looks like a monolithic bloc of escalation, pressure on the so-called allies—which are more vassals these days. And generally one does not hear that there is a real America, an America as it was meant as a republic, as it was created by the Founding Fathers, as it continued to live, with Lincoln, with FDR, with Kennedy, and therefore, to hear in the rest of the world that there is actually an American candidate and an American movement of different groupings, but especially what you have demonstrated in your previous senatorial campaign [in 2022] is actually something which is strategically important.

Because I’ve talked over the years with many people around the world, including Russians, including Chinese, including other NATO member countries, and for them to have an estimate, what is the United States? Is it a monolithic bloc, only going in the direction of confrontation with Russia, and now, increasingly with China, is a matter which goes into the analysis and into the decision-making for what to do. So don’t think your campaign is just a national campaign inside the United States. It has, especially at this moment, an international importance.

Now, I want to say that my motivation is to help to catalyze an international mobilization to end the Ukraine war with a diplomatic solution. Because the one thing which we absolutely cannot afford, and the world cannot afford, would be a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia, which, given the strategic partnership between Russia and China, would immediately be a confrontation between NATO and Russia and China, and be a world war. And that would be instantly, or in a very short time, the annihilation of the human species. And we’d better remind ourselves of the words of John F. Kennedy, who said, the people who die in a nuclear war, first, will be the lucky ones, because those who will die, then, maybe months or even years later in a nuclear winter, which is estimated to be about 10 years, and nothing will grow anymore and people will starve to death, if they haven’t died from nuclear fallout consequences beforehand; that is what we are looking at: We are looking at the potential annihilation of the human species.

There are some people who know what nuclear war is, mostly older people. We have found in the recent mobilization that many young people have no inkling what nuclear war is. And fortunately, we have Steven Starr who will speak about that again, help to get people really aware, that we are looking at the end of mankind. That is what this danger implies. And we are moving right now so quickly toward an escalation, that we have—a number of weeks ago, very gladly picked up on an offer by Pope Francis who said that he will offer the venue of the Vatican as a place for peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, without any preconditions. And this is very important, because the only chance to come to a diplomatic settlement would be to start totally fresh, without preconditions.

We have engaged in a letter-writing campaign in the meantime. We have more than 100 VIPs from I think 37 countries so far. We ask you to sign that letter to the Pope, that he sees that there is some support for this offer. [https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/2023/01/05/open-letter-to-pope-francis-from-political-and-social-leaders-support-call-for-immediate-peace-negotiations/] And then make international pressure on the United States, on the other NATO countries, that the population does not agree [with the war policy]. And frankly I think that at this point, the only thing which will help to stop this, is if you see, around the world, millions of people in the streets, and as you know, we are very, very far from that.

Now, one of the things which is absolutely mind-boggling, and actually scary, is to see how the political class in the United States and in most European countries, they forget everything: They forget what they said only less than a year ago. For example, Bundeskanzler, Chancellor Olaf Scholz from Germany, in February, shortly after the war in Ukraine started, he said, we can absolutely not send heavy weapons to Ukraine, because that has the danger to leading to World War III. And if you look at what has happened since, basically, step by step, more weapons have been sent: It went from just all kinds of weapons systems, to now we are already at Leigh tanks, the demand to send Leopard 2 attack tanks, fighter 10 tanks is mounting. And in the meantime, the United States and the British, and even Germany right now are training Ukrainian troops outside of Ukraine. There are reports by French journalists that U.S. military is very much present inside Ukraine. And just the recent development, where Macron sent last Wednesday [Jan. 4], AMX-10 RC light tanks—these are old tanks, they come from the 1980s—and as military experts in France told me, these are basically a reflection that the Ukrainians are meant to be cannon fodder, because they don’t give a very decisive margin of superiority to the Ukrainians; and now the Germans, immediately after Scholz spoke with Biden, they’re sending the Marder light tanks; the U.S. sends Bradley tanks. And basically, already that was denounced by Russia as being a major escalation.

Also there were three times already, deep into Russia territory, drone attacks; it’s not clear exactly from where they came, but that means also a major escalation if the war moves inside Russia. And yesterday, just shortly after the decision of the German, French and American tanks was becoming known, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the head of the military commission which coordinates all of these military activities, he sent out a message on his Telegram channel, in a language which makes your hair rising. He used language like “Nazi scum” which has grown in the West, making such decisions, and then, he announced that as of the beginning of this year, the Zirkon hypersonic missiles have been deployed off the coasts of the NATO countries. And that some of them would be close to the Potomac River, 100 km inside the coast—naturally, that’s Washington—and we had a previous report that these hypersonic missiles, which are Mach 9 and highly maneuverable, there is no missile defense system that can protect against them, that they are so quickly coming, let’s say if they’re off Washington somewhere in the Atlantic coast, that the U.S. President would not even have the time enter Air Force One. Other reports were that all U.S. cities would be nuclear contaminated within a very short period of time.

Now: That is not all decisive, because you have an incredible war deployment, and in a certain sense, if this goes, then we are looking at Armageddon.

Let’s look at how we got to this situation: In the meantime, because of the war propaganda, and because in times of war there is black propaganda, gray propaganda, and it’s now an effort to muscle all discussion that you are not allowed anymore to say that there is a prehistory which led to this. If you say that world history started on Feb. 23rd, you are already a “Putin agent.” There is a new action plan by the European Commission, an action plan against disinformation which starts with the very nice sentence that naturally, the freedom of expression is a guaranteed civil right; but then, the long text afterwards basically says that anything you are saying is regarded as coming from Russian trolls and makes you a Putin agent.

But the reality is, this war did not start on February 24. It was not an unprovoked military aggression by Putin, and it is also a complete lie to say that if Ukrainians are not winning on the battlefield, then Putin will take over all of Europe. I mean, it has reached a degree of hysteria which is unbelievable.

The war started with the idea that the Anglo-Americans, led by the British and the neocons, decided to create an unipolar world at the time when the Soviet Union disintegrated. And the whole problem is because they are intending to keep this unipolar world—despite the fact that it long has gone, it no longer exists! But basically, because of the policies which were called the PNAC, the Project for a New American Century, which was based on the “special relationship” between Great Britain and the United States; there were five NATO expansions eastward; you had the color revolutions, you had the policy of regime change. And the idea was, from the beginning, from 1991 (probably earlier), but in 1991 there was a study of the CIA which said that Russia had to be prevented from developing economically, because it had more strategic resources than the United States; it had better-skilled labor power; and therefore, if they would have access to scientific and technological progress and diversify from oil and gas, then they would become a competitor on the world market and that had to be prevented by all means: That policy existed in 1991!

It was continuously the basis of the policy. The West could live with Boris Yeltsin, as long as he was there because he was happily selling out Russia, leading to an absolute demographic collapse of Russia, losing 1 million people per year. And it really became completely different when Putin became President, and especially when he returned as President, and was moving to reinstall Russia as a world player. And that is the whole point.

Now, the rise of China has come as an additional factor, but the idea of an unipolar world is what is behind this war danger.

I cannot go for time reasons into the whole history, but another major stepping stone was the Maidan coup in 2014. It did not start with Russia “annexing” the Crimea, which is always said. This phase of the escalation started with the EU Association Agreement which then President Viktor Yanukovych, in the last moment realized he could not sign, because it would have given EU products free access to the Russian market and that was economically absolutely unacceptable; and it would have given NATO access to the Black Sea. So, when Yanukovych backed out of that, you had the Maidan coup, which Victoria Nuland bragged the pre-history was financed by $5 billion from the State Department. Then the Maidan coup was heavily infested with Bandera forces: To deny that that existed is absolutely ludicrous. And it was really then, the coup in Kiev, which forbade the Russian language—that’s why the people in Crimea held a referendum and decided to rejoin Russia.

The last straw was when, first Merkel, and then former French President François Hollande, for whatever reason, said that they had agreed to the Minsk Accords only to give Ukraine time to build up its military force and become strong enough. Now, I have my doubts as to why these people are saying this—one has to look at it very carefully. Minsk 1 and Minsk 2 were in a very difficult situation, and it could be that both France and Germany meant it seriously when they agreed in the Normandy Agreement to find a solution to the East Ukraine situation. It can be that Merkel, for sure, because she made the incredibly stupid mistake, to quit nuclear energy [after 2011] without having any replacement. Naturally, Germany was dependent on Russia gas. It can be that she was just trying to be in good faith with NATO now, and saying I didn’t mean it [Minsk] seriously, I tried to cheat on Putin the whole time. It can be that Hollande has very stupid domestic reasons—I can go through that if required also. In any case, if it’s true, it’s the most idiotic, it was the biggest betrayal; if it’s just a cover story, it’s the most idiotic stupidity.

The result of it is, that the Russians, and Putin and Lavrov and others, have said, correctly, if the West is lying like that, when can you believe them? Is there ever again going to be any word worth anything? And if we would come to a situation where we have to discuss a new world system, what is their word worth? The trust is zero, and that is where we are at right now.

Now, I should mention that you have a development which most people in the West have almost no inkling of. And that is that the continuous policy of sanctions against Russia has led to an enormous blowback. The fact that the seizure of $300 billion worth of Russian assets, the weaponization of the dollar, and sanctions and similar things, have led to a blowback, whereby many countries in the world, the majority of the Global South, are now moving to form an alternative system, because they think that a de-dollarization is the only way how they can survive.

As a result of all of these policies by the West, the trust in Europe is zilch; the fear of the United States is big, but the wish to survive on the part of the majority of the countries of the Global South is even bigger than that. So right now, you have a complete realignment in the world. You have, especially with the election of Lula as President of Brazil, the majority of Latin American countries want to work the BRICS. The BRICS have now 17 requests for membership, from Argentina, from Egypt, from Saudi Arabia, from Indonesia, from many other countries—17—and they represent the vast majority of the world population.

You have right now the BRICS-Plus, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and many organizations and countries from Africa, Latin America, and Asia which are in the process of forming a new economic system.

It is my absolute conviction that the only way how we will get out of this war situation, first of all, we have to stop the war in Ukraine: We have to have a diplomatic solution; that is why the Vatican initiative must step in, in the short term. But then, we need to think, how do we get out of this? And there, I think absolutely, as long as we stay in the realm of geopolitics, even the formation of another organization, like I described with the BRICS-Plus, is not sufficient; because if the United States and Europe are determined to prevent that from happening, war will be the consequence.

And therefore, I think we have to go back to the Peace of Westphalia idea, that we need an new international security and development architecture, which takes into account the security interest of every single country on the planet, and that includes, emphatically, Russia, China, the United States, and also Iran, North Korea, and whatever other country may be in question.

And then, we need to have a new paradigm, and a paradigm which starts with the sovereignty of every country, because sovereignty is a precondition for the participation of the individual in the self-government process. We need to concentrate on the vast problems of mankind: Eliminate poverty and hunger—2 billion people are in danger of starvation. We need to have a health system which allows people to have a full life, and not die prematurely. We need universal education. We need a credit system, because the financial system of the neoliberal system is about to blow out: We are, with the central banks, between a rock and a hard place. If they fight inflation by moving from many years of quantitative easing to quantitative tightening, you have the danger of a mass collapse of bankruptcies triggering a collapse, or a hyperinflationary blowout. But there is no third way. That’s why we need Glass-Steagall, we need a new credit system, we need a national bank in every country, and we need to invest in higher energy flux density production, to increase the productivity of the world economy, to accommodate all people living on this planet.

I have written Ten Principles for this to be discussed. [https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/2022/11/30/ten-principles-of-a-new-international-security-and-development-architecture/] The tenth principle I think is the most important: It is the idea that man is good, his nature is good, and that all evil in the world comes from a lack of development, and therefore can be overcome. I would encourage everybody to join in a discussion about how do we get out of this? Because, to stop the war is the first step, but, are we creative human beings, who can decide what is the order how we can live together in the 21st century, and hopefully the many millennia beyond.

I would like you to join this movement: We are going to try to build up more resistance to this war, and therefore, I’m very happy that Diane is announcing her campaign.

Thank you.

Scott Ritter, former UN Weapons Inspector in Iraq, delivers a stark assessment of the current strategic dangers facing the world.

Excerpt from a webinar by Diane Sare on January 8, 2023 Watch the full event https://rumble.com/v24xb2c-sare-for-senate-webinar-can-nuclear-war-be-avoided.html

Presentation by Steven Starr, a professor at the University of Missouri, former director of the MU Clinical Laboratory Science program

Excerpt from a webinar by Diane Sare on January 8, 2023 Watch the full event https://rumble.com/v24xb2c-sare-for-senate-webinar-can-nuclear-war-be-avoided.html

Helga Zepp-LaRouche at the Nov. 22 Schiller Institute conference, “Stop the Danger of Nuclear War Now; Third Seminar of Political and Social Leaders of the World,” offered the following ten principles, upon which a new global security and development architecture could be founded. She added in her Nov. 24 webcast, “These ideas are meant to be food for thought and a dialogue among all people concerned to find a basis for a world order guaranteeing the durable existence of the human species.”

The new paradigm which will be characteristic of the new epoch, and towards which the new global security and development architecture must be directed, therefore, must eliminate the concept of oligarchism for good, and proceed to organize the political order in such a way, that the true character of humanity as the creative species can be realized.

Therefore, I suggest that the following principles must be discussed and if agreed upon be realized. These ideas are meant to be food for thought and a dialogue among all people concerned to find a basis for a world order guaranteeing the durable existence of the human species.

First: The new International Security and Development Architecture must be a partnership of perfectly sovereign nation states, which is based on the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and the UN Charter.

Second: The absolute priority must be to alleviate poverty in every nation on the planet, which is easily possible, if the existing technologies are being used for the benefit of the common good.

Third: The life expectancy of all people living must be prolonged to the fullest potential by creating modern health systems in every country on the planet. This is also the only way how the present and future potential pandemics can be overcome or be prevented.

Fourth: Since mankind is the only creative species known so far in the universe, and given the fact that human creativity is the only source of wealth through the potentially limitless discovery of new universal principles, one of the main aims of the new International Security and Development Architecture must be providing access to universal education for every child and adult person living. The true nature of man is to become a beautiful soul, as Friedrich Schiller discusses this, and the only person who can fulfill that condition is the genius.

Fifth: The international financial system must be reorganized, so that it can provide productive credits to accomplish these aims. A reference point can be the original Bretton Woods system, as Franklin D. Roosevelt intended it, but was never implemented due to his untimely death, and the Four Laws proposed by Lyndon LaRouche. The primary aim of such a new credit system must be to increase dramatically the living standard of especially the nations of the Global South and of the poor in the Global North.

Sixth: The new economic order must be focused on creating the conditions for modern industries and agriculture, starting with the infrastructural development of all continents to eventually be connected by tunnels and bridges to become a World Land-Bridge.

Seventh: The new global security architecture must eliminate the concept of geopolitics by ending the division of the world into blocs. The security concerns of every sovereign nation must be taken into account. Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction must be immediately banned. Through international cooperation, the means must be developed to make nuclear weapons technologically obsolete, as it was originally intended by the proposal which became known as the SDI, suggested by LaRouche and made as an offer to the Soviet Union by President Reagan.

Eighth: In former times, one civilization at one corner of the world could go under, and the rest of the world would only find out years later, due to the length of distances and the time needed for travel. Now, for the first time, because of nuclear weapons, pandemics, the internet, and other global effects, mankind is sitting in one boat. Therefore, a solution to the existential threat to humanity cannot be found with the help of secondary or partial arrangements, but the solution must be found on the level of that higher One, which is more powerful than the Many. It requires the thinking on the level of Coincidentia Oppositorum, the Coincidence of Opposites, of Nicholas of Cusa.

Ninth: In order to overcome the conflicts arising out of quarreling opinions, which is how empires have maintained control over the underlings, the economic, social and political order has to be brought into cohesion with the lawfulness of the physical universe. In European philosophy this was discussed as the being in character with natural law, in Indian philosophy as cosmology, and in other cultures appropriate notions can be found. Modern sciences like space science, biophysics or thermonuclear fusion science will increase the knowledge of mankind about this lawfulness continuously. A similar cohesion can be found in the great works of classical art in different cultures.

Tenth: The basic assumption for the new paradigm is, that man is fundamentally good and capable to infinitely perfect the creativity of his mind and the beauty of his soul, and being the most advanced geological force in the universe, which proves that the lawfulness of the mind and that of the physical universe are in correspondence and cohesion, and that all evil is the result of a lack of development, and therefore can be overcome.

A new world economic order is emerging, involving the vast majority of the countries of the Global South. The European nations and the U.S. must not fight this effort, but by joining hands with the developing countries, cooperate to shape the next epoch of the development of the human species to become a renaissance of the highest and most noble expressions of creativity!

Let us therefore create an international movement of World Citizens, who work together to shape the next phase in the evolution of mankind, the new epoch! World Citizens of all countries, unite!

Commenting on the joint declaration issued today by NATO and the EU that they are preparing to aggressively counter what they called Russia’s “brutal” aggression and China’s “growing assertiveness,” Helga Zepp-LaRouche asked “Who authorized them” to form a “Global NATO,” which now puts everyone at risk? There was no vote by any nation, she continued, no public debate — this is exactly why no supra-national organization should have so much power.

Given that there is a growing awareness that the Ukraine situation will be “settled on the battlefield” and not through diplomacy — which increases the risk of nuclear war — it is essential that we catalyze public awareness that we are at the last moments before nuclear annihilation could be unleashed. She referred to the important dialogues of the last days, especially the January 10 round table on the implications of Merkel’s Minsk lies, as an example of what must be brought into public awareness.

She called on all viewers to back our initiatives, including signing and circulating the letter endorsing the proposal from the Pope to use the Vatican as a venue for negotiations, as a way of provoking necessary public response. To succeed, it is now necessary “to change attitudes [of citizens] in the western nations.”

• Ray McGovern, Co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS),
• Scott Ritter, former UN Weapons Inspector in Iraq,
• Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute and Chair of Bürgerrechtsbewegung
  Solidarität (BüSo),
• General (ret.) Dominique Delawarde, former liasson officer of France with the U.S. Army
  Higher Officers‘ School at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas
• Colonel (ret.) Alain Corvez, advisor on security questions,
  and others.
  
  The surprising acknowledgments by former Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel and former
  French President Francois Hollande, that they supported the Minsk Process only as a
  subterfuge to buy time for the arming and training of Ukraine, represents a breaking point. This
  Minsk Agreement acquired the character of international law with UN Resolution 2202. How do
  the representatives of the “rules-based order” deal with international law?
  
  For years they have repeated the mantra that the sanctions against Russia could be lifted only if
  the Minsk Agreement was to be fully implemented. But if the conclusion of this agreement was
  nothing but lip service, what was their intention?
  
  What sense does any agreement with representatives of the West make, if it must be assumed
  that they will do what they say only if it serves to carry out their agenda? What is necessary to
  restore trust in international political relations? Is that even possible?
  
  The speakers named above will discuss the dangers of the strategic situation, and the
  alternatives.
  

Join the Zoom meeting
Meeting ID: 853 1094 4353
Password: 872930

December 20, 2022

His Holiness, Pope Francis
Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City

Your Holiness,

Greetings from the grouping of Political and Social Leaders of the World to Stop the Danger of Nuclear War, initiated by the Schiller Institute in Germany.

We have met on three occasions to discuss the impending danger of nuclear war and global Armageddon resulting from the war between Ukraine and Russia, with a view to taking whatever action necessary to stop the war and to bring peace. On 17 November 2022, our group issued a Declaration to Stop the Threat of Nuclear War, signed by legislators and former legislators from Latin America, the United States, Europe, the Caribbean, and Africa.

In that declaration, we highlighted Your Holiness’s call for a negotiated, peaceful solution. We further welcome Your Holiness’s offer of the Vatican as a possible neutral ground for peace talks – without any preconditions – between Russia and Ukraine. Our group wishes to support this initiative in any way we can, including gathering together all who wish for peace and the prevention of nuclear war.

We note that others in Europe and the United States have also offered venues for the Russian and Ukrainian leadership to negotiate peace. We believe it is urgent to unify all such efforts into a globe-spanning movement to bring resolution to this conflict, taking into consideration the valid security interests of all parties.

In that spirit, we hereby sign this letter to indicate that support, and call on other political and social leaders around the world, regardless of differences in ideology or religious faith, to add their signatures as well.

We intend to convene a Fourth Seminar of Political and Social Leaders of the World to Stop the Danger of Nuclear War in early 2023 to further this push for peace and to stop the danger of nuclear war, and we extend an invitation to a representative from the Vatican to attend.