General

Join the initiatives of Helga Zepp-LaRouche and the Schiller Institute to urgently mobilize for an immediate ceasefire, a comprehensive Middle East peace conference, a two-state solution, and the implementation of LaRouche’s Oasis Plan.

A series of diplomatic meetings occurred yesterday, with more scheduled for today and the coming days ahead, of leaders seeking a strategy to find an exit from the vicious cycle of violence, which did not begin on October 7, but has proceeded continuously since the British left Palestine in 1948. An agreement for an extended ceasefire is a crucial first step, which could be enforced by the U.S., which would be supported by most nations.

A two-day extension of the “Humanitarian Pause“ was announced Monday evening, Nov. 27, thereby extending the pause until Thursday morning, Nov. 30. The question lingering in front of the world, however, remains: Can this temporary pause be turned into a real, lasting peace? And what’s required to actually achieve that?

Nov. 29 will see the convening of a high-level meeting of United Nations Security Council in New York, to be specially chaired by China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi. In addition, members of the Arab League and Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC), whose foreign ministers have recently visited most members of the Security Council, will be in attendance, likely making the event another step forward in the flurry of global diplomatic activity underway.

In discussion with associates on Nov 27, Helga Zepp-LaRouche reminded people that this conflict in Gaza, as with the war in Ukraine, are pawns of today’s reigning unipolar world order, and are thus being pushed in ways to further a much larger geopolitical agenda. This is also why it is so dangerous, because as the system continues to collapse before the eyes of the world, there are some who are willing to go to the end of the Earth to maintain their control—even if that includes world war.

Therefore, the United States and other Western nations must be brought to see other nations, particularly rising powers such as Russia and China, not as threats to “our system” but as allies in an effort to improve the whole world. Those who are stuck in a geopolitical confrontation are like “robots,” Zepp-LaRouche said, “they have no idea of culture nor of justice,” and they have no respect for the cultures of other nations.

“It is high time that the United States goes back to its foreign policy of John Quincy Adams, and that Europe likewise really starts to overcome the remnants of colonialism,” she continued. These underlying axioms are the biggest obstacle for Western societies’ ability to see a solution out of this crisis, Zepp-LaRouche said: “They do not really take into consideration the fact that the Global South has a fundamental right to overcome poverty, and that their decision, which was reinforced by China’s rise and the economic power of China … that they have the absolute right to control their own resources, increase the value chain in their own countries by reprocessing and the creation of semi-finished and finished products, and by building up real, full-fledged economies in their own country to increase the living standard of the entire population.”

Therefore, the way to shift the world today is to “get Europe and the United States to really understand that cooperation with the Global South, and not confrontation, is the easy way to get out of this whole war danger and establish a new paradigm among the nations of the world.”

The principles that are the key to mutual security based on common economic development were exemplified by Lyndon LaRouche in his Oasis Plan. These principles can be applied globally within the framework of a New Security and Development Architecture and the underlying Ten Principles of Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

Join the Schiller Institute in these crucial days and help build a mass movement for peace through development.

Speakers

• Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder and Chairwoman, Schiller institute
• Ray McGovern, co-founder, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
• Questions and Answers

A Nov. 5 article titled “Israel Minister Suspended after Calling Nuking Gaza an Option” Politico reported that “Israel’s Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu was suspended indefinitely after he said in an interview that dropping a nuclear bomb on the Gaza Strip was ‘one of the possibilities,’ the government announced on Sunday.”

It would be supremely irresponsible to {not} take this threat seriously. Already, between 25,000 and 30,000 tons of bombs have been detonated by the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza since October 7. This far exceeds the bomb tonnage dropped in the most lethal air raids of the Second World War, including Hamburg (4 raids, 9,000 tons) Dresden(4 raids, 3900 tons) and Tokyo (1,665 tons.) War crimes are afoot.

Türkiye’s Anadolou Agency reported October 12 that “The Israeli Air Force (IAF) said …that it has dropped ‘about 6,000 bombs against Hamas targets’ in Gaza since Saturday’s attack, which nearly matches the number of bombs the US used in Afghanistan in one year. The Washington Post, citing Marc Garlasco, a military adviser at the Dutch organization PAX for Peace, reported that Israel is ‘dropping in less than a week what the US was dropping in Afghanistan in a year, in a much smaller, much more densely populated area, where mistakes are going to be magnified.’” War crimes are afoot.

Has the 1930s era of publicly advocated and justified war crimes returned? Has the decision been made, contrary to ratified UN resolutions, to the 1993 Oslo Accords, to the Geneva Conventions and the Nuremberg code—as well as to the “mutually assured destruction” of thermonuclear weapons—to reintroduce mass murder in warfare as a “legitimate” practice?

“According to the Gazan Ministry of Health, as of Nov 7, 2023, 10,328 people in the Gaza Strip have been killed, including 4237 children, 2719 women, and 631 older people. In addition, 25,956 people have been injured and 2450 are missing, including 1350 children, mostly covered by some of the 262,000 damaged housing units. So far, 192 medical staff have been killed,”reported the Nov.17 edition of the British medical journal, The Lancet. These deaths—real people with real aspirations, not “collateral damage”—cannot be either necessary, right, or justified.

Consider a recent interview given to the BBC by senior British MP and Secretary of State for Defence Grant Shapps, when asked if he believes Israel is acting disproportionately in its military actions against Gaza: “I think it’s kind of forgotten that in war, very sadly, people lose their lives. When Britain bombed Dresden, 35,000 people apparently lost their lives. People die in war.” Then, recall the infamous statement reported by correspondent Peter Arnett on February 7, 1968, regarding the American bombing of the Vietnamese village of Ben Tre: “‘It became necessary to destroy the town to save it,’ a U.S. major said Wednesday….. regardless of civilian casualties, they must bomb and shell the once placid river city of 35,000 to rout the Viet Cong forces.” Same war crimes, different country, different decade, different people, different “unassailable righteous cause.” Are we all going to stand for this all over again?

When, in 1962, U.S. President John F. Kennedy was pressured by hardliners within his own administration to launch a military invasion of Cuba “ in defense of America,” after the Soviet Union had placed ballistic missiles there—missiles which, unknown to Americans at the time, were armed with nuclear warheads—he refused, and saved the world from nuclear war, perhaps at the cost of his own life. Like Israel’s prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, assassinated November 4,1995 by Israeli extremists that opposed Rabin’s “Oslo Accords”collaboration with Yassr Arafat for peace in Gaza and the West Bank, JFK had the courage to change America’s axioms. In his June 10, 1963 American University speech, he proposed this:”Let us examine our attitude toward peace itself. Too many of us think it is impossible. Too many think it unreal. But that is a dangerous, defeatist belief. It leads to the conclusion that war is inevitable – that mankind is doomed – that we are gripped by forces we cannot control. We need not except that view. Our problems are man-made – therefore, they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings.”

On November 26, at 11 a.m. EST, International Peace Coalition members Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, and Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst and founder of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, will present an alternative to madness, and call on the world to make a shift towards sanity, on the brink of annihilation. Following their presentations and discussion, the film, “8:15 Hiroshima: From Father to Daughter,” directed by J.R. Heffelfinger and written and produced by Dr. Akiko Mikamo, will be shown. It is a first-hand account of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima City by U.S. forces. Dr. Mikamo will be available for discussion at the film’s conclusion.

The Children of Gaza

Inspired by “SONG OF SONGS”

Iakovos Kambanellis
Mikis Theodorakis

Vocalist: Jen Pearl
Pianist: Malene Robinson

The horrors perpetrated in Gaza place all humanity on trial. Urgently, the voice of innocents beckons us to muster the moral fitness to bring the bloodletting to an  immediate halt. Mobilize for a Ceasefire, Now!Support the mobilization for Implementing a Global Approach To Ending the Cycle of Violence in Southwest Asia

 Following the international conference, organized by the Ibn-e-Sina Research & Development Center’s in Kabul in early November, on the reconstruction of Afghanistan, a group of researchers launched the following petition:

We, the undersigned, researchers and experts in the domains of the history of civilizations, cultural heritage, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, and many other fields, and other enlightened citizens of the world, in Afghanistan, Syria, Russia, China, and many other countries, launch the following call.

1) We regret profoundly 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 their 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.

2) We request particular attention to the case of Afghanistan. Its neighboring countries, national and international institutions, and countries involved in international conventions for the protection of cultural and natural heritage are committed to cooperation in the field of guarding cultural heritage sites and artifacts and preventing their smuggling and destruction. Therefore, it is expected, that in the current situation, they will fully play their role in the protection of Afghanistan’s cultural heritage in accordance with international laws and conventions. However, 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. Undoubtedly, the non-recognition of the Afghan government has dimmed the attention of cultural institutions. Considering the above, we expect these international institutions to renew their full support to protect both the tangible and the intangible cultural heritage of Afghanistan.

3) We regret that 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.

4) Therefore, we call on the international community, to end immediately this form of “collective punishment,” which creates suffering and injustice, promotes ignorance, and endangers humanity’s capacity for mutual respect and understanding.

The progress of scientific knowledge, in a positive climate permitting all to share it, is by its very nature beneficial to each and to all and to the very foundation of a true peace.