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


Category Archives

Schiller Institute Press Release: NATO Escalates for World War; Military and Foreign Affairs Experts Release Proposal: ‘Ending the War with a Negotiated Peace’

The following statement was released by the Schiller Institute internationally for immediate mass circulation on September 25.

NATO Escalates for World War; Military and Foreign Affairs Experts Release Proposal:
‘Ending the War with a Negotiated Peace’

All reports indicate that President Biden intends to send U.S. Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) long-range missiles to Ukraine, with Germany then moving in lockstep, sending Taurus long-range cruise missiles to Kiev, capable of hitting 500 km deep into Russian territory. This escalation by NATO could very well bring NATO into direct warfighting with Russia and—by design or miscalculation—into a nuclear world war.

The Schiller Institute is today circulating worldwide an in-depth and well-thought-out peace proposal first published in Europe by four renowned German experts, titled, “Ending the War with a Negotiated Peace”. The proposal, first published on August 28, 2023 is signed by Prof. Dr. Peter Brandt, Prof. Dr. Hajo Funke, Gen. Harald Kujat (ret.), and Prof. Dr. H.c. Horst Teltschik.

Peter Brandt is an historian and the son of former Chancellor Willy Brandt; Hajo Funke is a leading professor of political science at the Free University of Berlin; Harald Kujat is the former Bundeswehr Chief of Staff (2000-2002) and former Chairman of the Military Committee of NATO (2002-2005); and Horst Teltschik is a former top diplomat who operated out of the chancellery of Chancellor Helmut Kohl at the time of the Iron Curtain’s fall, and subsequently became president of the Munich Security Conference.

We urge you to study the proposal linked above and circulate it to national heads of government in both the North and the Global South, to all media, and to local and regional governments, as a step in the direction of the kinds of proposals that are urgently needed.

The danger of nuclear war grows by the hour. Act with The Schiller Institute to stop it.

Greetings to International Peace Day Rally at the United Nations

Below are the greetings sent in for the Humanity For Peace “Special Musical Operation” at the United Nations on International Peace Day.

Twenty-four hours of nonviolence and cease fire is the least we can ask for at this crucial time in our shared work for world peace.  Let this day of commitment inspire us to make every day a day of peace.

Frank Kartheiser, Worcester. Ma. Catholic Workers Movement.

September 21st is International Peace Day!  Today we a are faced with growing tensions around the world from Europe and Asia to the Middle East and Africa.  Many of these tensions include the involvement or support of Great Powers and have brought us perhaps to closest to an open nuclear conflict.  Let us take time this day to step back from the potential abyss, to think, to respect each other, to show leadership and true diplomacy, to resolve our disagreements and work together in joint collaboration for the betterment of all.

Earl Rasmussen,  Lt Colonel (ret) U.S. Army, business consultant.

“The 17.5 million Guatemalans support peace in the world and the proposal made by Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche of the Schiller Institute, where she proposes the CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW JUST WORLD ECONOMIC ORDER!”

RAÚL ANÍBAL MARROQUÍN CASASOLA, proud member of the IPC and Humanity for Peace, and Coordinator of “The Pupil of Heaven” Observatory for Peace in Guatemala


“Brothers of the nations of this shared world.

“Today, September 21, we join in a fraternal and unanimous call of solidarity for peace. In the midst of turbulence, discord and global conflict, we raise our voices to reaffirm our commitment to peace…

“Peace, in its essence, is the fabric that binds humanity together. It is the path to coexistence, justice and well-being for all. But in these times of uncertainty and divisions, it is vital to remember that peace is not an automatic gift; it must be built through the efforts and dedication of all the peoples of the world.

“We declare that peace is not just the absence of war, but the presence of justice, social equality and mutual understanding….

The five signers on behalf of

Central American and Caribbean Critical Thought proclaim the need to

Foster Empathy.

Resolve Conflicts Peacefully, rather than by violence and confrontation.

Promote a Culture of Peace through Education:

Combat Social Inequality and Injustice: We pledge to work together to eradicate poverty, discrimination, social and economic injustice.

Protect the environment: and

Support those vulnerable peoples who suffer the consequences of conflict and displacement, to alleviate their suffering.

We affirm that peace is not a utopian dream, but an attainable goal. We must remember that each of us has a role to play in the quest that together we can weave a more peaceful world for present and future generations. Peace is not just a word, but a collective action. Let us raise our hands and hearts to be peacemakers…

For Peace, today and always!

Signing on behalf of Central American and Caribbean Critical Thought are

from Nicaragua: Bolívar Téllez Castellón, Professor, and Fernando Vargas, editor of the Newspaper Socialist Voices;

and from El Salvador’s Universidad de El Salvador:

José Guillermo Campos, Chairman of the Department of Philosophy;

Luis Alberto Guzman, Chair of Marxism and Methodology of Materialism; and

Ivis Barrera, Master in Human Rights and Education for Peace.


Rejoice and stand together, for we are winning in this struggle for humanity and for peace. This struggle is far from over, but we are winning!

I grew up in former Yugoslavia and lived through the wars of succession which broke out in the early 1990s. The experience was almost surreal as we saw the society polarize almost from one day to the next, from a firm belief that war was unthinkable and impossible to fighting the war as the society’s central obsession. That experience made me so worried about a repeat of this social transformation in the buildup of war between Russia and the west that in 2017 I published a book in which I tried to warn about it and call attention to those parts of the ruling establishment in the west who were deliberately dragging us into this World War 3 scenario. They were planning the big wiar, that much was clear. But what they did not and could not plan with is us, humanity, simply rejecting war and demanding peace.

There is no question that Russia was absolutely provoked into its intervention in Ukraine. When President Putin launched the special military operation, the west responded with a total embargo on all Russian sources of information and with heavy-handed censorship of any pro-Russian views. Recall, some universities in the west even cancelled Russian literature classes, and some theaters cancelled performances of Russian composers like Tchaikovsky. 

They wanted to make sure that the western narrative about that conflict couldn’t be challenged and that we all embraced the belief that Russia’s aggression was unprovoked and that the collective west was valiantly standing up for democracy, freedom and the rule of law. They wanted us to fear and loathe Russia and to give our consent for that all-out World War 3. But that didn’t happen.

Instead, it became clear that behind the facade of unity kept up by the officialdom and corporate media, a silent majority in the west rejected the official narrative. I encountered a number of informal polls in social media where a large number of respondents expressed very contrary views – allow me to share some of them with you.

On 31 December last year, Twitter account NovElection 2022 simply asked, “Which side are you on? Russia or Ukraine?” Out of the nearly 37,000 people who responded, 78.8% said that they were on Russia’s side!

On 24 January this year, Chase Geiser asked on Twitter, “Which would you rather see win? Russia or Ukraine?” Out of the 15,670 votes, 73.6% said that they wanted Russia to win.

On 2 February David Vance asked, “…if you had to choose between Putin and Zelensky, which would it be?” Out of nearly 41,000 respondents, 77.2% preferred Vladimir Putin.

A few weeks later, George Galloway asked, “Is the west to blame for the Ukraine war?” Out of more than 15,000 respondents, 95% said, yes – they thought that the west was indeed to blame for the war.

In spite of the very large numbers of respondents, some people might object that these are not scientific polls. Well, let me share some further evidence that these polls are broadly correct. As I learned from a NATO official who shared this information with me, NATO itself has been monitoring public mood among member nations very closely. They found that in most Eastern European nations, as many as 3 out of 4 people sympathise with the Russian side in this conflict. In countries like France, Spain, Italy and Belgium 2 out of 3 individuals sympathise with Russia. And when the French polling organization IFOP (Institut Français d’Opinion Publique) asked the average Frenchman about their views on the war only two weeks from its start in February 2022, they found that 52% of the French people believed Russian justifications for war.

The silent majority in the west might indeed be silent, but it seems nevertheless to be a very large majority. That majority is us, people who have awakened and opened our eyes wide to what is truly going on in the world. The war between Russia and Ukraine did not escalate into a nuclear World War 3. For that we can thank the patience and restraint of the Russian Federation, but we should also celebrate the political awakening of the populations of western countries who have rejected the official narrative and the relentless demonization of Russia and her leadership. By withholding our consent for an all-out war against Russia we may have prevented that war and preserved peace. We have not yet prevailed in our struggle for peace, but we are prevailing so do rejoice and stand together! It may just be that we are the ones we’ve been waiting for and thus far we’ve come through!

Alex Krainer, Blogger, author, financial analyst

We need a global move towards de-escalation and away from the accelerating militarisation of international politics. Humanity is becoming increasingly trapped in a security dilemma. The Political West has been negligent in understanding the security concerns of others, thus prompting responses that only escalate the conflict. We must break this cycle, otherwise we will be on the increasingly slippery path to catastrophe. There is another way, and that is a return to the founding principles of the United Nations, above all sovereign internationalism – whereby sovereign states commit to work together to resolve the common problems facing humanity. This is the vision that inspired the creation of the UN in the first place, and we must now resist the attempt by those who wish to substitute the agenda of peace and development with their own agenda of endless deterrence and militarism. The Global South has had enough of the interminable conflicts provoked by the attempts of the Political West to maintain its pre-eminence. Its voice is demanding to be heard, and it is a view that many in the Global North share. On that basis a new peace and development movement is taking shape. There is an alternative, and we are part of it, reaching across continents and cultures. That is the only way forwards, if we are to have a future at all.

Prof Sakwa is the recently retired Emeritus Professor of Russian and European politics at the University of Kent in the UK. He is the author of many books on Russia, and a widely read book in 2022, Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands. 

The Pillars of Peace

The philosophical position which says the engagement of war is always inevitable, is contrary to the concept of peace. God’s imparting of peace is stated in John 14:27 where it says “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.” This indicates that peace is in conflict with a troubled heart. It also indicates that God desires us to be at peace with one another at all cost. That cost of war is troubled spirits of people who are engaged directly or indirectly with the actions of war. Therefore I would like to offer the pillars of peace that help us to avoid physical conflicts of war. These pillars are reason, understanding and temperance.

The pillar of reason helps avoid conflict because it helps to exhaust all avenues that lead to peace. When the wheels turn to war, reason should turn also, following the war and standing in the midst ready to continue talks of reason and peace.

The pillar of understanding is a two-way street. Both sides of a conflict should be open to make all attempts to understand the stance and feelings of the opposite side from themselves. Somehow wearing the shoes of someone else helps us to be selfless and seek to show empathy. This is the position of understanding even when we do not understand. In other words, understanding should be sought before we act on the emotions of anger and control. This leads us to our final pillar of temperance.

Temperance is simply self-restraint or self-control. This suggests that self-control over control of others is our main line of defense against war. The age-old Biblical principle found in Luke 6:31 says “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” No country desires to be drawn into war or to be the provocateur of war. Every time a war begins there is a first shot is fired which begins the conflict. It is at that moment that temperance should be exercised because remember the time to talk about peace is before a war begins. That talk must not just be had with one another, but also with the self-individual or self-country to maintain the self-control.

It is my hope that the talk of peace in relation to reason, understanding and temperance would help avoid the need for war. And in the event of conflict beginning, these would be tools utilized in the midst of conflict to minimize the impact and longevity of the conflict.

Rev. Dr. Terri Strong, Senior Pastor at Mt. Sinai AME Church, Arlington, TN

On this day while we commemorate International Day of Peace we ought to

reflect and point out root causes of Wars and aggressions that challenge

the humanity establishing the peace across the globe. We learn from past

and contemporary history that some of the reasons have been; superiority

complexes and difference of social and civic classes, racism, racial and

National arrogance, thirst of power over others and the most importantly

grabbing the material resources and economic exploitation.

Today the economic exploitation and deprivation is the main and central

root cause of Wars and military aggressions. We need to struggle and urge

that world global financial Groups such as World Bank, IMF and WTO

reconsider the terms and conditions that keeps under-developed countries

oppressed, continue to choke their economies and inflated debts.

International community of Nations need to work together in the spirit of

collective human progress and establish peace on the principals of equality

and respect for Human lives. The body of world nations shall mediate

between parties bringing the parties on the negotiating table.

American Muslims and Muslims across the globe strongly support any and all

moral and material efforts to bring the lasting peace in this planet.

Muhammad Salim Akhtar
National Director American Muslim Alliance

Pax Christi UpState New York totally supports the economic uplifting of all 

peoples and nations. BRICS, now greatly expanded, will have the natural and 

human resources to end poverty in the most populated regions of the world.

All nations, North and South must rally behind this just and egalitarian plan.

Jack Gilroy, Pax Christi & multiple peace and justice organizations

How Can Peace, Toppled by War, Nonviolently Reclaim

the Golden Age Mission?



In English:

In Russian:


          Erasmus of Rotterdam, a Dutch philosopher, theologian and humanist, more than 500 years ago wrote the world-famous “Complaint of Peace, Expelled and Defeated Everywhere” o­n Latin language: “Querela Pacis undique gentium ejectae profligataeque”, [s.l.], 1517, which became the pacifism humanistic pillar. But over 5 centuries, the situation with peace has practically not changed, if it has not become worse under the humanity and nature in nuclear Armageddon threat of complete incineration.

          Peace remains today, as before, an outcast “everywhere expelled and defeated” by war, nullified in all infrastructural vectors of all society spheres. “The expelled and defeated peace” today is its science zero and its academies. This is its schools and universities zero. This is its professional personnel zero, if you don’t count its spontaneous and sporadic amateur-pacifists. This is its material and technical base zero. This is funding zero for it, with zero peacemaking governments and parties that would not o­nly in words but also in practice, assert peace, creating all the necessary, permanent infrastructure for it. The most governments and parties frankly do not want peace, which prevents them from the war profiting and self-establishing themselves. Others want peace but do nothing real for it, do not know what to do and do not want to listen to those who know HOW to achieve true peace and not just another temporary truce that has filled all of history instead of true peace. The governments do not know true, eternal peace, out of ignorance recognizing as peace any temporary truce, any respite between wars.

          Unlike peace, from its gaping zero infrastructurewar today is provided with an excellent, rich infrastructure of resources in abundance. It is a military science started by Adam von Bülow since 1799, more than three centuries ago, and equipped today with hundreds of military academies in all countries. These are priority budget and private investments in the war and arms race, amounting to trillions of currencies of all lears. These are thousands of military schools and universities around the world. These are hundreds of millions of professional armed forces and paramilitary forces, the total number of which is bashfully kept silent in all sources. This is a countless and innumerable material and technical, primarily weapons, military platform with thousands of military bases and an endlessly accelerating arms race. This is practically all, 99%, of governments and parties in the world that openly or silently, under o­ne or another plausible pretext, serve the god of war. Now, the reigning war left to rogue-peace o­nly o­ne day a year, September 21, giving it a meager mercy-alms to remember, talk about, forget about again and return to itself for the rest days captured by war o­n subsequent years.

          With similar ratio of zero infrastructure of the rogue peace-life and 100% infrastructure of the reigning war-death-mass murder, brought to 100% nuclear, scientific genocide and ecocide, true peace will never be established o­n Earth, not in any new 500 years, if first it is not finally killed by the war along with all of humanity and its o­nly planet.

          Where, when and HOW can the humanity true, eternal peace come from and BY WHOM be established not in empty endless appeals and pacifist wishes but really, practically and tangibly in the priority peacemaking infrastructure in all spheres of every country and nation? This possibility and foundation are laid in social genetics, in the eternal actors of humanity substance, discovered by Mahatma Gandhi in 1927 in its “varna-spherons”. In prehistoric times, they provided India with a “golden age” of prosperity and world cultural leadership and will create it for the future of humanity, when it masters the Gandhian science of spherons, the peacemaking science of spheronics. The Golden Age, for all its utopianism, in historical examples like India, was “golden” o­nly thanks to the kingdom of peace, which is real as the o­nly sociogenetic way of life for people and whole humanity.

          The initial, fundamental pillars of this science, based o­n the Gandhian eternal actors of the true peace – spherons, ensuring the humanity survival as genetically peacemaking “mole of history”, in the form of an initial system of eight structural macro-sociological laws. They were first theoretically formulated, historically substantiated and statistically verified by world statistics in the GGHA during 18 years of hit scientific innovative research. Unfortunately, they remained unheard by anyone who could provide the development of this science with resources.

          The results of scientific research of the Gandhian spherons are presented in many publications in different languages, of which the last two, the most concise and generalizing, should be mentioned, presented o­n their paired banner:


          Their scientific, fundamental conclusion: no o­ne partial, class or national actor is capable to provide true, eternal and global peace. o­nly the humanity spherons can provide it covering all people from birth to death and acting o­n every social object and ensuring its peaceful life. Without the peace science, without its schools, academies and universities, there can be no peace. It can o­nLY begin since the OBJECTIVE, SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF PEACE, o­ne, necessary and binding for all people and nations, like Newton’s law. Without the peace science and its infrastructure, peace cannot begin. This requires, for the start, for the experiment, a meager investment of $2 million, which we, the GGHA, offer to the newly born consolidated historical actor of peace – BRICS+, which unites the global South, which makes up the majority of humanity. No other historical actor of true peace is visible today.

          There is no better purpose for the International Day of Peace than to realize this simple, basic truth: “WHERE DOES TRUE PEACE START?” that will trigger the conscious construction of its entire systemic and global infrastructure. Everything else, as they say, is “All Is Vanity and Vexation of Spirit” for peace, with which the past is filled but in which the true peace grains were born and which are integrated by spheronics. o­nly with this fundamental science will the rogue-peace revive its and the Divine providence “Golden Age” mission for the humanity.


         With the hope of understanding and recognizing this basic simple truth for peace,


Dr. Leo Semashko, o­n behalf of 750 coauthors of the Gandhian “Spherons Global True Peace Megascience”, spheronics during 18 years,

Philosopher, macro sociologist and peacemaker from the spherons harmony,

GGHA Founder (2005) and Honorary President,

Saint Petersburg, Russia


Skype: leo.semahko,



Dr. Leo Semashko, Founder and Honorary President, Gandhian Global Harmony Association

Open Letter to Heads of State at the United Nations General Assembly — You Must Act to Preserve World Peace!

by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute

Who can deny that the protection of World Peace is the most important obligation of governments? Two World Wars in the 20th century, and the dropping of two nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, brought death and suffering to those affected countries, clearly unimaginable by many leaders and politicians today.

But never has the entire existence of mankind been in greater danger than today. The strategic war between the entire West and Russia over Ukraine has come close to a military stalemate, and that leaves only two options: either an escalation which threatens the use of nuclear weapons, or the immediate end of the war through diplomatic negotiations!

If new levels of lethal weapons, such as Taurus cruise missiles and nuclear capable F-35 stealth bombers are deployed, as now planned, it threatens to lead to a Europeanization of the war, and beyond. If it comes to a global nuclear war, mankind will end in the ensuing 10-years of nuclear winter, as will virtually all life on the planet end with it.

Where other than the UN General Assembly should this be raised? The heads of state participating in this session of this unique institution represent all nations in the world, and must address this existential danger. When the present organization of the world has led to the danger of the extinction of civilization, then that organization must be changed! The world needs a new international security and development architecture, which takes into account the security and development needs of every single country on earth. Such a new architecture must create conditions that protect and nourish the lives of all people, and protect the potential of every person as a creative individual. This means not only people living today, but also the lives of future generations!

The world is presently experiencing an epochal change. The period of approximately 600 years of colonialism is coming to an end and is being replaced with a new world economic system that will allow life with dignity for all. The realization of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the largest infrastructure and development program in the history of mankind, has created the conditions in which more and more countries can overcome poverty and underdevelopment. The recent expansion of the BRICS, in Johannesburg, South Africa, to which now around 40 additional countries are in the process of applying for membership, and subsequent conferences in St. Petersburg, Jakarta, New Delhi and Vladivostok have demonstrated the breathtaking speed, with which a new system is emerging. In addition, the efforts to create new credit mechanisms for development, such as the BRICS New Development Bank (NDB) now becoming the “great bank of the Global South,” are welcomed and necessary.

But as of now the danger of the world separating into two blocs has not yet been overcome, and such a separation would continue the danger of the same kind of geopolitical division that was the cause of the world wars in the 20th Century. Therefore, there is this urgent appeal to the countries of the Global North, that they must support the aspiration of the Global Majority to establish a just new world economic order for all!

This moment in history represents a greater challenge and chance than the end of the Cold War, to create a better world. Let us not miss that unique chance!

Join our Chorus on International Peace Day! Live Dialogue with Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in a live dialogue on September 20 to discuss! Send in your questions early to

Fred Wills Address at UNGA Sept 8 1975

Call for New International Economic Order 


Mr. President,

   One year ago in this very forum there were articulated the Declaration on the Establishment of the New International Economic Order and a Programme of Action to implement it. These were adopted at the Sixth Special Session and were followed by the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties promulgated at the 29th regular session of the United Nations. Thus was provided a compendious mandate for the dismantling of the old structures that have proved inadequate and the construction of an entirely new system more responsive to the needs and hopes of the poor and disadvantaged.

   The allegedly sterile debate as to whether or not a new international economic order is required has already resulted in the presentation of far-reaching proposals which it would be our clear duty to evaluate in our efforts to arrive at a global consensus.

   It is, therefore, with great pleasure, Mr. President, that my delegation views your election as President of this session. Your long standing and unswerving commitment to the solution of the problems which confront us is well-known and rightly admired.


   Mr. President, in four days time we conclude our deliberations and negotiations. So far we have been encouraged by the absence of confrontation and the minimal resort to declamation and diatribe. But we must face squarely the danger of stalemate. We must not let the mantle of progress descend on extravagant ideas aimed at refurbishing tired and worn out institutions. On the other hand we must not allow the absence of novelty to be the central thrust of our objection and the focus of our criticism.

   The hour is critical. The expectations are that we will agree on concrete steps that will represent a real advance towards the new order on which the majority of mankind insists.

   The imperatives for change are clear. Thirty years ago the Bretton-Woods system, reinforced by the Marshall Plan, introduced a new era in the post-war world which promised a redress of economic disequilibrium in the developed world. Predictably, this system failed to satisfy the aspirations of the developing nations and it is this failure in especial that introduces the note

of urgency in our debate. It is imperative that we should fashion new structures and new institutions to arrest the widening gap between the developed market economies and the producers of raw materials and semi-manufactures.

     But there are other imperatives. The victory of the people in Indo-China, the relentless march of decolonization in Southern Africa both point to the erosion of the traditional structures of power. There are some who take comfort in the theory that the global order of colonial power has disappeared. But retreat from political domination is not ipso facto a retreat from colonialism. The structure of economic power built upon the foundations of the old colonial order persists with remarkable tenacity and endurance.

   In addition to these factors making for change there has been the emergence of issues which are global in their range and in their import and are only susceptible to a management which derives its authority from a global consensus. I speak here of such matters as the orderly utilisation of the resources of the sea, the preservation of our environment and the depletion of non-renewable resources.

   There can be no turning back and this is why Guyana welcomes in particular, the recognition in the statement delivered by the distinguished Ambassador of the United States of America, ‘Change is inherent in what we do and what we seek.’

   It is clear, Mr. President, that any attempt to give new vitality to obsolescent institutions is wholly unacceptable. In the face of such attempts the solidarity of the developing countries is the best guarantee that the processes of change will lead to the establishment of the new international economic order.

   Those of us who embrace Non-alignment will not lose a moment’s sleep over deliberate attempts at misrepresentation. We are not a bloc. Unbound by pacts, eschewing centralised military force, refusing the dictation of hegemonic power, we are aligned with peace, independence, equality, justice and the importance of the single human being. Our solidarity is based neither on the preservation of nor on the quest for power. It is rooted in common perception and shared ideals. The universality of the principles of Non-Alignment has long been vindicated. Those who only recently have come round to the acknowledgement of its validity must now seek to understand it properly.


   Mr. President, the international community must move forward and in our way forward we must be guided by three fundamental approaches to the problems of development and international economic co-operation. From these approaches my delegation feels we deviate only at our peril. 

    First, we must subject all proposals to the test of their likelihood of advancing the arrival of the New International Economic Order along the path charted by the Group of 77.

   Secondly, decision making on these vital issues must remain firmly within this Organisation.

   Thirdly, the solidarity of the developing countries must be given new depth and content, especially through programmes of collective self-reliance.

   Mr. President, I should like to dwell briefly on these three points.

    One group of proposals has come from an initiative taken by my Prime Minister, Comrade Forbes Burnham, at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Conference in Kingston, Jamaica, earlier this year. In keeping with this initiative a Group of Experts drawn from both developed and developing Commonwealth countries was established. In their Interim Report they endorsed the need for fundamental change but also identified a number of concrete steps which can assist our international dialogue. In addressing the conference of Commonwealth Finance Ministers at their meeting in Georgetown, Guyana, a few weeks ago my Prime Minister suggested that this report was an acceptable minimum approach towards the first phase of the implementation of the new economic order. Without necessarily committing their Governments to every aspect of the Interim Report, the Commonwealth Finance Ministers gave it their general endorsement. They called the attention of the Group of Experts to the need, in the Final Report, for an examination in depth of a number of issues not fully covered by their Interim Report and requested that they take into account the work carried out in other bodies.

     In this very Assembly at the beginning of our deliberations important proposals were advanced by the delegation of the United States. These are serious proposals which merit our serious consideration. In this process my delegation considers that a number of questions must be answered. Do the proposals acknowledge the need for fundamental structural change? Are the developing nations to have effective participation in all decisions affecting the global economic system? Are we of the developing countries being asked to believe that institutions which have historically served the best interests of 

the developed world can be modified to promote our development? Must the improvement in the condition of the developing world remain a mere footnote to the prosperity of the developed world? In short, in a situation that demands surgery are we being asked to be satisfied with the dispensation of mere palliatives?

   Nevertheless, Mr. President, I wish to assure you that my delegation will approach these and all other proposals, including those of the EEC, objectively and responsibly, because we are aware that what is at stake is nothing less than the future condition of all mankind.

   Mr. President, I turn now to our second guideline. Guyana has always strongly supported the strengthening of the United Nations system, Therefore, we accept no proposal calculated to diminish the role of the United Nations and to bypass it by having recourse to institutions old and new in which a privileged few control the levers of decision making. To act in such a way would be to frustrate the insistent demand by the developing countries for more effective and equitable participation in decision making on the issues which affect all mankind.

   In this connection we have before us the report of the Committee of Experts on the restructuring of the UN system. In the light of the changes in the international environment and of the imperative need to make the UN system into an effective instrument for the implementation of the new international economic order, we support the proposal to establish an Inter-governmental Committee of the Whole, which would work urgently towards this objective.

     Now, Mr. President, the third guideline – collective self-reliance among developing countries. The Programme of Action for the implementation of the New International Economic Order assigns an important role to collective self-reliance among the developing countries and calls upon the developed world to support such efforts. Forms of horizontal cooperation at the regional, sub-regional and inter-regional levels have already demonstrated their potential as instruments compelling significant change. Such    new horizontal economic structures and arrangements will assist substantially in bringing our marginal situation to an end and could provide an essential thrust for radical alteration in the international economic system. The much maligned produce associations have already proven their worth as a stimulant of International dialogue, catalyst for change and a mechanism for the mobilisation of resources in the developing world.

   At Lima just before we assembled here in New York, the Non-aligned countries took further important decisions – decisions Mr. President, on the establishment of supportive institutions for programmes of collective self-reliance, decisions for the establishment of a Solidarity Fund for Economic and Social Development of Non-aligned countries, a Special Fund for the financing of buffer stocks for raw materials and primary products exported by developing countries and a Council of Associations of developing countries which are producers as well as exporters of raw materials.

   Collective self-reliance is not co-terminous with confrontation. The processes of development which it will generate in the southern part of the world can and will provide gains for the international community as a whole.

   The new economic order must therefore be designed to foster all efforts of self-reliance on the part of the developing countries – efforts both national and collective. True development cannot be imposed ab extra, but must be part of the internal dynamics of growth. The international framework must therefore create the conditions and provide support within which self-reliance can flourish.

   We must not be mesmerised into accepting proposals for producer/consumer cooperation by sanctimonious references to the concept of interdependence. There can be no true interdependence unless it is based on relations of equality. Let us beware lest that concept of interdependence be used as a mask to disguise new forms of dependence and subjection or, indeed, to sustain the old.

   Those, therefore, Mr. President, are the guidelines which we suggest should inform our decisions as we come now to the closing stages of this Special Session. They should be integrated within the blueprint already adopted for the New International Economic Order.

   The future condition of mankind depends on the decisions we take on these issues – decisions that therefore must remain within the United Nations system appropriately restructured to deal with the gravity and range of the problems. Collective self-reliance must be our sword as well as our shield. Global consensus must remain the unalterable objective. Either we open up new possibilities of cooperation or we plunge head-long into confrontation, conflict and chaos. It is these global considerations more than the maintenance of any particular national interest which will produce the required consensus.

    Posterity will surely judge us, Mr. President, by the intensity of our efforts at accommodating the opinions of others in arriving at just and equitable solutions. At the same time compromise by itself is not an objective.

   It may be that we will come to no final agreement despite these efforts. The developing world cannot be expected to sacrifice its legitimate demands on the altar of expediency.

    More hopefully, it may be that we differ only on emphasis and priority rather than on principle and that, together here at this Session, we will take those essential steps to hasten the implementation of the New International Economic Order.

   Mr. President, I have every confidence that the hopes and aspirations of the billions on this planet will not be disappointed. I have every confidence that we, their representatives, will not be caught below the level of events.

   I thank you, Mr. President.

LaRouche to Mexican Students, 2002: “This Is a Systemic Crisis. Obviously, There Are Solutions!”

In South America, we see that Argentina has been destroyed, especially since 1982. We see that Bolivia is now in danger of going back under a drug dictatorship. We see related crises on the borders with Brazil and Argentina, Paraguay, and Uruguay. We see the loss of sovereignty of Peru, by a coup organized under the direction of President Clinton recently….

At the present time, Brazil faces an impossible burden. There’s no possible way that Brazil could carry the debt which is now being imposed upon it. This debt was not really self-incurred. The debt was imposed by international institutions under strong pressure from the United States, including the dollarization of Brazil’s debt in 1989, which was a tragedy for them. There’s no way they can pay this debt under these terms. The IMF demands that concessions be made by Brazil to all of the requirements of the markets; markets which are essentially corrupt. J.P. Morgan, Chase, and Citibank are implicitly bankrupt, and but for the power of the United States, as a physical power, they would be bankrupt. They have no hope for the future, under their present conditions. This is true of the banking system of the United States in general. The Federal Reserve System of the United States today is bankrupt in fact, and is sustained only by the political power of the United States. The banking systems of Europe are bankrupt. The central banking systems are bankrupt, and this is the condition throughout much of the world.

Now, the IMF — which has been the organizer, together with the World Bank, of this bankruptcy, which has developed over the years —now comes to Brazil and says, “Brazil, you are bad. You’re bad. You have to accept our tutelage. We, who ruined you, have come to help you by ruining you some more.” What would happen if Brazil capitulated to the IMF, and accepted anything in any way resembling the demands which have been made upon it by the IMF? Brazil would die! It would disintegrate, rapidly. Not over several years, but over months! Look at the figures. Take the ratios. Take the debt service charges. Take the effect of these conditions in the collapse of the economy of Brazil. Look at what’s happened to Argentina, and see that what happened to Argentina is now in the process of unfolding with full force in Brazil….

If Brazil resists, and does not submit, it could survive. If the average interest rate could kept below 10% in Brazil, and suitable conditions of refinancing the debt were instituted, Brazil could survive, and could be part of a recovery prospect for the hemisphere. But if Brazil were to survive under those conditions, the IMF would go bankrupt. It could not, under present circumstances, absorb that kind of financial reorganization.

Either way, the IMF is dead, in its present form. If it succeeds, it dies. If it fails, it dies. This gives you an indication of what we’ve described as a systemic crisis, as opposed to people who study the statistical phenomenon called boom-bust cycles. This is not a cyclical phenomenon….

Now obviously, there are solutions. I’ve been pushing such solutions. We had a vote most recently in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, a majority vote for a proposal which I had made; the Italian government is implicitly, by this vote, committed to working with other governments, to reorganize the world monetary system, to return to a Bretton Woods formula of the type we had in 1945-1964. To use that model: fixed exchange rates, protectionist system, to promote production, and similar kinds of programs, to ensure that we get back on a growth pattern again. This means that we have to put the world through bankruptcy reorganization, the same way you’d do any bankruptcy….

… We, as states, will create the credit; the credit needed for large-scale infrastructure programs and for promotion of private investment. This credit will be used over a long-term basis, that is, 25 years or so, in general at 1-2% simple interest rates, as state credit, to be used largely for infrastructure; to build up the level of employment; to build the railroads, the water systems, the power systems, and so forth, which are needed for society. This will stimulate private employment. We will also put credit into creditable areas of private investment, to build up agriculture, to build up manufacturing, to build up other necessary things, and we will build our way out of this mess….

What I propose is, that we look at the world in terms of certain countries which are, technologically, fountains of technology. Within other countries, including China and India—which are not prosperous countries, relatively, there are also fountains of technological progress: certain industries, certain techniques they have, but not enough to meet the total needs of their population.

Our proposal was, you take these areas of Eurasia, build up the fountains of technological progress, for long-term transmission of capital, technologically necessary capital, into areas which have low technology potential. And thus, take areas like the interior of China (as opposed to the coastal areas), and of other countries, and begin to build these up, in terms of their productivity over a generation or so. And on this basis, by long-term credit on a 25-year basis, or in that order, we can create and extend credit to fund the flow of high-technology exports from those areas which are fountains of technology, into countries which are in desperate need of these technological infusions. We could organize it in such a way that, when comes 25 years from now, they will be able to buy their way out of what we advanced as credit to them.

I proposed in 1992 and so forth, and these countries came to accept, what I call the Eurasian Land-Bridge….

But today, we have new technologies. And what I propose is the creation of development corridors, from areas such as Rotterdam in Europe, to places like Pusan in the tip of Korea, on the other side of Asia. These development corridors would run across the northern part of Russia and Kazakhstan, to the central part into China and Central Asia, and the southern part along the coast of the Indian Ocean, India and so forth, into Indochina, and so forth by those routes.

These development corridors would be 50-100 kilometers in width, that is, they would incorporate mainline transportation, water management routes, power generation and distribution centers, and thus, create industrial centers and agricultural centers along areas which today are largely underdeveloped or wasteland. And by crisscrossing an area which is largely wasteland, which contains the greatest concentration of mineral resources on this planet of any part of the world, North and Central Asia, we would transform this into an area of growth for all Asia.

This program is now being put into effect, step-wise, gradually. The efforts of China and Russia, among others, to force the building of the railroad connections between North and South Korea, which is actually a railway connection from Pusan to Rotterdam, through China and through Russia. And this is already in place.

The problem is, getting people to accept, and governments in particular, the fact that this is a bankrupt system; that it’s hopeless under this system. Don’t try to adapt to the system, replace the system. How do you do it? The authority of government, of sovereign government; a group of sovereign governments. Groups of sovereign governments must put their banking systems into a bankruptcy reorganization, create a new system of, effectively, national banking, under national government; mobilize credit; reorganize to protect the general welfare to maintain stability; to promote full employment; to find areas of growth in which credit can be concentrated, both in the public sector, in infrastructure, and in the private sector.

Only governments can do that. That is the sovereign power of government as a true sovereign….

… Therefore, you must build up the base of the economy. And, 50% of any modern economy, that’s competently devised, is investment in infrastructure, not in production: Transportation, power generation and distribution, water distribution and management, sanitation, health-care systems, educational systems, these are the gut of an economy. Libraries, access to this kind of thing, are an essential part of the productive power of labor. The ability to transmit goods efficiently and quickly, on a large scale in any area, to go from one place to the other, these are the essentials. We’ve lost that sight.

My specialty in this area, of course, is what I’ve concentrated on all these years, is physical economy. Financial economy? That’s nothing. Accounting? That’s nothing. That’s connect the dots; that doesn’t require any scientific skill whatsoever. What’s required is to understand how we invest, in a combination of infrastructure, and other things, to get the effect of this multi-generational progress, increasing the productive powers of labor….

So, my concern is, that if you can get a grounding among students, where they can understand what an idea is, in Plato’s sense of idea— discovery, hypothesis, experimental proof, the method of Kepler—once you know what an idea is, stick with a physical scientific idea, because that’s an easy one to demonstrate. Then say, “How is culture developed?” It develops on the basis of transmission of ideas, which correspond to such discoveries, from one generation, to the next generation. That is history!  Archimedes and Eratosthenes and Plato and Archytas; the sources of ancient scientific method.  These live in our society today because those who are scientists have replicated those discoveries and have applied that to understanding modern science today.  And there, the transmission of culture across thousands of years to the present is the result of understanding what an idea is, and the importance through educational and related processes of transmitting that idea from one generation to the next; with the result that you have a generation which emerges which has more power per capita in respect to the universe than the previous generation. That is culture! Ideas of Classical drama, which give you insight into how human beings behave and misbehave, and how you manage that. This is what we need.

Accounting is simple. Playing with mathematics, adding and subtracting and so forth, that’s simple. That is not economics. Economics is based on human beings, which are not monkeys, which have the power to generate, assimilate, replicate ideas; whose purpose with ideas is, knowing they’re all going to die — we all die—so, what is our expenditure of our talent in life? What does our life mean after we’ve left it? What have we embedded in the coming generations, which gives us a permanent place in the space-time spectrum? That’s human. And to try to get the knowledge, in every possible area that your appetite can reach, to be able to relive and discover the wonderful discoveries of the people before you, and transmit them to others, to have a society in which this is the standard of practice —that is economics.

Economics is what one generation is capable of doing, for the benefit of two generations hence.  Thank you very much.

Moving Forward after the BRICS & G20 Summits! Live Dialogue with Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche in a live dialogue on September 14 at 11am EDT/5pm CET to discuss how to bring the Global North into a New Paradigm! Send in your questions early to

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: A Transformation Bigger than the End of the Cold War

The following speech was given by Helga Zepp-LaRouche (Germany), Founder of The Schiller Institute during Panel 1 “The Strategic Situation After the Historic BRICS Summit” at the international Schiller Institute Conference “Let us Join Hands with the Global Majority To Create a New Chapter in World History!” 

A Transformation Bigger than the End of the Cold War

It is most urgent that we make the ordinary citizens of European nations and the USA–who are bombarded on a daily basis with a barrage of news in the mainstream mass media, which all have generally a spin in such a way, as to create an almost entirely fictitious parallel reality–aware of the tectonic change going on in this historic moment. Because only if they recognize the choices clearly lying ahead of us, is there hope for a positive way out of the present existential crisis of humanity.

It is high time to review the success and respectively the failure of the official policies of the recent period in order to assess the validity or flaws of ones own axioms of thinking. If there is one lesson about how it came to two world wars in the 20th century, then it is the number of miscalculations on the part of the participants in those wars. Having that parallel in mind one can only sound the alarm bells in the shrillest way possible.

The geopolitical confrontation of the US-led NATO over Ukraine, which did not start „unprovoked“ on February 23, 2022, but really already with the „Orange Revolution“ financed by the NED in 2004, and escalated with Victoria Nuland’s Maidan Coup in 2014, is clearly not working the way it was intended. The unprecedented series of sanctions did not „ruin Russia“, as Annalena Baerbock had wished, but caused a far reaching reorientation of Russia to the East and the South. But also Russia’s expectation about a short term nature of the military special operation did not materialize since the Russian leadership obviously underestimated the effect of NATO-operations in Ukraine since the Maidan coup and the subsequent attitude of the population, as well as the far reaching willingness for military engagement in Ukraine by the West.

Now a military stalemate has been reached, and the continuation of the military operations can, despite all new weapon deliveries, only lead to the complete  attrition of the human resources of Ukraine, who already has suffered horrendous casualty figures, and the danger of an escalation to the nuclear level, if either Russia sees its territorial integrity threatened or somebody thinks that a limited nuclear war is feasible.

If the Europeans believed that their giving in to the demands of ever „more weapons“ to Ukraine, would lead to a victory of Ukraine on the battlefield, that also did not work out. Instead European nations find themselves completely cut off from any ties with their neighbor Russia, the „energy- dependency“ shifted from Russia to the much more expensive American energy, and in the meantime Germany has lost even the appearance of a remnant of sovereignty and with it the respect in the whole world. Germany, the erstwhile economic powerhouse of Europe is rapidly undergoing a process of deindustrialization caused by exorbitant energy prices provided by the wonderful protective power and ally US, who is not hesitating to lure the battered German industries to resettle in the US with the help  of the Inflation Reduction Act–not even to mention the North Stream Pipelines about which nobody believes the belatedly made up story about the sailing yacht Andromeda. A popular saying these days is: What do you need enemies for with friends like this?

Germany has been transformed into a doormat, trampled upon by NATO-boots, while the present political leadership with its green Atlanticist ideology, for whom it would be a euphemism to call it „German,“ is gambling away about everything all the generations have built up from the rubble fields after the Second World War. Half of the German Mittelstand, the source of the entire social system in the country, is either going bankrupt or leaving to reinvest either in the US or in China. The overwhelming mood in the country is one of desperation, restaurant owners, farmers, craftsmen, store owners, nurses, all kinds of service industries, all feel that the floor is being pulled away from under them, and those, who don’t want to move to the Alternative for Germany, a right wing party, with some good points, but also unacceptable elements in it, feel that they have no place to turn to. „Everything will crash against the wall“, is one of the most heard sentences in many private discussions. People feel completely betrayed. We should remember, it was that utter feeling of betrayal after the Versailles treaty, which was the death-nail for the Weimar Republic!

But what most citizens of the West have no inkling about, is that a much bigger, much more consequential development is taking place elsewhere, in those parts of the world, which are effected by what is going on between NATO and Russia, where the „collateral damage“, such as high energy and food prices in these countries was considered „negligible“. And now that oversight is turning out to be the biggest misjudgment of all.

The unilateral (and therefore illegal) sanctions against Russia and a whole series of other countries, the confiscation of state assets and weaponization of the dollar on top of the longstanding experience of unfair trade and credit conditions have led to a gigantic blowback in the countries of the Global South which since has emerged as the Global Majority, representing more than 85 % of the world population. The massive attempts by NATO countries to pressure countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa to take the side of the „democracies“ of the „rules based order“ against the supposed „autocracies“ and „dictatorships“ in the Ukraine conflict backfired thoroughly. The identity of these countries as being part of the Nonalignment Movement and the „Spirit of Bandung“, the major alliance between Asian and African countries of the 1955 conference, came back to life and with it the memory that it was the Soviet Union which had helped many of the developing countries in their struggles for independence against the colonial powers.

When Lyndon LaRouche, my late husband, had first proposed an alternative to the IMF and its  conditionalities in 1975 with the proposal for the IDB, which was intended to issue 400 Billion dollar credit lines per year for industrial  development projects, this proposal was fullheartedly endorsed be the NAM then, who incorporated it in their final resolution in Colombo, Sri Lanka, representing already 75 % of the world population. The reaction of the financial powers to be were brutal: Indira Gandhi and Mrs. Bandaranaike were ousted from power, President Ali Bhutto and Prime Minister Indira Gandhi several years later were assassinated. The NAM played a subdued role for many years to come as a result of these attacks.

Lyndon LaRouche, whose 101st birthday we were celebrating yesterday, and his international movement kept writing development plans relentlessly, a comprehensive infrastructure plan for the entire African continent, presented in 1976 in a conference in Paris, Operation Juarez for Latin America in cooperation with Mexican President Lopez Portillo, a 50 year plan for the Pacific Basin in light of the expected increase on population density in that part of the world, a 40 year plan for India, which Mrs. Gandhi started to implement, the Oasis plan for Southwest Asia, and in 91, when the Soviet Union disintegrated, the Eurasian Landbridge, the New Silk Road–all of these programs were presented at literally hundreds of conferences and seminars on five continents.

After President Xi Jinping presented the concept of the New Silk Road in Kazakhstan, exactly 10 years and 2 days ago, Western governments, think tanks and media amazingly ignored this program which was clearly the largest infrastructure program in history ever, easily an order of magnitude larger then the Marshal Plan for Europe after the second World War.

But for the countries of the Global South the BRI became the game changer, allowing many of them for the first time to seriously launch infrastructure programs, industrial parks, advanced science projects, etc. From the end of 2017 the attitude in the West towards the BRI suddenly shifted from indifference to hostility, in the security papers of the Pentagon first, and then synchronized in all western media and think tanks, China’s rise was characterized as „systemic rival“ and „opponent“ culminating in the recent „decoupling“ and „de-risking“ frenzy. With the recent enlargement of the BRICS into BRICS-11 and the expressed interest of around 40 more countries to join likewise, the idea of a complete decoupling from Russia and China is more than absurd: it is suicidal. The perspective of creating two more or less separate blocs in reality is not feasible and can be only seen as the futile effort to economically weaken an adversary before a planned military attack, which given the existence of several thousands of nuclear missiles would mean the annihilation of the human species and with it all life on earth.

It is time for a fundamental strategic reevaluation. Is it not now more in the interest of the US and European nations to take the initiative to cooperate with all the countries of the Global South and build a prosperous world for all nations, than taking the risk of pursuing a policy which may lead to the „end of history“, albeit in a different way than Francis Fukuyama, the father of all political misjudgments fantasized?

News are coming in this morning, that Prime Minister Modi announced in a long overdue step at the ongoing G20 summit in New Delhi, that the African Union has been admitted to the G20, making the G21.  That is positive, but completely insufficient. In order to eliminate the danger of a third, this time thermonuclear war, we need to create a totally new international security and development architecture, which takes into account the security and economic interest of all nations on the planet. And that is only possible, if it is based on the development of all, on the interest of the other, and the creation of a common future, which is promising and uplifting for all of humanity.

The comprehensive study the Schiller Institute published in 2014 in response to President Xi’s announcement from 2013 in Kazakhstan, „The New Silk Road becomes the World Land Bridge“ can be the basis for such a peace order for the 21st Century. It gives a clear orientation for the economic buildup of all parts of the planet, concrete plans for overcoming underdevelopment in the Global South as well as concrete guidelines for the reconstruction of the decaying economies of the Global North. Together with the Ten Principles I suggested for such a new architecture, these proposals could be the basis for any serious attempt to find a solution to the present crisis. Why not conduct a special session of the UNGA to discuss such a new international architecture, when clearly so many people around the world are concerned about the threat to world peace?

The idea of a World Landbridge, connecting all infrastructurally developed continents through tunnels and bridges, so that one can travel soon with a maglev train from the southern tip of Argentina or Chile up north through the Americas via the Bering Strait all way along the transsiberean railway to Gibraltar and on through Africa to the Cape of Good Hope. This will be the realization of the vision of the German economist Friedrich List and his „space and time economy“, where he outlined, how an advanced transport and communication system with a high speed, dense regularity and cost efficiency of infrastructure would allow for new levels of the mental and material productive powers. This development would then lead to a „Republic of the planet“ based on the „economy of humanity“, which would make it possible that all talents would exchange their ideas and work together in all areas in science and art and all areas of knowledge, which in turn would increase the efficiency of all powers of humanity, the exact opposite of „decoupling“ and „derisking“, obviously.

A similar idea about the future development of humanity to become a great community of the entire world, a „datong shijie“, one can also find with Cai Yuanpei, the first education minister of  the Republic of China and President of Peking University, who introduced Schiller’s conception of aesthetic education into China. Obviously the same evolutionary innate idea governed Nikolaus of Kues idea about harmony in the macrocosm based on the best mutual development of all microcosms. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz’ idea of a preestablished harmony in the universe represents the same idea, Vernadsky’s notion of the increasing dominance of the noosphere over the biosphere, as well. And I remember very well, how Lyndon LaRouche stunned his associates, when he talked about how despite the present importance of the sovereignty of the nation state, that would not be the last stage in the evolution of the the development of humanity.

Look at this latest breakthrough China made in controllable nuclear fusion technology for a new generation of an „artificial sun“, the Huanliu-3, a week ago. They realized high-confinement mode operation with a plasma current of one million ampere for the first time, according to the China National Nuclear Corporation, (CNNC). The high-confinement mode,  is also used as the standard mode for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), in Cadarache, France, which is run by seven member parties, China, the EU, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the US. This inherently safe form of nuclear energy, once it is fully realized, is one of the technologies which will remove the basis for geopolitical rivalry, because it will make energy so plentiful and cheap, that it will be cheaper than the continuation of military conflict.

The perspective for a completely new paradigm in international relations is on the horizon, and this could come much faster then most can imagine. A change in the US with the next presidential election could return the US on the path of a republic. As Sergey Glazyev indicated, a new BRICS currency will likely materialize in 2024 during Russia’s chairmanship of the BRICS, which could turn out to be the lifeboat for the global financial system.

So, there is all the reason for a culturally optimistic view for the future of mankind, provided we replace hatred, envy and resentment with love, generosity, and curiosity for the potential of the other cultures. We still have time to reset the axioms of our thinking.

Diane Sare: The Strategic Situation After the Historic BRICS Summit

The following speech was given by Diane Sare (U.S.), LaRouche independent candidate for U.S. Senate from New York during Panel 1 “The Strategic Situation After the Historic BRICS Summit” at the international Schiller Institute Conference “Let us Join Hands with the Global Majority To Create a New Chapter in World History!” 

“The Strategic Situation After the Historic BRICS Summit”

When I was recently at the NY State Fair in Syracuse, I learned that the building of the Erie Canal led to a 40 fold increase in the population of Syracuse. Think about that. 40 times more people moved into that city over a mere 10 year period.  And they became more and more prosperous with the diverse market that the canal opened up, allowing transport of goods back and forth between New York City and Buffalo. 

Contrast this to the statement of New York City Mayor Eric Adams who said earlier this week about the 110,000 migrants who have arrived in New York City since April of 2022, “Never in my life have I had a problem that I didn’t see an ending to, I don’t see an ending to this,” Adams said. “This issue will destroy New York City.” 

I hate to tell you, Mayor, but New York City was already destroyed.  It was destroyed in 1975 with the Municipal Assistance Corporation, just as Lyndon LaRouche warned.  That’s why a city of 8 million people can’t absorb 100,000 more.  The city couldn’t even take care of it’s own. There were 100,000 homeless children in the NYC public schools in 2018, and an NYC educator told me that even before the migrants many New York City classrooms had as many as 40 students per teacher.  Do you want to produce a nation of morons, derelicts, and drug addicts?  Destroy the schools.

Why do we need schools anyway?  Our nation isn’t doing anything!!!

Let me remind you why in 1907 we could absorb and employ TRIPLE the number of immigrants per capita as we now have entering our nation both legally and illegally combined.

What did our nation do?  How did we really liberate ourselves (mostly) from the British Empire?

Lyndon LaRouche, the greatest American of all time, pointed to the work of the young bastard from the Caribbean, Alexander Hamilton.  

Having witnessed the horrors of slavery on the sugar plantations of Nevis, where slaves only lived for months after being brought over, he was an adamant opponent of slavery.  After the Revolution against the British Empire was won, he became our first Treasury Secretary and he wrote four papers which should be a guide for any American Patriot:

On the Subject of Manufactures

On Public Credit

On the National Bank

And again, when the Bank was under attack, on the Constitutionality of the National Bank.

I suspect that there is not even ONE high school in this nation that teaches those papers which were so crucial to the founding of the United States.

What Hamilton created was the means by which human creativity could be deployed to raise the platform of human economy. Obviously transport was crucial, and so was energy.  

Imagine Hamilton, Washington, and Lafayette, in the middle of the hard fought American Revolution, standing on the cliff over the Great Falls in Paterson, NJ planning to harness those falls for the power to create a modern city – a city which became a driver of American productivity, which now lies in a shambles, and was the home of 11 of the 9-11 hijackers.  Think about that.

But what else did we do?  What about the Transcontinental Railroad, and the amazing Chinese workers who built it, despite the racism against them.  They survived many illnesses because they were smart enough to drink a lot of tea – they boiled their water. But the railroad was built in spite of the British-orchestrated mis-named “Civil War” and its completion and the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia in 1876, even after the assassination of President Lincoln, by pro-British agents, inspired the world.

American Civil War veterans went to Egypt to train the Army and build the Suez Canal, celebrated by Verdi with an opera.  Was the purpose of this just so we could loot Egypt?  Was the Panama Canal built so we could loot Panama?

American patriots knew that eradicating poverty around the world would make it more difficult for the British Empire to run its destabilizing evil drug and slave running program.  People say the British eradicated slavery?  How do you explain the British East India Company?

We suffered more assassinations:  Garfield and McKinley – both staunch advocates for the development of transcontinental rail through the Americas. Their plans would never have allowed the nations south of our border to become the drug producers for the British Empire, which was still thriving in pockets of the United States – emphatically Wall Street and with the Boston Brahmins.

With FDR, we had a return to Alexander Hamilton’s principles – and no accident, as one of Franklin Roosevelts’ forebears, Isaac Roosevelt had been a collaborator of Hamilton generations earlier. Unable to tackle the unconstitutional Federal Reserve, FDR used the reconstruction finance corporation to issue billions of dollars of credit to construct thousands of new schools, roads, bridges, power plant, post offices sewage treatment plants, hospitals, and great projects.  Most notably the Tennessee Valley Authority, which transformed one of the poorest, malaria invested, backward parts of the nation, into one of the most productive parts of the country. 

Again, as after the Civil War, after World War II, delegations from all over the world came to tour the 16 new dams built by the TVA which allowed cheap abundant electricity, coupled with breakthroughs in fertilizer and flood control, increased food production in the region by orders of magnitude in a very short time. 

One delegation came from China.  The success of the TVA consolidated their plans to build the Three Gorges Dam.  Even Afghanistan built a Helmand Water Authority, which was quite productive until the various wars and occupations.

The British made sure to prolong the war, so that FDR would not be around to oversee the end of colonialism, which is what he intended.  He also wouldn’t have allowed the dropping of two nuclear bombs on Japan.

The FBI and MCCarthy-ite witch hunts took over the political scene, with Eisenhower a welcome reprieve, and then John F Kennedy, whom Eleanor Roosevelt came to like and offer advice, became president. Again, Kennedy revived the Hamiltonian principles.  We began building again. He also wanted to eradicate poverty world wide, and was a friend of Patrice Lumumba, who was assassinated in 1961, just after Kennedy was elected.

Then JFK was assassinated, Malcolm V, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy were all killed within 5 years of each other.  The Vietnam war, which Kennedy intended to end was launched full force, the post-industrial flower child green anti human cultural project of the British Tavistock Institute and the CIA became our culture, and we became insane.

Just at that time, Lyndon LaRouche began recruiting a hard core of moral intellectual elites at American Universities, and later internationally. He decided in 1976 that he had to run for president of the United States, by 1983 he was Ronald Reagan’s back channel to the Soviet Union on the matter of strategic defense, The Soviets rejected LaRouche and Reagan’s proposal, and collapsed economically, just as LaRouche warned they would.

By the late 1980’s the treasonous intelligence agencies and their main stream propaganda outlets in the New York Times and elsewhere, all funded by Wall Street crooks had geared up a get LaRouche task force, not only shutting down LaRouche’s Fusion Energy Foundation, his anti-Drug magazine, and his newspaper, but ultimately jailing him and over a dozen of his associates in what former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark called the longest running and broadest ranged operation to “lay low” a political leader in his time or to his knowledge.

Perhaps this is why, as the leaders of Russia, China, Brazil, South Africa, India, and so many other nations finally throw off the yoke of British Colonial divide and conquer games, Americans are not rejoicing.

If we were sane, we would recognize this as the long-overdue fulfillment of the principles of the American Revolution. Instead, we are so bowed down by the rage and frustration of our self-inflicted oppression that we are missing it.

But, happily, we are a nation of immigrants, and the liars and traitors in the mainstream media, and who infest our government agencies will not be able to suppress the news forever.  The truth of the rejection of colonialism is seeping in, and I am optimistic that the enemy won’t be able to contain it.

My biggest fear is that as this old stinky monolith collapses, Americans will be looking at their dirty socks and not at the stars, which is where we have to go, along with our brothers and sisters of the entire human race worldwide.

H.E. Donald Ramotar: “Prospects and Challenges post BRICS Summit”

The following speech was given by H.E. Donald Ramotar (Guyana), Former President of Guyana during Panel 1 “The Strategic Situation After the Historic BRICS Summit” at the international Schiller Institute Conference “Let us Join Hands with the Global Majority To Create a New Chapter in World History!” 

“Prospects and Challenges post BRICS Summit”

The just concluded BRICS Conference in South Africa will certainly go down as an historic event. This is so because it could very well be the beginning of the end of Neo-colonialism and the advent of a new era of economic liberation. This is something that Patriotic and Nationalist leaders of the Global South had longed for. 

This was something that many countries and progressive leaders had been pondering for a long time. We have suffered for so long by the massive manipulation of International institutions, such as the World Bank and the IMF which became instruments of oppression used by the US. Even the United Nations was known to be mis-used on several occasions e.g. in the murder of Patrice Lumumba and more recently the invasion of Iraq and Libya. 

However the issue that made them necessary was the use of the US dollar as the pre-eminent currency to carry out international trade. This gave the US authorities enormous power and influence in the global economy. 

This United States used its position in the international economy to impose its positions on other countries. 

If it did not like the policy of any state it was quick to impose sanctions on those states. 

The longest sanctions have been imposed on Cuba. This has created great hardships on the people of that island. The main objective of the sanctions is to ensure that Cuba’s socialist system does not succeed. 

Over the years this became a powerful weapon in the hands of the U.S. Today the people of Venezuela and Nicaragua are laboring under heavy sanctions. Iraq were heavily sanctioned during the time of Saddam Hussein and its cost them dearly. More than ½ million children did became of those sanctions. US secretary of State Madeleine Albright said then that it was worth killing all those children among others. 

They have seized billions of dollars from Iran, Afghanistan and many other states.

Indeed, they weaponized the dollar using it to raid and rob other states and even individuals. 

They felt so sure about their ability to destroy and/or inflict heavy damage on countries that they placed that in their planning to destroy Russia. 

So, when they pushed Ukraine to provoke Russia into a conflict they were not only depending on their military might but also on their sanctions. 

Recall President Biden’s boast about imposing that mother of all sanctions on Russia. They felt that Russia could not withstand such comprehensive sanctions which included the stealing of Russia money that were held in U.S Banks. 

Russia’s response showed that the sanctions could be defeated. In my view the demand by Russia to be paid in Rubles for its oil and other commodities was most responsible for exposing the sanctions and making it ineffective. 

Russia began trading with other countries using their respective currencies. The system is working. Moreover, it offers all nations a greater degree of economic freedom. 

Other countries, including allies of the U.S have recognized this and have appreciated the wisdom of this. Added to the greater independence is the recognition that the U.S can seize any countries savings that are held in U.S banks. 

Trading in their own currencies and eventually creating a new currency for foreign trade among BRICS and states is demonstrating a strong viability. 

This movement has great possibilities and is likely to spread even wider. 

Other systems are coming into existence that will facilitate this for want of a better word, independence movement. This includes finding alternatives to the SWIFT system and other in Banking arrangements. The BRICS Bank has the possibility of offering a new kind of relations among all nations. This is particularly attractive to the Global South. 

While recognizing the potential that the BRICS arrangements offer, we must not allow ourselves to fall into false sense of security. we must see this as a struggle and the possibilities are so great that they are worth fighting for. 

Let us not believe that it would be smooth sailing. If we agree that this would be a struggle then we must examine the vulnerabilities of the BRICS and anticipate that the US and its NATO allies would strive to take advantage of anything to frustrate and defeat this movement. 

We must be aware that unity with in the group even on limited objective is most important. Without doubt the NATO group would use any vulnerability it could find.  

Some Vulnerabilities 

In the first place I see that India would be a target to work on. This is so because of the border issue which exist between China and India. It was rather disappointing that at the same time when announcements were being made of the glorious possibilities of BRICS we saw that tensions have grown between those these two countries. 

Mother major issue is the situation in the South China Sea. The U.S is ensuring that the countries are getting together to discuss the matter. Even a country like Vietnam is straddling its positions between China and the U.S. 

The U.S is seeking out of any country with any issue with China and Russia and offering its supports to them. We see them at this moment working with Armenia one of Russia’s allies, because of the tensions with Turkmenia.

In Latin America we can expect massive overt and covert actions by the U.S to bring about regime change in many countries. 

Recall that Mexico expressed strong support for BRICS initiative at an earlier period. It should be noted that did not materialized.

Argentina has great internal problems. The US has strong influence in the military of most countries of the region. They have strong links within the countries including the political parties.  The government of Argentina is in a very weak position. You can bet your bottom dollar that the US is going to activate its contacts to bring about regime change. 

The situation is a bit better in Brazil; however, we must not forget that Lula’s victory was very slim. Here too we have to expect US involvement to remove Lula. 

These are some of the areas that could be exploited to stem the tide that the BRICS summit in South Africa has created. 

Our first task is to minimize the issues in and among BRICS nations. 

Whatever influence we have we should first direct it towards removing things that could be used to stymie BRICS advancement. 

In my opinion the border issues are the most dangerous of all. We should encourage discussions among the BRICS states to assist in settling the contentions issues among the group members.

If we can succeed in removing those impediments then we will be contributing to the unity of the movement which is so essential for success. 

Thank you for your attention! 

Page 5 of 126First...456...Last