What really happened on 9/11? Why did the U.S. go to war in Afghanistan, and remain for 20 years? Why in Iraq, in Libya? Who is the Patriot Act supposed to protect? Is it not important to note that the same networks in the U.S. responsible for these wars and violations of American liberties are the ones who have benefited most from these failed policies? And are the ones most hysterical about the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan? NOW is the time to answer these questions, so Americans will never again die, and kill, to preserve the British Empire, the City of London, and the U.S. Military Industrial Complex.
The individual who is among the most culpable for ongoing geopolitical confrontations which could lead to nuclear war, the Queen’s Privy Council member Tony Blair, blasted Joe Biden for his “obedience to an imbecilic political slogan about ending ‘the forever wars’.” Blair was not criticizing the way the U.S. left, but ending the war, saying that leaving Afghanistan shows the West has “lost its political will.” Clearly, this apologist for endless imperial wars has not lost his commitment to unleash genocidal catastrophes. Not surprisingly, Dick Cheney’s war hawk daughter Liz agrees with Blair, telling NBC News that proof the U.S. should not have withdrawn is that British parliamentarians and NATO officials are furious about the U.S. withdrawal! Keep in mind that when Blair talks about commitment, the British have been playing the Great Game in Afghanistan on-and-off since the 1830s — with consistently disastrous results. harleysch@gmail.com
April 2 (EIRNS)–Argentine ambassador to China, Sabino Vaca Narvaja, has met with high level Chinese government officials in Beijing “to ask for that country’s support in the national government’s negotiations with the IMF, seeking an extension of payment terms and reduction in interest rates,” the daily Dangdai reported April 1, citing embassy sources. Dangdai generally reports on Sino-Argentine relations, and touches on China’s relations with other Ibero-American countries to a lesser degree.
The Telam news agency reported that Vaca Narvaja met with the Foreign Ministry’s director of the Latin American and Caribbean Department, Cai Wei, with whom he discussed President Alberto Fernandez’s desire to refinance the $45 billion standby loan contracted by former President Mauricio Macri in 2018. Further citing embassy sources, Dangdai reported that Vaca Narvaja’s meeting included a discussion of the invitation to President Fernandez to make a state visit to China, now scheduled for early May, during which he is expected to sign a Memorandum of Understanding to join the Belt and Road Initiative. A review of the two nations’ bilateral agenda, Dangdai noted, focused on a series of infrastructure investment projects which both governments prioritize and which would be integrated into a joint Five Year Plan. Especially interesting was the discussion on the use of national currencies for trade and investment, including “an evaluation of productive and industrial projects that could be financed in renminbi, a currency which could be used subsequently to meet foreign payments to China.”
It should be noted that the IMF’s 2018 standby loan, which was originally for $57 billion, but whose last tranche Fernandez refused to accept after he became President, was granted by then IMF Managing Director Christine “Lady Gaga” Lagarde largely for political reasons to prop up the sagging Macri government and the brutal austerity program he was implementing in hopes he might be able to be reelected. Argentine authorities are in fact conducting a criminal investigation into the fraudulent way the loan was contracted and used–most of it ending up as capital flight and vastly expanding the amount of debt Argentina cannot pay. The loan violated Argentina’s constitutional norms as well as the IMF’s own internal regulations. Macri himself, his two former Central Bank presidents and two former finance ministers, are all under investigation.
China’s international news agency, China Global Television Network (CGTN), produced a six minute video of excerpts from the keynote speech by Helga Zepp-LaRouche at the July 31 Schiller Institute Conference, “Afghanistan: A Turning Point in History After the Failed Regime-Change Era.” The CGTN video is titled: “Afghanistan: The Bright Future for the Coming Cooperation of the Great Powers.”
It is certain that leading circles within the U.S., including within the Biden Administration, are watching closely as prominent figures from Russia and China speak at Schiller Institute conferences, and present LaRouche’s ideas in their media and institutional websites.They are watching, and some are listening and learning. Others are chewing the rug, and working with the U.K. to prevent what they see as the greatest danger to their Empire—the United States coming together with Russia and China to address the world’s existential crisis in all its facets—the danger of nuclear war; the pandemic; famine in multiple locations; the cultural decay across the Western world; and the financial bubble threatening to either explode or break out in an even more destructive hyperinflation.
The ending of the 20-year war in Afghanistan, then, is not a disaster, as portrayed in the Western press. It is an opportunity for a great change in the course of human history. Mrs. LaRouche says in the video: “It should be obvious, even to the most incurable warmongers on the planet, that in Afghanistan, no military solution can succeed. In that sense, there must be a recognition that all such endless wars, like in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and so forth, belong to a paradigm of geopolitical thinking that has utterly failed. That means that the geopolitics of the British Empire, of the ‘Great Game,’ of the Arc of Crisis of Bernard Lewis and Zbigniew Brzezinski—must be outlawed forever. And there should be an agreement among all neighbors of Afghanistan that geopolitical manipulation must be ended and replaced by the application of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.”
Zepp-LaRouche also points to the fact that even Secretary of State Tony Blinken, who generally sounds as mad as Mike Pompeo on all things Chinese, “during his recent trip to India stated that the U.S. government sees a positive role for China in the economic development of Afghanistan.” She pointed to the statement by the Afghan Ambassador to China, “who recently said that Afghanistan is the one place where the United States and China can actually cooperate, since they have common interests such as the suppression of terrorism and the elimination of opium production.”
Zepp-LaRouche concludes: “In this sense, Afghanistan is at a crossroad. Not only for Eurasian integration, but also at a crossroad for universal history where we all can leave the age of immature adolescence behind us, and enter an era of adulthood, in which we concentrate on the common aims of mankind.”
Recall that Biden held a high profile summit with President Putin, and spoke for hours on the phone with President Xi Jinping. Recall also the Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman held extensive discussion with Foreign Minister Wang Yi and the Deputy Minister responsible for U.S.-China Relations, then chaired a major summit with top military and diplomatic leaders from Russia and the U.S. Afghanistan was a leading item on the agenda at both meetings.These leaders are abundantly aware that the ideas expressed by Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche, and the wealth of ideas in the voluminous writings of Lyndon LaRouche which have been translated into Chinese and Russian, are ideas taken extremely seriously in Moscow and Beijing, as they are increasingly around the world.
What direction will the U.S. take at this turning point in human history? The American people are finally beginning to throw off their delusions, their smug confidence that life as usual will go on no matter what they do. As their economy unravels under the Malthusian “Green New Deal”; as the reckless printing of trillions of dollars to bail out the bankrupt financial system without any real economic growth begins to drive inflation to the point of explosion; as their children are being offered legalized drugs and encouraged to change their sex; and as they contemplate the very real threat of nuclear war from the anti-Russian and anti-Chinese hysterics in both political parties—a real resistance is mounting, and is increasingly turning to LaRouche.
Afghanistan is at peace—for now. The Taliban today, unlike the Taliban of the 1990s, is working in close cooperation with Russia, China, Iran, Pakistan and others in the region. Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen, in addition to pledging no retaliation and for women to continue working and studying in schools, also told CGTN that “the people of Afghanistan need help of other countries. They should come forward and help in the health sector and also infrastructure and education. They can come to explore our natural resources. This is a general invitation to all countries, and we appreciate any country that they help us at this crucial time of our history.”
Will the U.S. and Europe accept this offer, to work with China’s Belt and Road to build the country they have destroyed, the country President Ashraf Ghani admitted suffered from a 90% poverty rate? Will this approach serve as a model for rebuilding Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen?
Join the Schiller institute on Saturday, Aug. 21 at noon EDT for a follow-up conference to the July 31 event, under the title: “Now More Urgent than Ever: Afghanistan Is an Opportunity for a New Epoch for Mankind“
https://laroucheorganization.nationbuilder.com/20210403_saturday_meeting Friday Questions — Don’t be fooled, Biden’s “Earth Day Summit” is not about a “clean” environment, but about deindustrialization and depopulation — but it can be derailed. What is behind the heightened tensions between Russia and Ukraine? Will the “endless wars” continue? What is the Atlantic Council? What will the long-term effect be if psyops specialists, such as those who wrote the paper at Oxford University denouncing Mozart and Beethoven as composers whose works perpetuate racism, are not countered — can classical culture survive?
Be sure to join me this Saturday, when I participate in this week’s Manhattan Project forum of The LaRouche Organization, in a dialogue on how Lyndon LaRouche’s concept of “corridors of development” represents the alternative to global economic collapse and war: April 3, 2 PM EDT.
The Schiller Institute will hold a dialogue among leading officials on August 21, at Noon EDT, on “What Just Happened in Afghanistan?”
It is past time that we face the reality that continuing to make decisions based on 19th century imperial geopolitical doctrines and neoliberal economics leads inevitably to disaster. There is an alternative, which is to cooperate with other nations in junking the presently disintegrating world monetary system, and launching an era of mutually beneficial development projects. Instead of seeking new wars, for the benefit of the Military Industrial Complex, we can demonstrate, by joining with China, Russia and Afghanistan’s neighbors, that Development is the New Name of Peace.
Two weeks before the fall of Kabul, the Schiller Institute presented a dialogue on how the U.S./NATO failure in Afghanistan can be turned into the basis for a New Paradigm of peace and development for the world. Events since then have shown how prescient the speakers were, especially in emphasizing that there is no military solution to end the “endless” wars. While the war hawks yearn for more war and unresolvable conflicts — and the booty they can steal for their corporate war machine — it’s time for them to shut up, and get out of the way. This Saturday, August 21, the Schiller Institute will sponsor a follow-up event, on how to replace the era of failed regime change wars, with one of mutually beneficial cooperation. Watch the event Saturday at 12 noon here.
Contact Harley at harleysch@gmail.com
On Friday morning, at least six Sinologists and China experts added their names on the website of the LaRouche movement in Italy, Movisol, to the Schiller Institute statement on China. They had been were mobilized by Fabio Massimo Parenti, associate professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, Beijing. Professor Parenti was contacted by journalists of the “Report” political magazine (connected to the Rai Tre national television channel) who had asked him about the statement. Parenti, who had had dealings with Movisol in the past, contacted Liliana Gorini, the chair of Movisol; to sign the statement; and then to post it on his Facebook page. His group is now considering to write a similar statement, to be sent to Italy’s President, Sergio Mattarella.
Huge amounts of ink, digital and otherwise, are being wasted in discussion of President Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure plan announced yesterday. But one of the more revealing comments came from the ever-green Washington Post, which insisted that the whole purpose of the plan isn’t infrastructure, but bringing about a paradigm shift.
“President Biden’s infrastructure plan would turbocharge the country’s transition from fossil fuels, using the muscle and vast resources of the federal government to intervene in electricity markets, speed the growth of solar and wind energy, and foster technological breakthroughs in clean power,” the Post wrote. “The linchpin of Biden’s plan… is the creation of a national standard requiring utilities to use a specific amount of solar, wind and other renewable energy to power American homes, businesses and factories. The amount would increase over time, cutting the nation’s use of coal, gas and oil over the next 15 years.”
The Post concluded with excitement: “Biden’s strategy would amount to the most sweeping federal intervention in the electricity sector in generations.”
As that reality sinks in, there will be foot-dragging and more from all sorts of political and business layers in the country. The following response by Brian Wolff, executive vice president for public policy of the Edison Electric Institute, the power sector’s biggest trade association, is indicative:
“Certainly, we will review any proposed clean energy standard closely,” he said, “and we support policies that enable our member electric companies to continue to get the energy they provide as clean as they can as fast as they can, without compromising the affordability and reliability our customers value.”
Not precisely a ringing endorsement.
U.S. Special Envoy for Climate John Kerry will visit India in early April, The Hindu reported. The visit is a run-up to the April 22-23 virtual “Leaders Summit on Climate” hosted by President Joe Biden from the White House. Kerry’s April 1-9 itinerary will also include Abu Dhabi and Dhaka.
The Kerry visit is likely to focus on pressuring India to declare a target year, preferably 2050, for achieving net-zero emissions of greenhouse gas. But there is strong opposition to this within India, including prominent advisers to Prime Minister Narendra Modi such as Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, a Member of PM’s Council on Climate Change and former ambassador to China and the EU. In a recent interview with the Indian news daily, The Hindustan Times, Dasgupta answered a question on what he believes would be the impact on the Indian economy of pursuing net-zero emissions target:
“First, it would require us to immediately scrap all existing coal-based power plants and factories, or alternatively, retrofit them with carbon capture and storage technology. This would entail astronomical costs at a time when the economy is already reeling from the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.” He added that it would also quickly derail Modi’s Aatmanirbhar Bharat (self-reliant India) policy: “It would necessitate an immediate switch-over to imported, existing clean energy technologies at a huge cost, denying our own industry the time required for indigenization or development of affordable indigenous technologies. Let us not forget that the US lodged a complaint against us at the WTO when we took some modest measures to promote domestic manufacture of solar cells and modules.”
“Third, we need to examine the trade-related implications of surrendering our principled position on ‘common and differentiated responsibilities’. The European Union is set to impose levies on carbon-intensive imports, even from developing countries. It would be naive to think that the countries calling on India to adopt a 2050 net-zero target are motivated purely by altruistic concerns unrelated to commercial interests.”
The “common and differentiated responsibilities” clause refers to the argument made for decades by developing countries that any global targets have to be applied in a differentiated way to their countries, since they are also trying to overcome underdevelopment.
The pressure on India is intense. Last February, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) hosted an annual event, the World Sustainable Development Summit (WSDS), in New Delhi with a focus on the climate crisis, with the presence of high-level representatives from the U.S., the U.K., the EU, the United Nations and other countries. At this virtual Summit, John Kerry did not mince his words: “We all have to adopt the notion of zero emissions.” And his finger pointed towards India when he noted that “90% of the world’s emissions come from somewhere other than our country (US)” and “70% come from somewhere other than China”.
The pressure has been building, especially over the last six months as Biden took over the White House. Some analysts claim that China’s 2060 carbon neutrality pledge has also contributed to the pressure, as has the UK’s diplomatic push to ramp up climate matters ahead of Cop26. Cop26 is the next annual UN climate change conference scheduled to be held in Glasgow, UK, from Nov 1-12. Cop26 president Alok Sharma visited India in February and issued a statement before his departure stating, “I firmly believe that powerful action from India will be a catalyst for change, encouraging others to be more ambitious in their approaches to protecting both people and planet.”
With the heat on, discussions have begun in India on what it can do to withstand the pressure.
