Global Diplomacy

Schiller Institute Brings Haiti Development Plan to Spanish-Speaking Audience

November 10, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Agriculture, Dominican Republic, Economic development updates, General updates, Global Diplomacy, Haiti, New financial order updates, Our economic development events, Power & Energy

Schiller Institute Brings Haiti Development Plan to Spanish-Speaking Audience –

Nov. 7 (EIRNS) – Some 40 people from nine countries in the Americas participated in a Spanish-language international dialogue on “The Schiller Institute Plan for the Development of Haiti” held Nov. 6 via Zoom video conference. The opening presentations were made by EIR’s Dennis Small and Plan co-author Cynthia Rush, followed by remarks from three respondents: Domingo Reyes (Dominican Republic, economist); Billy Anders Estimé (Haiti, co-founder of Café Diplo Haiti); and Caonabo Suárez (Dominican Republic, water expert). All three respondents emphasized the importance of the Schiller Institute’s global approach to solving the Haiti problem, denounced attempts to pit Haitians and Dominicans against each other, and urged the widest possible circulation of the Schiller Institute Plan (now available in English, Spanish, and French versions). The dialogue lasted almost three hours, and is now posted on the EIR Espanol YouTube channel https://youtu.be/q8S7W8TB2ZQ . The countries represented were Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, and the U.S.

Like Father, Like Son: Prince Charles Demands Environmental War Drive at COP26

November 3, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in Britain, Environmentalism updates, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Green New Deal

Like Father, Like Son: Prince Charles Demands Environmental War Drive at COP26 –

Nov. 2, 2021 (EIRNS)—While the Queen ensured that Prince Phillip’s virus hovered visibly over the proceedings, recording her video for the Royal Family’s reception for the world leaders gathered to open COP 26 with the late His Royal Virus’s picture prominently next to her, Prince Charles well saluted his father’s Nazi-like approach to depopulation, demanding that this be accomplished by replacing governments by a global system of private interests imposed through “a vast military-style campaign.”

Twice he insisted that “a war-like footing” be adopted. “Climate change and biodiversity loss … pose an even greater existential threat than the COVID-19 pandemic, to the extent that we have to put ourselves on a war-like footing,” Prince Charles asserted from the outset. “We know what we must do. With a growing global population creating ever increasing demand on the planet’s finite resources, we have to reduce emissions urgently, and take action to tackle the carbon already in the atmosphere, including from coal powered power systems….”

“Our efforts cannot be a series of independent initiatives running in parallel; the scale and scope of the threat we face, call for a global systems-level solution, based on radically transforming our current fossil fuel-based economy to one that is genuinely renewable and sustainable….

“We know this will take trillions, not billions of dollars. We also know that countries, many of whom are burdened by growing levels of debt, simply cannot afford to go green. Here what is needed is a vast military-style campaign to marshal the strength of the global private sector. With trillions at its disposal, far beyond global GDP, and with the greatest respect, beyond even the governments of the world’s leaders, it offers the only real prospect of achieving fundamental economic transition,” he concluded. His ghoulish speech can be found here,

HRH’s reference to a military approach is not mere metaphor. As EIR reported in its Oct. 1, 2021, Daily Alert, the British Crown’s premier policymaking think tank, the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA)—known as Chatham House—had just published a paper, “Building Global Climate Security,” arguing that since climate change poses such a serious threat to global security, it will now be necessary to rethink “traditional security concepts,” because climate change is “the most serious threat to global security we face,” and the “security community” is going to play a major role in enforcing green fascism and depopulation. For example: the RIIA paper enthusiastically noted that since there are growing calls to legally define “ecocide” as a crime under the International Criminal Court (ICC), the chance of the armed forces being called on to defend against ecocide “looks increasingly likely.”

Former Greek Premier Calls for BRI to Be Model of Cooperation Between China and EU

May 13, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in China, Economic development updates, General updates, Global Diplomacy, Greece, New Silk Road / BRI updates

May 12 (EIRNS) — In an interview with Xinhua, former Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou called for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to become a project for new relations between the European Union and Asia. “The Belt and Road Initiative should become a project of new relations, building the new and future relations of the European Union with Asia and of course with China,” he said. He added that because Greece has “worked closely with China for many years,” it is in a position to play a role in this effort. “Greece and China, as ancient cultures, have a lot to give not only to each other, but to the world,” the former prime minister stressed.

Papandreou cited China’s Cosco Shipping investment at Piraeus as an example of fruitful cooperation between Greece and China. Piraeus has been transformed into a major trading and transportation hub for goods both ways. In addition to trade, Papandreou said, Greece and China can collaborate in areas such as the environment, tourism, as well as in the exchange of traditional medicinal and wellness knowledge, among others. Papandreou is currently a member of the Greek parliament and the President of the Socialist International (SI). He has consistently called for cooperation with China, despite the positions of other member parties in the SI.

A recent example is a meeting via video link between Papandreou and Song Tao, Minister of the International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), on April 2, where Papandreou said, “We need to find ways to lower the tensions around these issues [human rights issues] and actually have a dialogue… If we get into this tit-for-tat policy, it often escalates. In the zero-sum game, nobody wins or everybody loses it”. He also praised the successful fight against poverty. As vice chairman of the International Olympic Truce Centre, Papandreou also spoke highly of China’s contribution to the Olympics. “As a Greek, and also as part of the Olympic movement, we see the Olympics as neutral ground, one which should not be politicalized,” he said, referring to recent contentions around a range of issues between China and the United States.

Nigerian VP Osinbajo: “Banning Fossil Fuel Investments Would Crush Africa”

November 10, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in Economic development updates, Environmentalism updates, Finance, General updates, Global Diplomacy, Nigeria, Nigeria

Nigerian VP Osinbajo: “Banning Fossil Fuel Investments Would Crush Africa”–

Nov 8 (EIRNS)–Adding another voice to the African chorus denouncing the Green Reset– Mark Carney’s drive to “red-line” the developing world, by refusing credit for projects and even proffering pay-offs to never develop your nation– is Nigeria’s Vice President, Yemi Osinbajo. He wrote an article this Summer, that was re-posted last week during the COP26 Summit. He states that “wealthy nations” cutting investment avenues for carbon-based energy sources in Africa– especially after having profited from them for decades– “will do little to limit carbon emissions globally but much to hurt the continent’s economic prospects.”

Nigeria, a country rich in petroleum and natural gas, is being forced to deny itself the benefit of {its own} resources, Osinbajo says, because the only investments which can be financed are for (interruptible) solar and wind. “For countries such as my own, Nigeria, which is rich in natural resources but still energy poor, {the transition must not come at the expense of affordable and reliable energy} for people, cities, and industry. To the contrary, it must be inclusive, equitable, and just – which means preserving the right to sustainable development and poverty eradication, as enshrined in global treaties such as the 2015 Paris climate accord.”

The Vice President writes, “Africa’s progress could be undone by the rich world’s efforts to curb investments in all fossil fuels,” pointing out with bitter irony that, “Institutions such as the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation and the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation {were specifically created to help spur high-impact projects},” the very kind of which they are now refusing to let go forward. [emphasis added]

The fact that Osinbajo wrote this piece, titled, “The divestment delusion: Why banning fossil fuel investments would crush Africa,” over two months ago –about the time that the multinationals were beating a retreat from one of the world’s largest natural gas developments, in Mozambique– should not reduce the power of his statement, in fact just the opposite. Originally published in the August 31 issue of the Foreign Affairs, the magazine of the imperial Council on Foreign Relations, Osinbajo’s piece was republished last week by the Habari Network a publication focusing on Africa and the Caribbean. While the post therefore may not reflect the latest developments in Glasgow, the sentiment and the validity of the charges made against the “climate mafia” in the U.K., the U.S. and Western Europe continue to ring true. The Habari Network article appears here. The original article in Foreign Affairs is here.

China Labels U.S. Foreign Policy on Xinjiang “Weasel Diplomacy”

May 13, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in China, Color Revolutions, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Global Diplomacy, United States, World war danger updates

May 12 (EIRNS)—China very appropriately has labeled as “weasel policy” U.S. policy toward Xinjiang. Today at the United Nations, the permanent missions of the U.S., the U.K, Germany and an array of NGOs are holding an event on Xinjiang and “the repression of Uighur Muslims.” The spokesman for China’s UN mission issued a hard-hitting statement in response to this insult, while the semi-official Global Times titled its article on the subject: “U.S. `weasel diplomacy’ will not function in Xinjiang.” During the May 10 Foreign Ministry briefing, spokeswoman Hua Chunying also asserted that U.S. behavior on Xinjiang was “just like the weasel paying respect to the hen, without the best of intentions.” Global Times quotes professor Li Haidong, from the Institute of International Relations at the China Foreign Affairs University, who warned that the purpose of this “weasel diplomacy” is to turn Xinjiang into another Afghanistan. The proverb quoted by Hua, he said, is that a weasel may put on a friendly face, but will always find the opportunity to catch the hen and eat it.

Global Times adds that this weasel diplomacy has brought war to many countries, pointing to how the U.S. “ruthlessly and barbarically inflamed turmoil in Afghanistan for its own interests,” yet now pretends to care about Xinjiang’s Muslims. It won’t work in Xinjiang, GT admonishes, because Xinjiang “is neither Ukraine nor Afghanistan–China has strong national power, rich resources and powerful strategies.” Li pointedly warns, “If the U.S. tends to believe it could stir up internal chaos in China, it must have overestimated its own strength and underestimated China’s ability to resist external pressures.”

The Chinese UN mission’s statement points to the “sheer lies and political bias” of today’s UN event, and particularly attacks the fact that in the middle of a global pandemic, and when nations should be acting in solidarity to face the challenge of defeating the pandemic, the co-sponsors of this event are obsessed with undermining the unity and collaboration of Member States–violating the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. The spokesman slams the U.S.’s sanctimonious claims of defending Uighur Muslims, when its perpetual wars have slaughtered Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria–killing civilians and displacing tens of millions. The U.S. doesn’t care about the deaths of almost one million Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria but is “very keen” on Uighur Muslims in China, he says. Today’s event, he intones, is “outright political farce.” The full Global Times article is here.

Schiller Institute Urges Funds for Afghan Health Platform; British Urge Billions to Fight Mythical `Global Warming’

November 2, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in Afghanistan, Agriculture, Economic development updates, General updates, Global Diplomacy, Healthcare, Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Oct. 31 (EIRNS)–Schiller Institute Chair Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her weekly webcast yesterday reported that more than 2,000 hospitals in Afghanistan had closed during the fighting in that nation. Even more shocking, only 100 hospitals, most lacking medical supplies and adequate personnel, remain for 38 million people.

Mrs. LaRouche called on her audience to mobilize immediate emergency aid to be sent from the United States, Europe and the whole world; China has already done so. She called the needed supply action, “Operation Ibn Sina,” after the famous Persian doctor born in today’s Afghanistan, considered one of the greatest scientists of the Islamic Golden Age, and the father of modern medicine. Of the 250 books Ibn Sina is estimated to have written, 40 deal with medicine, including The Book of Healing, and the Canon of Medicine (which became a standard medical text at medieval universities until about 1650).

In a cynical juxtaposition to this heroic effort to save the nation of Afghanistan, police estimated last summer that the current “Climate Summit” in Glasgow could cost “several hundred million pounds,” nearly half a billion U.S. dollars. COP 26 will be the largest summit the U.K. has ever held, with up to 200 leaders expected. Better they stay home and focus on Operation Ibn Sina instead.

Syria Times Reports Dr. Shaaban Attacking British at Schiller Event

May 11, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Color Revolutions, General, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Global Diplomacy, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Media coverage of our activity, Our conferences, Syria, Syria, World war danger updates

May 10 (EIRNS) – Schiller Institute Southwest Asia representative Hussein Askary reported to EIR that Syrian media is publishing a news item today in which it is made obvious that Syrian government spokesperson Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban used the Schiller Institute conference as a platform to single out the British as instrumental in the propaganda and psychological war against Syria. Dr. Shaaban usually directs her criticism for the military and economy devastation visited upon Syria, at the United States and Saudi Arabia; seldom at Britain. This link is for the English version of the circulating story in Syria Times. The Arabic version was published in several Arabic newspapers and websites, Askary reports.

Presidents of DR, Costa Rica and Panama Urge Immediate Action on Haitian Crisis

September 27, 2021by madeleine in COVID-19, General, General updates, Global Diplomacy, Haiti, Healthcare

Meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York on Sept. 22, the Presidents of the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica and Panama signed a communique announcing the creation of an informal alliance among them, titled the {Alliance for Democratic Institutionality,} which calls on the international community to act swiftly to address the crisis in Haiti. In the communique, Dominican President Luis Abinader, Costa Rican Carlos Alvarado Quesada and Panama’s Laurentino Cortizo Cohen express their “deep concern over the Haitian crisis and its growing impact on the region, particularly its grave migratory consequences.” They have “instructed their foreign ministers to, in alliance with strategic partners such as the United Nations, the United States, the European Union and other friendly countries, immediately devise concrete, comprehensive and sustainable solutions in the framework of respect for [human] dignity and human rights for the purpose of taking on the alarming situation in Haiti.”

All three nations are struggling to recover from the impact of the COVID-triggered economic crisis, made more difficult in the recent period by having to contend with large flows of migrants, largely from Haiti. In a document produced as a result of their meeting, in addition to the communique, the three leaders stress their shared values and “consider it of the utmost importance the exchange of opinions on the challenges our region faces to retake the path of post-pandemic development,” including proposing “joint initiatives that result in the prosperity, sustainable development and the reactivation of our economies.” They stress the importance of reviving regional integration, mentioning “strategic partners” without naming them — all three nations have diplomatic ties with China; and make an obligatory reference to the “green development paradigm.”

They will benefit from learning about the Schiller Institute’s development program for Haiti, the Caribbean and Central American region to be published in the upcoming {EIR}, which was presented in the Sept. 25 Manhattan Project Meeting, “Reconstructing Haiti is America’s Way Out of the `Global Britain’ Trap.”

Spanish-language communique and document available here.

NYT Opinion Writer: Biden’s Taiwan Policy “Reckless,” Threatens “Catastrophic War”

May 6, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in China, General, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Global Diplomacy, United States, World war danger updates

May 6 (EIRNS)–Under the title: “Biden’s Taiwan Policy Is Truly, Deeply Reckless,” the New York Times Opinion writer Peter Beinart warned on May 5 that the Administration’s policy is bringing us very close to war, and quotes experts that the war would become nuclear. He also quotes military experts that the U.S. could not win such a war — simply driving home that such a war would likely become nuclear by a desperate and crazy U.S. leadership.

Beinart writes: “Like the Trump administration before it, the Biden team is now progressively chipping away” at the One China policy, which has prevented war over these past decades.

He notes: “Last summer, Democrats removed the phrase `one China’ from their platform. In January, Mr. Biden became the first American president since 1978 to host Taiwan’s envoy at his inauguration. In April, his administration announced it was easing decades-old limitations on official U.S. contacts with the Taiwanese government. These policies are increasing the odds of a catastrophic war. The more the United States and Taiwan formally close the door on reunification, the more likely Beijing is to seek reunification by force.”

Beinart quotes Harvard’s Graham Allison: “No Chinese national security official I have ever met, and no U.S. official who has examined the situation, doubts that China would choose war over losing territory it considers vital to its national interest.” He quotes Fareed Zakaria: “The Pentagon has reportedly enacted 18 war games against China over Taiwan, and China has prevailed in every one.” He notes: “Within 500 miles of the island, mainland China boasts 39 air bases. The United States possesses two. To come to Taiwan’s aid, U.S. forces would need to cover huge distances, and China has built an arsenal of advanced anti-ship missiles, sometimes called “carrier-killers,” which are designed to make such a rescue mission hideously costly.”

In other words, the U.S. can not win such a conventional war. Beinart notes: “Some of America’s most experienced China experts — including former ambassador to Beijing J. Stapleton Roy and Chas Freeman, who served as Richard Nixon’s interpreter on his 1972 trip to China — believe such a conflict would risk nuclear war. He adds that, according to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, 85 percent of Republican leaders support defending Taiwan militarily, but “only 43 percent of Republicans among the public agree.”

He concludes: “What’s crucial is that the Taiwanese people preserve their individual freedom and the planet does not endure a third world war. The best way for the United States to pursue those goals is by maintaining America’s military support for Taiwan while also maintaining the “one China” framework that for more than four decades has helped keep the peace in one of the most dangerous places on earth. Hawks will call this appeasement. So be it. Ask them how many American lives they’re willing to risk so the United States can have official diplomatic relations with Taiwan.”

Beinart is a professor of journalism and political science at The Newmark School of Journalism at The City University of New York, and is editor-at-large of the “progressive” Jewish Currents..

Global Times Editorial Defends Developing Nations’ `Industrialization’ vs. Climate Geopolitics

April 20, 2021by Mary Jane Freeman in China, Economic development updates, Environmentalism updates, General, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Global Diplomacy, Green New Deal, New financial order updates, Power & Energy

Global Times Editorial Defends Developing Nations’ `Industrialization’ against Climate Geopolitics

April 19 (EIRNS) — The unsigned editorial in the April 19 Global Times, “To deal with climate change, China-US cooperation is important and sensitive,” takes the global anti-Malthusian resistance shown by India and others to another level. The developing nations’ 2009 resistance to population reduction and genocide, effective in Copenhagen then, is revived.

The unsigned editorial (indicating a Politburo statement) begins with reserve, pointing out that it is “fair to say that China and the U.S. have communicated quite effectively and achieved some results. China has not yet announced plans for its top leader to attend the climate summit; analysts are waiting for things to become clearer.” The editorial likewise points out that “the general environment among the big powers is not good. The U.S. wants to show leadership by working with China and Russia to address the climate challenge, while it is also obstructing China and Russia in other spheres. That is not what normal relations among great powers should be like.”

But then the principles of economic development against environmental extremism become very clear indeed. “UN climate action involves the fundamental interests of humanity, and the specific arrangement for reducing emissions concerning all countries’ major development interests,” says Global Times. “The developed countries have completed industrialization, while developing countries are still in the process of industrialization, and some have just started this process…. People’s living standards are still low in these countries, and it is particularly important to create more resources to improve people’s livelihoods through further industrialization.” The article states that the U.S. has used its power to force more obligations on countries, while taking benefits.

“In an extreme scenario, if the world is about to promote carbon neutrality today, then the world’s economic development pattern will be perpetuated as it is today. The development gap between the developed and underdeveloped countries will become permanent.” The newspaper reminds that while the American elite fight over many issues, they agree on U.S. hegemony. “The current U.S. administration is trying to play the role of a leader and thus squeeze developing countries’ room for growth, as the previous U.S. administration desired.

“China and the U.S. are both the largest emitters; the two countries have huge differences in population and economic development, but the U.S. wants China to take more responsibilities in reducing emissions. It is worth observing the relation between such [environmentalist] pressure from the U.S., and the U.S.’ geopolitical move to pressure China.”

It concludes: “We should promote that the common interests of humanity are jointly defined by the interests of people from all countries, rather than by a handful of countries that want to monopolize this definition.”

Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche suggested today that the editorial has a clarity that would not have come without the LaRouche movement’s organizing and reports exposing the Green New Deal. She called it the strongest statement since the 2009 announcement of the G77 nations that they would not sign the Copenhagen “suicide pact” of population reduction.

Page 19 of 34First...«181920 »...Last

Recent posts

language