Join us this Thursday (August 3rd) 3pm EDT (9pm CET) for a special No2Nato Humanity for Peace rally featuring just some guest speakers from across the globe who will be speaking at the Sunday 6 Aug rallies across the globe commemorating the anniversary of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima. Unite with us demanding it to never happen again!
Jan. 18, 2023 (EIRNS)–CGTN today published on its English-language YouTube channel (which has about 3 million subscribers) a 14-minute video commentary by Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, on the occasion of the Davos World Economic Forum. CGTN’s introductory blurb asked the question: “How should world leaders work together in a volatile situation? Join Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and president of the Schiller Institute, to explore these talking points.” The video can be found here.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche:
The world economic forum has given its annual meeting the title “Cooperation in a Fragmented World,” and shortly before the Forum published their Global Risk Report, in which they present the results of the latest Global Risk Perception Survey. In that, they consider the current crisis, then the expectation of what many experts think will come out in the short term (two years), the most severe in the long term (ten years), in terms of the economy, the environment, society, and those geopolitical and technological risks that could become tomorrow’s crises. Then they consider how these different crises could evolve into a “poly-crisis” by 2030.
Concerning the methodology used to come to their evaluations, they report that they interviewed over 1200 experts from academia, business, government, the international community, and civil society between September 7th and October 5th, 2022. In other words, this Global Risk Report is not based on scientific methods, but rather on an Aristotelian method to arrive at the common denominator of the opinions of selected experts.
While there will also be attendance from countries of the Global South, who may try to set different accents, the World Economic Forum represents a good portion of the top global corporate establishment; and they clearly try to continue to push their agenda, which is an acceleration of the Great Reset, that they have been pushing before. It completely leaves out the optimistic perspective, for example, of the circa 150 countries working with the Belt and Road Initiative and their optimism that through investments in infrastructure, agriculture, industry, and international scientific cooperation, etc., most of the problems they insist will dominate the next years can be overcome.
Instead, there is a lot of talk about “progressive tipping points” and “catastrophic outcomes,” which are all designed to motivate the assembled business leaders and beyond, to adopt the program fitting the financial interests of the main financial players of the neo-liberal system. For example, in the section called “Natural Ecosystems; past the point of no return” they write:
“Human interventions have negatively impacted a complex and delicately balanced global natural ecosystem, triggering a chain of reactions. Over the next ten years, the interplay between biodiversity loss, pollution, natural resource consumption, climate change, and socioeconomic drivers will make for a dangerous mix.
“Given that over half of the world’s economic output is moderately to highly dependent on nature, the collapse of ecosystems will have far-reaching economic and societal consequences. These include increased occurrences of zoonotic diseases, a fall in crop yields and nutritional value, growing water stress exacerbating potentially violent conflict,” etc., etc.
The deep Malthusian pessimism reflected in such a statement makes clear that this report is more a program of their intent than a scientific prognosis. Because of human interventions, the world population has increased from a few millions after the last Ice Age to 8 billion. If there will be a fall in crop yields, then [it will be] only because of the Green demonization of modern agriculture. And if there will be a violent conflict, then only because the necessary development of new fresh water resources will be blocked by the Malthusian environmentalist agenda.
Economic Risks in 2023
Unfortunately, I think that 2023 will see an escalation of the financial and economic crises. The central banks have tried to curb inflation by raising the interest rates rather rapidly. Then, as we could see for example in Great Britain, they had to suddenly go from quantitative tightening to quantitative easing again, because of the danger of a chain reaction of over-indebted firms; thus going back to the inflationary money pumping. Since the tendency towards hyperinflation is the result of ever more monetarist policies going for profit maximization at the expense of physical economy and the reckless liquidity injections following the systemic crisis of 2008 by the trillions of dollars, euros, and pounds, only an end to the casino economy could solve the problem.
What should be put on the international agenda is the reintroduction of a Glass-Steagall banking separation, which puts the commercial banks under state protection, but forces the investment banks to straighten out their balance sheets on their own without taxpayer money. Then, each country must create their own national bank, because credit creation must be under the sovereign control of the governments. These national banks must then cooperate to create a new credit system, which is only devoted to investments in projects serving the common good of the people. There are already efforts going on in this direction among many countries of the Global South — also, to create a new international currency.
While it is very difficult to predict the exact time when the systemic crisis of the neo-liberal system will come to a head, it cannot be excluded that the decision to have a complete reorganization of the international financial system could force itself on the agenda in this year of 2023.
Geopolitical Conflict Triggering a Chain of Reactions
Right now, unfortunately, the crisis over Ukraine — which is not a crisis between Russia and Ukraine, but between NATO and Russia — is accelerating in a dangerous way. I think it is extremely urgent that a diplomatic solution is found quickly to end the war. There are various efforts, like Pope Francis has offered the Vatican as a venue for negotiations, and I and a group of Latin American legislators have written an open letter to the Pope to mobilize people around the world to support this idea. We are also asking people to sign that letter. Also, President Lula from Brazil has been asked to mediate by several countries from the Global South; and also President Erdogan from Turkiye has made some efforts.
I think all of these proposals should be merged, because too much is at stake. But, I think because the crisis around Ukraine is so dangerous, the initiatives made by President Xi Jinping with the Global Security Initiative, together with the Global Development Initiative are probably the most important angle to solve the crisis. The Global Security Initiative is really a proposal for a new international security architecture, and obviously that must take into account the security interests of every single country on the planet for it to work.
I am aware that right now it does not look very likely that the countries of the so-called West would be willing to discuss such a new international security architecture, given the fact that NATO is trying to become Global NATO, and Japan and Great Britain have just signed the so-called “Reciprocal Access Agreement,” and the US, the UK, and Australia have signed the AUKUS pact. But the BRICS countries already have a higher GDP than the G-7; and 17 countries of the Global South are applying for membership in the BRICS. So, they are in the process of representing the vast majority of the human species. And the countries of the Global South have made it quite clear that they don’t want to be drawn into a geopolitical conflict between the West on the one side, and the China and Russia on the other side.
I think it is therefore quite possible that in the course of 2023, the financial crisis erupts even more dramatically, and that that will be the right moment to put the combination of the Global Security Initiative and the Global Development Initiative on the international agenda. I think President Xi is very right that security can only exist if there is development. So, I am sure that the vast majority of the countries who are striving to overcome the relics of colonialism, and who really want to develop into become modern and prosperous countries, would support such an intervention.
And then hopefully, the countries of the West can see that it would be in their best interest to cooperate with the Global Security Initiative, the Global Development Initiative, and the Belt and Road Initiative.
Global Risks in the Next Two Years
There are policy initiatives which can overcome the inflation by reorganizing the financial system, by addressing the root causes for the crisis. The excessive profit orientation at the expense of the physical economy clearly did not work. And what the World Economic Forum calls the geo-economic confrontation can be stopped the moment these CEOs recognize that win-win cooperation with the majority of the countries in the world would also be in their best interest; since to cooperate with growing markets with billions of people with growing buying power is for sure better than to go bankrupt in a crash. And the best way to cope with natural disasters and extreme weather events is to invest in basic infrastructure, water management, and scientific and technological progress in order to develop the technologies to have early warning systems, secure housing construction, and other means of adaptation.
Disagreements on Cybersecurity in Major Countries
There have been various attempts to have agreement between major countries on cybersecurity. There was an agreement for example in 2013 between Russia and the United States to establish a secure phone connection, and a working group to mitigate cybersecurity threats. In 2017, in light of the allegation of election interference made against Russia, Trump and Putin agreed to create a cybersecurity unit to prevent election interference and other cyber threats. Trump praised it as a big step forward, but was forced to backtrack only 12 hours later, due to massive pressure from Congress and the mainstream media. Then, in preparation work for the 2018 meeting in Helsinki between Trump and Putin, Russia offered the United States cooperation in the field of preventing cyberattacks on critical infrastructure — power plants, water supply and transport management systems, hospitals, banks, and so on. The corresponding provision was included in the joint statement of the Presidents of the two countries prepared by the Russian side for adoption at the summit in Helsinki. While the summit between the two Presidents worked well, all hell was unleashed against Trump afterwards by the same forces, and the agreement was not signed.
At this point, the trust between the West and Russia and China is at an historic low point. Under these circumstances, an isolated agreement on cybersecurity seems very unlikely. Therefore, a great vision is required on how a solution can be put on the table which addresses all the major problems together, such as a new, just world economic order based on such concepts as the Global Security Initiative in combination with the Global Development Initiative.
I think that we have reached a point in the history of mankind where we really must get serious about the international order of relations among nations, and how we can organize them in such a way that we can self-govern as a species which is gifted with creative reason. In an existential crisis, [such] as the one we are experiencing right now, and which is very likely going to get much worse, it is not the amount of money one owns that counts; but it is the quality of political leadership of exceptionally wise and moral men and women who have the ability to shape the future for the benefit of all humanity.
In Davos, there will be a great number of billionaires, millionaires, and hangers-on to power. It will be very interesting to watch if they are also up for the larger job required.
Dec. 7, 2022 (EIRNS)–Wednesday Dec. 7, 2022—Vladimir Soloviev aired a 21-minute interview with Helga Zepp-LaRouche on Dec. 7. {Video version of this interview is here: https://disk.yandex.ru/d/6gNnbGKzVoMQLA }
VLADIMIR SOLOVIEV: Well, unfortunately, that’s about my German, so if you don’t have anything against it, we’ll try English. I’m sorry for being late a couple of minutes. You know, those Russians, they’re never good on time. There’s always a problem with Russians being good on time! [laughter]
I have to say: I was quite impressed with your very tough point of view, (should I say that?) very revolutionary. Definitely not mainstream of current European political ideas. How come? It looks like the Dawn of Europe, the book that was written more than a 100 years ago, suddenly comes true. What are we facing right now? And what should be done, in order to save the world?
HELGA ZEPP-LaROUCHE: Well, I think the problem is that we are, as some of the Russian officials have stated recently, we are already at a state of war between NATO and Russia, and many people in many countries are extremely worried that this may lead to nuclear war. And if it would come to that, I don’t think it would be a limited nuclear war. I think regional war, the use of only tactical nuclear weapons, I think this is all ruled out. And if it comes to the use of only one single nuclear weapon, it would have the danger of a global nuclear and that would mean the annihilation of civilization.
And for me, I think you have to start with that: This is why I have suggested principles, 10 principles for a new international security and development architecture, which is drawing very much on the example of the Peace of Westphalia which ended 150 years of religious war in Europe. And I’m really fighting very hard to put this on the agenda before it is too late.
SOLOVIEV: So, what are those 10 principles? And what makes you think that current political power in Germany, but basically in U.S.A.—we realize that; whatever is there right now in Germany, it’s just a reflection, it’s just another projection of American point of view—that they will hear you? That you won’t be punished severely for your point view. Because now it’s not—it’s impossible to talk about the freedom of speech and the freedom of philosophical ideas in Europe.
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: I know it’s not allowed, and you are being ostracized immediately, and worse. But I think we are in a situation—I mean, this is not a tenable situation. Germany, for example, has lost all of its sovereignty with the present government, at least concerning certain ministers. We are running against a collapse in Germany: The economic situation is absolutely devastating. The result of the sanctions, which Germany imposed against Russia, on orders practically of the United States, is boomeranging, and the blowback is threatening the existence of Germany as an industrial nation. So this will become apparent in the next weeks and months.
And I think we are in an epochal change: It’s not just a war between the West and Russia, but the result of the policies imposed against Russia in particular, have led to a counterreaction: The entire Global South is in a revolutionary spirit to establish a just new economic order, and this is a revival of the Non-Aligned Movement, which was already on that course in the 1970s, and now I think it is unstoppable. You have the emergence of a completely new system, which is the BRICS, the SCO (the Shanghai Cooperation Organization), the Eurasian Economic Union, all of these countries are reacting to the policies coming especially from the British and the United States, and they’re forming a new world economic order.
Some people may think it is enough if you have a multipolar world; the unipolar world is definitely over. But I am of the opinion that even multipolarity is not sufficient, because it still has the potential of a geopolitical confrontation. So this is why I think the most advanced proposal to overcome that in the present world comes from President Xi Jinping, who is talking about the “shared community of the future of mankind.” My 10 principles are basically an effort to elaborate principles how we can get people to understand what the new paradigm is, in which we have to move. That is a very deep philosophical conception: I’ve been working together with my late husband, Lyndon LaRouche, on that for the better part of the last 50 years. So I’m convinced that this is resonating with what the world right now urgently needs, which is a new conception—the question, really, is can we as a human civilization give ourselves an order which allows the long-term survivability of our species? So this is the biggest challenge to our intelligence you can have. And since I’m—and that’s the 10th point of my 10 principles—I’m convince that man is fundamentally good, and that the evil in the world is the result of a lack of development.
So I’m confident. I think the danger is incredibly big, but on the same time, I’m also extremely optimistic that a solution to this present calamity can be found.
SOLOVIEV: So what are those 10 principles? What are they? How dare you bring those 10 principles to the world of Schwab! Who is saying that humanity is a disease, and it’s better to be without humanity for the world! So how come that, nowadays, you’re coming with basically, let’s say “humanitarian tradition” of understanding humanity? Instead of modern liberal, Nazi view, where basically humanity should be destroyed?
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: Well, I think the present world order, in large part suffers from the problem of oligarchism: That is not a new phenomenon. You had empires, the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, the Venetian Empire, the British Empire, which in one sense still exists, and these forms of government were based on the idea that you have a small, powerful elite, sometimes the aristocrats, sometimes the financial elite, and that they have all the privileges and rule over backward masses of people. That system is the origin of what a former President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, calls the “green delirium,” which is the idea that we are living in a world of finite resources, that you have to have management of scarcity, and all of this.
But that’s not the real universe. The good thing is that man is different from animals, because we are capable of discovering universal principles about the physical universe. This is called scientific and technological progress, and when we apply that progress in the production process, then it leaves to an increase in the living standard, the longevity of people. So, I think we have reached the point now where the evolution of mankind is at a point where we have to adjust the political and economic order to the actual lawfulness of the physical universe, if we want to survive. That is not a new idea: That was actually a philosophical conception in Europe, it was called “natural law.” You have the same idea in other cultures. In India, for example, it’s called “cosmology,” where basically politics is supposed to implement the lawfulness of the cosmos. You have the same idea in Chinese philosophy, with the “Mandate of Heaven.” So in all great cultures, you have the idea that there is a higher lawfulness which we have to respect, or bring about destruction.
So I think we are in a very optimistic change of an epoch. I would call it that mankind is about to reach the age of adulthood.
SOLOVIEV: [laughs] That is very optimistic, should I say! But by reaching the age of adult, we have to face quite new challenges. One of them is that Europe is basically put in an Iron Curtain, by trying to recognize Russia as a “sponsor of terrorism” state, they are just cutting all possible ties that have been left, and it’s leading us to a completely new scenario. Europe without Russia is basically a very small place!
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: Right now, the mainstream media and the major political parties, as they are represented in the European Parliament, which made this resolution about Russian being a terrorist state, that is the surface. And if you only look at the mass media, you get the impression that that is everything there is. But we are organizing people: Look, there are demonstrations in all European countries, to end the war, to have a peaceful negotiation, use diplomacy already, and many people are demonstrating in east Germany, in Belgium, in France, in Italy, even in Great Britain. So I think, this is a very dangerous moment, obviously, but I think that as the crisis will become bigger, and you have hyperinflation, the energy prices, the food prices, I think we are heading towards a very big moment of decision. And what the Schiller Institute is trying to do, is we are organizing international conferences, which have to be virtual because of the still existing pandemic conditions, and we are trying to bring together people from all over the world.
I have initiated something which is called—I should explain—Friedrich Schiller, after whom the Schiller Institute is named, had the idea that there must not be contradiction between patriots and world citizens. So, given the fact that the danger of nuclear war makes everybody, instantly a world citizen, because the whole world is challenged, so I’ve called for a world citizens’ movement. And since I was born in Trier—which some people may recognize the importance of that—I have called for “World Citizens of All Countries, Unite!” [laughs] in which I find a certain irony.
But many people have responded. We’ve had three conferences already with many sitting and former parliamentarians, and former ministers and Presidents from Latin America, who have issued a call to all parliamentarians and elected officials of the world to join this movement, and fight essentially for these 10 principles, and a new security and development architecture.
SOLOVIEV: So you are still an optimist? Do you still think that humanity is going to survive?
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: Oh, yes! You know, obviously, the danger is enormous, because if it comes to nuclear war, there will not be even an historian left to investigate the reasons why it came to this point. So I’m not unaware of the incredible danger. But I believe that the majority of the world is already creating a new system: The BRICS countries already have a GDP which is higher than that of the G7. And you saw at the recent G20 meeting, despite incredible pressure, the majority of the countries of the Global South do not want to change sides! Even the Trilateral Commission, which is really—not exactly my kind of organization—the Japanese representative of the Trilateral Commission just recently said, telling the United States and Great Britain, do not force us to choose sides between China and the United States, because if we are forced, we will choose China. This came from Japanese Trilateral Commission members!
So the spirit is really not—people do not want this geopolitical confrontation any longer. And I think there is a tremendous chance—look, Modi, who will chair the G20 in the coming year, just wrote a very beautiful statement, where he echoed essentially what I’m saying, that there are people who say that man is evil, but he says, no, the fact that there are so many aspirations in religion and philosophy that man is fundamentally good. And I think that with the leadership of India in the G20, you will see that the Global South will have a much great voice.
And we are trying to convince people in the United States and in Europe to join with that new system, rather than trying to oppose it. And, OK, maybe that will not function, but I’m optimistic that it’s the only choice: Because we have to get the United States and Europe to cooperate with the countries of the Global South and China. If the United States and China, which are the two largest economies of the world, are not working together, then no problem of the world can be solved. On the other side, if we succeed in showing that there is an advantage for everybody, to solve poverty—I mean poverty should be eliminated! It is the biggest violation of human rights you can imagine. So, all I want to say, is that what we are proposing is actually in cohesion with the wishes and desires of the world population.
SOLOVIEV: Well! But how can you imagine those guys in U.S., in U.K., in Germany, giving up the complex of superiority, where they still consider the other part of humanity, according to Kipling, half-beast, half-humans, as in the burden of the white man? So how can you imagine Americans suddenly recognizing that they’re not the chosen nation? They won’t count it! They don’t want to do it! No one ever gave up the complex of superiority before being defeated. There is no brain to apply to: Look at Biden! There is no {brain} to apply to! There is a number of stereotypes! And that’s about it.
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: Yeah, but look, Josep Borrell from the EU made this incredible statement that the EU is a beautiful garden…
SOLOVIEV: Yes, surrounded by jungle.
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: And that made him the laughingstock of the whole world!
SOLOVIEV: But he is an idiot! And he represents the diplomacy of the EU! What kind of idiot right now represents the EU as the top diplomat? That’s annoying!
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: Yes. But, in a certain sense, you have to laugh about it, as many countries of the Global South are doing.
The countries of the developing sector are right now in a mood where they recognize that this is the effort to keep the colonial order. But that is not—Look, all of these countries have a different tradition. The United States, for example, made their independence in the War of Independence against the British Empire. And the Constitution of the United States was the first real republic in the history of mankind, and if you look at the principles of Benjamin Franklin, of George Washington, of John Quincy Adams—John Quincy Adams said exactly what we are saying today, that you need a partnership of perfectly sovereign republics and the United States should not go out and look for foreign monsters. And then, Lincoln had the same idea. Franklin D. Roosevelt, when he designed the Bretton Woods system, it was meant as the first priority to overcome the underdevelopment of the developing countries. Even Kennedy had a beautiful idea about the role of technology would solve all the poverty in the Third World. So there {is} a tradition in the United States which is completely different. The problem with the United States right now is that they have adopted the model of the British Empire as the basis to rule the world in a unipolar world, in a unipolar style. But that is not the whole United States! The people of the United States are essentially good. It is what some people call the “MICIMATT”—you know, Ray McGovern—
SOLOVIEV: Right.
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: It’s the military-industrial complex, plus the Congress, plus the media, plus Silicon Valley, but that is a small minority. They look like the all-powerful force right now, but I think this other tradition of America is there, and we are trying very hard to make a revival of the best traditions of the United States.
SOLOVIEV: I hope that you succeed. I hope you succeed! Unfortunately, our time is running out. And excuse my smile: The reason is that my wife’s name is Olga Sepp [ph], so when I see Helga Zepp, I feel like I’m talking to a relative, should I say! [laughter]
ZEPP-LaROUCHE: That’s funny!
SOLOVIEV: Yes, that’s quite unusual. And, I love what you’re saying! And I love your very sweet, idealistic, but very thought-through, based on the belief that human are better than they are.
The only minor thing is: The Founding Fathers of the United States, after all about democracy and “human rights,” shall we say, so they all owned slaves. So, their definition of free men, were only for WASPs, and that’s what makes us Russians being so careful when we’re dealing with the West—the definition of every word. You have to be sure that you understand words in the same way. In any other case, we’re running into problems all the time.
It was a pleasure, and I to continue our discussions in the coming future.
The transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s participation in the panel interview, ‘What’s the Outlook for China’s Foreign Policy in the Next Five Years?’ on Nov. 4, 2022 follows:
China’s diplomatic efforts are in full swing, with the first round of visits by foreign leaders since the conclusion of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s visit to China, as the first EU leader since the start of the pandemic, follows that of General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong of the Communist Party of Vietnam, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan. What does it say about the outlook of China’s foreign policy after the Party Congress? Host Ge Anna is joined by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder of the Schiller Institute; Dr. Rong Ying, Vice President and Senior Research Fellow, China Institute of International Studies; Hamzah Rifaat Hussain, News Anchor, Indus News, Islamabad, Pakistan.
GE ANNA: China’s diplomatic efforts are in full swing with the first round of visits of foreign leaders since the conclusion of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. What does it say about the outlook of China’s foreign policy after the Party Congress? Welcome to World Today, the panel discussion with Ge Anna. We come to you from our studio in Beijing with a different perspective.
Chinese President Xi Jinping has met with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in Beijing, noting the complex international landscape, the Chinese President underscored the need for China and Germany—two major countries with significant influence—to work together in times of change and instability and contribute more to global peace and development. Scholz’s visit to China as the first European leader after the 20th CPC National Congress follows that of General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong of the Communist Party of Vietnam, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan.
So, what does China’s intensive diplomatic efforts say about the outlook of China’s foreign policy after the Party Congress, as China strives to translate its visions into reality? What can the rest of the world’s developed countries and developing ones alike expect from the rapid growth in the country?
To delve into this and more, let’s have: Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based political and economic think tank; Dr. Rong Ying, Vice President and Senior Research Fellow, China Institute of International Studies; Hamzah Rifaat Hussain, News Anchor from Indus News, Islamabad, Pakistan. Thanks for joining us today.
Zepp-LaRouche, the just-concluded 20th National Congress of the CPC has laid out a new blueprint for China’s future development, including shaping the trajectory of its engagement with the world. So, with such a background, what messages are being sent by China’s active diplomacy this week, shortly following the Party Congress?
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think this constitutes a major new initiative towards harmonic development in the world. I think this is a very important step, because the world is in deep trouble. We have incredible challenges as President Xi Jinping has always emphasized; challenges which have not been seen since 100 years. We face the danger of nuclear war; we have out-of-control inflation in many of the countries of the trans-Atlantic sector. I think what China is bringing into this world is a completely different approach. I think the potential of the combination of the Belt and Road Initiative, the global development initiative, and the global security initiative, are all conceptions which can bring a completely different paradigm into the world situation.
[Ge asks other guests questions.]
GE ANNA: Speaking of the purpose and objectives of China’s foreign policy, that is, to maintain world peace, promote common development, and a view to a community with a shared future for mankind, Helga, how do you read these objectives of China’s foreign policy? Especially when many believe we are living in a world where forces are keen to draw ideological lines and provoke confrontation between camps?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think this idea of a community with a shared future of mankind is very important, because it should remind people that we are sitting in one boat. And especially in times when the danger of a global nuclear war is on the horizon, I think it is a very useful concept to remind people that if it ever would come to that, nobody would survive such a war. And at the same time, it’s also a forward looking conception for the New Paradigm, because I think we have reached an epochal change in the history of mankind where we have to overcome geopolitical thinking. Geopolitical thinking was the cause for two world wars in the 20th Century, and if we continue to think in terms of blocs, this can go awfully wrong. So, the idea of the shared community of the future of mankind is the idea that we have to think about the one humanity first; that there can be no national interest, or the interest of a group of nations which would be in contradiction to the one humanity. I think this is a very important concept, and I think it would be very good if the Western countries would not just push it aside, but recognize that this is a philosophical idea which does give a concept for how we can build a future where all of humanity can prosper and survive.
[Ge asks other guests questions.]
GE ANNA: Helga, what’s your take? How do you look at the centrality accusation against China?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think if you go away from the words and actually look at the substance, behind all of this is the fact that the Western countries have pursued the neo-liberal model of economy and that is collapsing right now. I would even say that we are in the final phase of a hyperinflationary blow-out of the trans-Atlantic system. Because of that, they look at the rise of China as a systemic threat.
China is doing nothing to give a reason to be regarded as a threat, but I think it’s the idea that only if you contain the rise of China, if you decouple from Russia, from China, that you can somehow maintain what they call the “rules-based order.” Now, what this rules-based order is, nobody knows exactly. It’s also not so clear who is making these rules. We have the UN Charter, which should be the standard for international law, but I think the idea that China should be a systemic rival is not what the majority of the world population thinks. I think more than 150 countries that are cooperating with China in the Belt and Road Initiative do not see China as a systemic rival, but they see China as the country which helps them to overcome the relics of colonialism and poverty and under-development.
So, I think it’s really a tragedy that the Western media are so absolutely unified—the German word is Gleichschaltung—that they don’t allow anymore any truthful coverage. Because if the people of Europe and the United States would know the reality of what enormous progress China has made, they would not believe the story about systemic rivalry, because China has said many times that there is absolute room for everybody. Xi Jinping has made many times offers, especially to the United States, saying that there is a new concept of great power relationships; that the two strongest economies of the world must cooperate. I think the idea of finding a win-win cooperation remains the only way how we will get out of these many calamities in which the world is right now.
GE ANNA: Zepp-LaRouche, another question based on what you were just talking about, because China has repeatedly stated that it will never accept any zero-sum game, or the law of the jungle. But many experts believe this is a challenge to Western values. How do you look at such accusations?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: What is behind that, is that since about 2017, especially the British, but also the U.S. National Security papers, the National Security doctrines, started to characterize China as a systemic rival, as a competitor, and even harsher words. In a certain sense, China pursues a policy of harmonious development. I have not found—and I’m really a critical observer of politics—I have not seen any country of the developing sector, of the Global South, that would complain that they have been coerced by China. These accusations only come from the Western media. I think China has, on the other side, learned the lesson from its long history; from the century of humiliation, the enormous struggles of the 20th century. Now that China is finally strong enough to not have to put … [show goes to break while Zepp-LaRouche is still speaking].
GE ANNA: Let’s move on to the most recent visit by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. This is the first visit by a leader of a European Union country since the start of the pandemic, and the first visit by Scholz since he took office as Chancellor of Germany. This trip also attracted much attention from the media. Zepp-LaRouche, what do you think makes this meeting so significant to China and Germany in particular?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think it is extremely important, because it brings together the second- and fourth-largest economies of the world. Obviously, their collaboration is extremely important to solve any problem in the world. It is also very noteworthy because Scholz did this trip despite enormous pressure to not have a good relationship with China. He’s being pressured enormously from the U.S., from the British, and the Atlanticists inside Germany. As a matter of fact, the German Foreign Minister Baerbock, she is completely unreasonable in relationship to China. Therefore, I think it’s very important that Scholz does this, especially as the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between China and Germany has just occurred last month. Obviously, with the enormous rise of China, Germany has profited enormously, a lot of the living standard in Germany was also supported by the strong integration of the two economies. So, I think it is extremely important, and I’m actually happy, because I hope that this will be a signal for all the other European countries, and it will be a sign of at least a little demonstration of sovereignty on the side of Germany.
GE ANNA: But the German-based media has been bombarded for days with commentary on whether Scholz’s visit to China is showing weakness to Beijing, or is buying time for Germany to wean itself off its dependence on China. What’s your reflection on their perspective? What’s the meaning, in your opinion, of Scholz’s trip to China?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Scholz just wrote a longer piece in the German newspaper FAZ, where he says he wants to reduce the dependencies on certain supply chains. That makes sense, because as we have seen in the pandemic, if you don’t have a certain security in terms of essential goods, this can be devastating in times of crisis. But that is different than to say that Germany should decouple. If Germany would decouple right now, because of Atlanticist pressure the relationship with Russia has already been completely ended. Right now, there is no relationship between Russia and Germany anymore. These are the words of Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. I think if Germany would give in to this pressure, and also decouple from China, that would be the end of Germany as an industrial nation. We will look for an enormously difficult period in the coming fall and winter. The energy prices, the food prices, the inflation; we are looking at the potential de-industrialization of Germany. Many leaders of German industry have said that very clearly.
So, I think for Germany, the relationship with China must absolutely be a cornerstone of the existence of Germany as an industrial nation. But I’m optimistic that the industry leaders who are accompanying Scholz on this trip have said very clearly that they see the future of the German economy being very closely tied to that of China.
But it will be a battle, because I expect that the pressure is coming from the U.S. and Great Britain, so it will be a question of whether Germany can assert its sovereignty and its own interests. Hopefully that will happen, and then the future is bright. I have said many times that the fact that there is now a new economic system developing between the countries of the Global South, the BRICS, the SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union—these countries are all building a new economic system. It would be in the fundamental interest for Germany, which is an export nation, to cooperate. Hopefully if Germany goes in this direction, many other European countries will see the benefit for themselves as well.
[Ge asks other guests questions.]
GE ANNA: Zepp-LaRouche, besides differences between China and Germany, both China and Germany are actually the beneficiaries of globalization, and are striving for a more just international order with less political gains, sanctions, and confrontations. Do you think both sides do have the same vision in these turbulent times, as Dr. Rong suggested? In what areas can China’s and Germany’s cooperation and communication better insure multilateralism in the world?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Obviously, when you think small-minded, then you think that the world is only made up of competitors. But if you think creatively, and you think that scientific and technological progress are what make the economy progress, which was the philosophy of Germany for a very long time, and it is now the philosophy of China with the continuous application of innovation. If those two countries would join their creative efforts in discovery of new fundamental physical principles, scientific and technological progress, and they would cooperate, they could become so strong as a locomotive of the world economy.
For example, if Germany and China would cooperate in the area of artificial intelligence, digitalization, manned space flight, it would open up a whole array of new technologies; real fundamental breakthroughs as they go along with space science and space travel. It would really be a complete science driver for the whole world. So, hopefully, those elements of the German economy which are still in the traditional German sense and have not been infected by the Green delirium as Vaclav Klaus, the former President of Czechia, was calling it, then these two countries could cooperate tremendously to the benefit of the whole world. Because the industrial capacity of the entire world economy presently is below that which is needed to create enough food and development for all countries. That is the reason we have world famine and lack of clean water and all of these problems.
I think philosophically we must go back to the spirit of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who was a philosopher in the 17th and 18th centuries, who in 1697 wrote the beautiful Novissima Sinica, What Is New from China. He was at that time advertising that Germany and all of Europe should cooperate with China, to reach out and touch their hands and develop all the countries on the planet. I think that would be the joint mission for China and Germany to adopt in the best tradition of the Leibnizian outlook, which was the most advanced philosophical conception Germany had.
[Ge asks other guests questions.]
GE ANNA: Zepp-LaRouche, what’s your reflection on China’s emphasis on neighboring diplomacy as a top priority of these foreign relations?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think the success of that outlook is pretty obvious, because, for example, when you look at the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) which was founded in the beginning of this year, this has now become the largest free-trade zone in the world. In ASEAN you have a similar very good cooperation. And all the other economic and political alliances, partnerships China has, the BRICS, for example—that’s not all neighbors, but nevertheless—the SCO, all of these are examples of extremely well-functioning relationships among China and its neighbors. I think the success of that is seen by the fact that the economic dynamics in the world have clearly shifted to Asia. I think the Asian economic cooperation, not only China, but many other Asian countries, has become really the motor of the world economy. I think this is very important for the future, because we are in a transition form. It’s very clear that the old system of geopolitical control and bloc-building, this will not be suitable for the future, and a new model for cooperation has to be found. And I think what China has done in making these new kinds of diplomatic relations, that can actually be a role model for many parts of the world based on sovereignty, non-interference, acceptance of a different social model. All of these are ideas which would be very useful for other countries to study.
Oct. 9 (EIRNS) – Ahead of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China which convenes Oct. `16, Global Times has published an extensive interview with Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, “the second piece of a series of GT‘s interviews with influential scholars” on China’s economy and the BRI.
In answer to one of many question in the interview, Zepp-LaRouche warned, “The neoliberal financial system may disintegrate, either in a hyperinflationary disintegration – it would not happen in only one country – or if the central banks try to curb inflation through a ‘Paul Volcker style’ high interest rate policy, there could be a sudden chain reaction of bankruptcies of both emerging markets and over-indebted firms. While this will obviously affect China, its economic blueprint approach of caring for each segment of the economy with appropriate incentives will be invaluable.”
And to another, on Germany’s predicament, she answered: “Top executives are already ringing the alarm bells, warning that Germany is about to crash into a wall and that its identity as an industrial nation is at stake. The straw that is about to break the camel’s back is the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines. The destruction of these pipelines means they cannot be re-opened as a fallback source, which means the energy crisis in Germany will get extremely serious in the short term with a great deal of social upheaval. The only way to solve the situation would be for all European nations to put an end to the sanctions against Russia, and throw all their weight into insisting on a negotiated solution for the Ukraine situation. This situation has moved beyond an energy crisis. A comprehensive approach is needed, which is why the Schiller Institute has called for a completely new international security and development architecture, which takes into account the interest of every single country on the planet.” [The entire interview is available here.]
June 25 (EIRNS) – Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche has issued a “Call for an Ad-Hoc Committee for a New Bretton Woods System,” which is now circulating and gathering signatures from prominent leaders around the world, and will shortly be made public. In it, she calls for the “immediate convening of an emergency international conference which mandates: First: The reorganization of the bankrupt world financial system and replacing it with a New Bretton Woods system. The declared goal of this new credit system must be overcoming poverty and underdevelopment in the entire world, but above all raising living standards in developing countries, making it possible for all people on this planet to fully develop their potential capabilities.”
Other crucial points follow, but that first point summarizes the central idea of the document, an idea whose time has come.
The June 18-19 Schiller Institute international conference elaborated on the strategic situation which cries out for such a solution, and presented the essential features of the LaRouche policies in economics, science, culture and statecraft that must be taken up around the world. It is of note that China’s CGTN issued a Tweet yesterday with a two-minute video clip from Zepp-LaRouche’s speech at that conference, which they also made available to millions upon millions of viewers on Weibo (China’s Twitter-like online networking tool).
In it, Zepp-LaRouche states:
“According to Duma President Volodin, the Emerging G8, of Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Mexico, Iran, and Turkey, already has bypassed the G7 in terms of the GDP. Other organizations and nations are working toward a new model of a global order, such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, ASEAN, and many nations in the Global South. “What all of these countries are aiming at, is the wish for common poverty alleviation, real development of their physical economies, national sovereignty, the right to choose their own model of social and economic development, and cooperation in their mutual interests…
“So, the `democracies’ are really only the U.S., Great Britain, the EU (which, however, is divided), Japan, Australia, and South Korea. So when, at the end of this month, the annual NATO Summit meets in Madrid to present a plan for a Global NATO and a new security doctrine, without a real economic development plan, naturally, which it certainly will not have, it will fail to address the actual needs of a world faced with famine, pandemic, and economic chaos. It will have a big posture, but it will be a colossus on clay feet.”
The just-concluded BRICS summit also discussed ideas of how to construct a new international economic system to replace the current bankrupt trans-Atlantic colossus, as seen clearly in Russian President Putin’s remarks at that event. The key to the strategic situation remains whether sufficient forces for sanity, development, and war-avoidance can be rallied within the United States, to bring the U.S. into a working relationship with China, Russia and other great powers, as Lyndon LaRouche repeatedly called for. That specific task will be taken up this coming July 3, at 1:00 p.m. EDT, when Helga Zepp-LaRouche will be joined by Diane Sare, LaRouche Party candidate for Senator from New York, to celebrate the true meaning of the U.S.’s July 4 Independence Day, and thereby catalyze a return to the best tradition of American System economics of George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Quincy Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Lyndon LaRouche.
EIRNS, June 23–Pakistan’s PTV World program Views on News, hosted by Faisal Rehman who spoke with Helga Zepp-LaRouche and other guests concerning security and development issues facing the new Pakistani government. Zepp-LaRouche’s theme was that there must be peace and development for Afghanistan. She asked, “How long do you want to keep fighting? The grievances of the past are not the starting point for defining the future.” Mrs. LaRouche called for the integration of Afghanistan with the Belt and Road initiative. The full program can be viewed here.
Aug. 6 (EIRNS)—Under the striking headline, “Schiller Institute Calls for New Bretton Woods To End War, Economic Crisis,” one of India’s leading dailies, The Hindu, today published a thorough article on its interview with Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who detailed the role played by her late husband Lyndon LaRouche in shaping the policies for a New International Economic Order and the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), as well as his close relationship to India dating back to the time of his World War II service in the China-India-Myanmar theater, and his and Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s personal friendship with Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The Hindu article was illustrated with a prominent photograph of a 2001 meeting of Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche with then President K.R. Narayanan at the presidential offices.
The Hindu began by pointing out that the “global thinktank, Schiller Institute, that recently hit the headlines for organizing an international conference on the Ukraine war and economic crisis,” was shaped by the late economist Lyndon LaRouche. The Schiller Institute’s global conference last April 9 included three prominent Indians among its speakers: retired diplomat P.S. Raghavan (who was scheduled to speak but was unable to attend), journalist Saeed Naqvi, and Sam Pitroda. Subsequently, “it came under attack from Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation that fights online Russian propaganda, [which] released a list of 75 commentators, including the three Indians, whom they accused of promoting Russian propaganda.”
Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche elaborated in some detail her late husband’s role in shaping policy debate in the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). She reported that, after Richard Nixon dismantled the Bretton Woods system in August 1971, her husband warned that the so-called “Nixon Shock” would encourage speculation-driven economic activities and greater inequality, and that he “wrote in favor of the developing economies. Some of those ideas found expression in the 1976 Colombo resolution of the fifth NAM summit that called for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) to help the non-aligned countries,” The Hindu reported. The effects of that “Nixon shock” are still being felt today, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche asserted.
That the New International Order didn’t come into being was due to many factors, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche explained, but stressed that when she and her husband met with Indira Gandhi, the Prime Minister showed great interest in “having economic ideas that would safeguard India from the volatilities of international finances” that had affected so many other developing countries. Following Mrs. Gandhi’s assassination in 1984, Mr. LaRouche authored the book Derivative Assassination examining the global dimensions of Khalistani terrorism that might have played a role in her murder. Even after her death, the LaRouches visited India on several occasions and met with such prominent economists as the late Arjun Sengupta and with President K.R. Narayanan in 2001.
In the interview, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche remarked that the “LaRouche tradition” within the NAM didn’t progress for a number of reasons, including the assassinations of Mrs. Gandhi in 1984 and of her son and successor Rajiv Gandhi in 1991, and the “interventionist wars” launched by the West in Syria, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, whose chief architect was U.S. President George H.W. Bush, were largely responsible for the global turmoil that made such progress impossible.
Despite the crisis in Ukraine and the global financial crisis, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche is hopeful that there is now a reemergence of non-alignment and other positive traditions, The Hindu reported, while warning that Western leaders failed to deal with earlier crises such as the 2008 Lehman Brothers crash, and that the crisis today is such that it could lead to a “blowout of the neoliberal system.”
Look at the West’s treatment of Russia, she said. When the U.S.S.R. collapsed, the Schiller Institute proposed a development corridor—the Eurasian Land-Bridge—that would have helped in economic development. Instead, Western powers adopted a strategy of destroying Russia, treating it as a “regional power,” planning to reduce it to the status of a raw-materials producing “ex-superpower.” These Western policy errors continue to this day, she warned, telling The Hindu, “If we don’t get the United States and Europe onto a new track, toward a new system [New Bretton Woods,] the war danger only worsens.”
Aug. 9, 2022 (EIRNS)—The following interview with Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche was included in CGTN’s “World Today” podcast.
The World Today host began a segment: “Decoupling of the EU and Germany from China could cost Germany almost six times as much as Brexit. This is the finding of a scenario analysis conducted by the Info Institute on behalf of the Bavarian Industry Association. The report shows that automotive industry companies producing transportation equipment and manufacturers of machinery and equipment would be hurt the most if the decoupling happens.
So, for this and more on EU-China and Germany-China relations, let’s have Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based political and economic think tank. Thanks for joining us, Ms. Zepp-LaRouche.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Good day.
CGTN: Germany would face costs almost six times as high as Brexit if Germany and the European Union were to shut China out of their economies. What do you make of the projections?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think it’s much worse, because as you have mentioned already, there is right now an effort to push Germany and all of Europe into a decoupling from Russia and China. This, in my view, would mean economic suicide. You already have an almost total decoupling from Russia that has led to an explosion of energy prices. You have hyperinflation going on, which is not due to anything having to do with Ukraine or Russia’s war with Ukraine. It has to do with the quantitative easing and pumping of money for many years. So, you have hyperinflation; you have an energy crisis. And now on top of that, if you also would decouple from China, the most important trading partner for Germany, this would mean economic suicide. I think this is something people should review and really step back away from, because it would lead to complete social chaos in Germany and Europe, with unpredictable consequences.
CGTN: The report said the biggest loser of a trade war with China would be the automotive industry, manufacturers of transport equipment and mechanical engineering which have had strong ties with China over the years. With the domestic argument for decoupling getting louder in Germany and the European Union, do we hear any voices from those industries?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, my personal experience in talking to many of those, is that the individual firms really want to stay in China, but they are being pressured by the banks with their credit policies, the financial sector, and that is all hanging together with Wall Street and the City of London. They have geopolitical motives to push this decoupling. I think if German industry wants to survive, and I really mean survive, because it’s an existential situation which most of them are in, they have to stand up and defend their own interests. They have to fight for the jobs of the people; they have to stand up for German interests and the common good of the people.
I think we are heading into an incredible social crisis in the coming weeks and months. The question is, will Germany economically survive this assault? It’s time for Germany to define its own interests and not be the instrument of NATO.
CGTN: Speaking of that, we heard from Volkswagen’s CEO, who defended [inaud] in China in Xinjiang. What do you make of this, because there are two different opinions nowadays? On the one hand, people say their insistence is only about profit and making money. On the other hand, people believe they see a different Xinjiang in China from the ones mirrored in the Western media. What’s your take?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, we had two members of the Schiller Institute traveling to Xinjiang and visiting many locations. And many diplomats from many countries also have traveled there to investigate the situation. What all of these people report is that China has brought development into one of the previously poorest areas, and given people jobs, bringing prosperity, infrastructure. So, a lot of people who turned from the Uighurs to terrorism before now have a perspective and a future, and have stopped being terrorists. I think to overcome terrorism through development is a much better method than throwing bombs and drones and having civilian casualties you don’t care about, like it happened so many times in Afghanistan or Iraq, where the United States conducted these things. I think people should not listen to this guy Adrian Zenz, who recently came out with a study. He’s a right-wing Christian fundamentalist who has very dubious beliefs, because he thinks that God gave him a mission to destroy China. All of this anti-Xinjiang propaganda is mainly based on this extremely dubious source. People should not fall for it.
CGTN: Given what we have been talking about, if you also ask a lot of experts in Germany, they suggest that companies should find more countries to reduce dependency on China. How do you look at this suggestion? Can China, as the top trading partner of Germany, be replaced at least in the short term?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: In the short term, for sure not, because the idea to diversify and have partnerships with so-called “like-minded democracies,” if you really look at it, it’s only the U.S., the British, the countries of the Five Eyes, Japan, New Zealand. But the overwhelming majority is going with China’s BRI. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the BRICS, most countries of the Global South want to have development. There is a revival of the spirit of Bandung, which is the Non-Aligned Movement. I think it would be complete suicide for countries like Germany that are very export-dependent to cut off these markets which are the future. The only growth which occurred in the recent period was in Asia, and not in the Atlantic sector. So, Germany should really redefine its own interest.
CGTN: Thank you very much. That’s Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based political and economic think tank.
Here is the link to the interview; this segment is with Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche: ④ Decoupling with China could cost Germany six times as much as Brexit, a study shows at 33:55 min.
Found here is a segment of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s interview with Ge Anna at CGTN World Today done July 25 in which Zepp-LaRouche insists on the immorality of sanctions for all countries. This segment was Tweeted out by Ms. Ge Anna which can be heard at the link.
In the longer interview with Ms. Ge Anna, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche also takes up the multi-layered importance of the just concluded Russia-Ukraine grain deal which can be heard here in the second segment start minute 15:12″ to 26:58″ using the play button at the left.
