Top Left Link Buttons
  • English
  • German
  • Russian

Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Category Archives

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: The Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Julian Assange Are Identical!

May 3, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in General updates, Global Diplomacy, Helga statement, article, transcript, Helga Zepp-LaRouche

April 3, 2023–The “narrative” of the MSM is that there are countries, where freedom of the press thrives, such as Norway, which appears again at the top of the relevant index; and that there are countries, where it is suppressed. In reality, in the MSM honest journalism has almost entirely disappeared. The very notion of a historical or objective “truth,” which can be unearthed by investigative journalism, has been buried by a barrage of projectiles which pierce through that very concept. What has come in its place is an arbitrary variety of descriptions of that “truth,” which are either named as “fake,” or must be “debunked,” or even crushed before conception by being “pre-bunked.”

In reality there is a brutal fight for control of the “narrative” of the “rules- based-order,” where journalism has been degraded to serve as the executioner on behalf of the ruling elites. If this were an exaggeration, Seymour Hersh would have received a newly created Nobel Prize for excellence in Journalism in Norway, and all the Norwegian media would have excelled in reporting about the role of Norway in the sabotage of the Nord Stream Pipelines.

The heads of state who assemble this weekend for the coronation of King Charles can prove their commitment to freedom and democracy by congratulating the newly crowned King for making his first act the freedom of Julian Assange!

World War III or Peace? ~ Support China’s Peace Plan!

March 6, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Color Revolutions, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Global Diplomacy, Helga statement, article, transcript, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Sanctions, World war danger updates

by Helga Zepp-LaRouche

No, not sleepwalking, but rather with eyes wide open, and without reason, backbone or conscience, the trans-Atlantic Establishment is pushing us to the edge of the cliff, beyond which a thermonuclear Hell is lurking, that threatens to annihilate all life on this planet. The 12-point program for a diplomatic solution to the strategic crisis between NATO and Russia, released by China on February 24, represents a possible last-minute lifeline to save us from jumping off. Although it was rejected out-of-hand by President Biden and the EU Commission, it has been increasingly supported for good reason by nations of the Global South, and consequently by most of humanity. It definitely needs to become an integral focus of all those forces worldwide that, in this time of existential threat for humanity, are committed to a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine conflict. It also represents a concrete option around which to orient the offer of Pope Francis to use the Vatican as a venue for peace negotiations.

The reason why China’s peace plan was immediately rejected by the United States and NATO is that their goal is the restoration of a unipolar world in which China would never be allowed to play the role of a broker for peace. As NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg made clear Feb. 28, in his joint press conference with Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin in Helsinki, he sees Ukraine’s future as a part of the EU and as a member of NATO (in the long run). Thus, for NATO, the option of a neutral Ukraine is off the table, although the NATO leadership knows perfectly well that Russia considers that a blatant disregard of its demand for security guarantees. In other words, the U.S., the UK, NATO and the Atlanticists defend the line: “Ukraine has to win on the battlefield,” and “Russia must be ruined.” Conversely, Russia naturally sees this as an existential threat, and will attempt to bring about a decision on the battlefield. 

The Russian government would be in a parallel universe if it did not take seriously the proposals discussed at a joint event of the Jamestown Foundation and the Hudson Institute in December 2022, concerning options for a complete breakup of the Russian Federation. Their “minimalist” goal is for Russia to be turned into “a looser, confederation-type administrative political structure”—de facto disempowering the Russian government, while the “maximalist” goal is the complete breakup and partition of Russia “along ethno-religious lines” and the simultaneous creation of separate states such as Chechnya, Dagestan, and Tatarstan. In that case, they say, demilitarization comparable to the Morgenthau Plan proposal, a “de-Sovietization,” would have to be carried out, and broad sections of society would have to be brought before a war crimes tribunal or re-educated. 

Since the collaborators of these two think tanks are recruited from the inner core of the U.S. intelligence agencies and the military-industrial complex, i.e., the real U.S. power structure, Moscow must assume that these scenarios reflect the intention of the U.S. government. That, in turn, would fulfill the condition that the Russian military doctrine has set for the use of nuclear weapons, i.e., when the territorial existence of Russia is threatened.

According to experts from several nations, a military victory for Ukraine is far away. Ukrainian troops have suffered huge losses, averaging 1,000 men per day over the past three months and around 500 per day since mid-February. Some 10 million refugees—two million of them in Russia—unanimously say they do not want to return to Ukraine. Overall, the Ukrainian population has dropped from 37.5 million to about 20 million at present. Almost half of the urban infrastructure has been destroyed, while all critical industrial capacity is located in Russian-speaking regions.

In such circumstances, a war of attrition lasting many years, as the amount of weapons ordered by NATO would seem to indicate, will be a meat grinder in which the population will be wiped out “to the last Ukrainian.”

While U.S. military officials such as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley are pushing for negotiations based on a realistic assessment of the situation, and even the Rand Corporation has advised against a “long war” in Ukraine for its own reasons, the hawks around the State Department are apparently following the proposal made by one of Britain’s leading think tanks, the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), which advocates escalating the war to the point where Russia would have to threaten to use nuclear weapons because of a threat to Crimea and thus to Russian territory. According to this perverse logic, the ensuing “Cuban Missile Crisis on steroids” would “promote” the settlement of the war because Russia could thus be forced to surrender. U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria “Dr. Strangelove” Nuland, notorious for her active role in the 2014 Maidan coup in Kiev, recently reiterated her support for Ukrainian military attacks on Crimea. Thus, the danger of an escalation to a global nuclear war in the short term is knowingly accepted. Obviously, the lives of the Ukrainian population do not count in this scenario; the sole goal is to ensure the defeat of Russia in order to re-establish the status of American hegemony.

The European Council for Foreign Relations, the EU’s own think tank, points out in a recent study that although the U.S. and Europe have drawn closer to one another, the rest of the world is moving further and further away from the West. Those who wish to get an idea of this reality for themselves are advised to watch the video of a dialogue between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the head of the Indian think tank ORF (Observer Research Foundation), Sunjoy Joshi, at this year’s Raisina Dialogue. A good representation of the Global South’s elite meets regularly at this prestigious event sponsored by the Indian government. As Lavrov, among others, indicated, the Russia-India-China troika, first initiated by Russian Foreign Minister Primakov, continues to be a centerpiece of strategic cooperation, but has since greatly expanded into the BRICS Plus group, to which two dozen other countries of the Global South have applied for membership. Therefore, Russia is hardly isolated, as this includes an overwhelming majority of humanity.

And this majority supports the Chinese peace proposal, which calls for respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries, abandoning a Cold War mentality, ending hostilities, ending sanctions against Russia, and proposes concrete steps on how to overcome the crisis diplomatically. President Zelensky has also stated that he wants to discuss this with President Xi. The near-hysterical reactions of the mainstream media and the Atlanticists to the Chinese proposal prove once again that ideological glasses cause blindness.

The majority of the world’s population supports a diplomatic solution to the crisis. Brazilian President Lula, who has called for a peace club composed of the nations of the Global South, will travel to China later this month to discuss peace initiatives with Xi Jinping. Italian General Fabio Mini, former commander of the KFOR mission in Kosovo, has proposed further useful steps for a settlement of the conflict in Ukraine. Pope Francis’ offer to use the Vatican as a venue for diplomatic negotiations is gaining support from key individuals and institutions around the world, as well as religious leaders of various denominations.

Therefore, it is high time for China’s proposal to become the center of the discussion. The situation today is comparable to that in which the negotiations leading to the Peace of Westphalia ended 150 years of religious war in Europe. At that time, the warring parties came to the conclusion that the war had to come to an end, otherwise there would be no one left to enjoy a victory because everyone would be dead. That is precisely our situation today, with the difference that the existence of nuclear weapons today would guarantee such an outcome.

One of the most important results of the Peace of Westphalia, which laid the foundation for international law, was the realization that peace requires taking into account the interest of the other. From that standpoint, not only is NATO’s repeated eastward expansion a catalyst for war, NATO itself is obsolete and urgently needs to be replaced by a new international security and development architecture that takes into account the interests of all states on the planet.

It is urgently necessary that the newly emerging peace movement, that came onto the scene at the “Rage Against the War Machine” demonstration on Feb. 19 in Washington, on Feb. 25 in Berlin, and in many other rallies in Italy, France, Germany and numerous other countries, take a clear position in favor of ending NATO and supporting the Chinese proposal for a peaceful settlement to the conflict which otherwise threatens to lead to the end of civilization.

zepp-larouche@eir.de 

Appeal to Religious Leaders of the World

February 21, 2023by madeleine in General, Global Diplomacy, Helga Video, Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Helga Zepp-LaRouche appeals to religious leaders of the world to join with Pope Francis, who has offered the Vatican as a venue for unconditional negotiations between Russia and Ukraine.

Mobilize your community for peace now because this is a crisis that tests our ability to survive.

Sign the “Open Letter to Pope Francis From Political and Social Leaders: We Support Your Call for Immediate Peace Negotiations”

Take this Tragedy as the Opportunity to Lift All Sanctions Against Syria

February 7, 2023by Anastasia Battle in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Economic development updates, General, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Helga statement, article, transcript, Sanctions, Syria, Turkey

By Helga Zepp-LaRouche

PDF of this statement

Feb. 6, 2023 (EIRNS)—The recent double earthquake in southern Turkey and northwestern Syria is a terrible disaster which is generating a wave of emotion and empathy from around the world. The situation will likely worsen due to forecast weather of extremely low temperatures throughout the region, resulting in the collapse of weakened buildings due to the cold and frost, not to mention the immediate consequences to children, women and men who have lost everything.

Time is of the essence. We welcome an international response; in fact there are several countries that have already offered their assistance to the populations affected by the earthquakes. This being said, it is difficult to accept that the same disaster has a very different human impact on either side of the borders of Turkey and Syria. On the Syrian side, this tragedy is affecting a population that has been hard hit by years of war and sanctions imposed by the United States with other nations.

This situation confronts us, as Western nations, with our responsibility to uphold the values we claim to embody. Are we going to continue to apply the measures that we very well know have led to the unimaginable suffering, misfortune and death of innocent people? Or are we going to finally make the decision to lift these criminal sanctions? Don’t we know, after so many years of use, that the weapon of sanctions only hurts the people?

It is time for Western leaders to regain a minimum of moral fiber, by taking this tragedy as the opportunity to definitively lift all sanctions against Syria and, from then on, to organize the reconstruction of the country with those who are determined to contribute to it.

‘Soloviev Live’ Interviews Helga Zepp-LaRouche on Ten Principles

December 8, 2022by Mary Jane Freeman in Economic development updates, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Germany, Global Diplomacy, Helga media coverage or interview, Helga Video, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Media coverage of our activity, Russia, Sanctions, Ukraine, World war danger updates

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.

Zepp-LaRouche on CGTN: “Fostering Cooperation in a Fragmented World”

January 19, 2023by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, Agriculture, BRI - Belt & Road, BRICS updates, China, Economic development updates, Education, Finance, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Germany, Global Diplomacy, Healthcare, Helga media coverage or interview, Helga statement, article, transcript, Helga Video, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Media coverage of our activity, New financial order updates, Power & Energy, Railway projects, Space updates, World Land-Bridge updates, World war danger updates

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.

The Present Danger of Nuclear War Confirms what We Have Said: There Is No Peace Without Development

November 25, 2022by madeleine in General, Helga Video, Helga Webcast, Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Helga Zepp-LaRouche issued a direct challenge to viewers today, that they join the discussion process underway around what she presented as 10 Principles of a new security and development architecture as a matter of utmost urgency.  There is a “daily escalation” of the war danger, she said, citing Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zakharova, who said the war in Ukraine is now a war “between NATO and Russia.”   

Most people are not getting that this is the real picture.  The process around our mobilization is “exploding”, she said, as increasing numbers of officials have become fearful that world war looms, unless there is a serious effort to end the NATO escalation against Russia.  In her presentation in the November 22 SI conference, she showed why “pragmatic solutions” cannot work, and that it is necessary to go to a higher level, exemplified by Nicholas of Cusa’s “Coincidence of Opposites”.  This means returning to the ideas of the Peace of Westphalia, in which sovereign nations act on the basis of recognition of the legitimate interests of the other — which means not just the absence of war, but the eradication of poverty.
In her concluding remarks, she said, the issue is defining principles under which we can “govern ourselves” — let’s debate this,” insisting that it is not only necessary to approach the problem on this higher level, but possible.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche on China Plus ‘World Today’ Program on Scholz’s Beijing Visit

November 6, 2022by madeleine in Helga media coverage or interview, Helga Video, Helga Zepp-LaRouche

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.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche Briefs EIR on Urgency To Implement New Paradigm in Face of World War and Economic Crash Threat

October 23, 2022by Mary Jane Freeman in Economic development updates, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Helga statement, article, transcript, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Our economic development events, Our initiatives (petitions, etc), Sanctions, World war danger updates

Pre-release of EIR interview:

PAUL GALLAGHER: Today is Saturday, October 22, 2022, and this is the 60th anniversary of the day that President John F. Kennedy of the United States made a speech which told the world that it was in a nuclear warfare crisis, a countdown to nuclear war which could conceivably destroy civilization. Kennedy announced that the United States had determined evidence of Soviet provision of nuclear missiles to Cuba, and said that the United States would not tolerate this, absolutely, under any circumstances, and a crisis was on, which gripped the attention of the world and held people in fear of it for more than two weeks. [JFK speech is here.]

So now, this is Paul Gallagher of EIR. I’m speaking with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, and a frequent lead candidate of the BüSo political party in Germany, about the extraordinary situation which is developing there, and internationally.

So Helga, good afternoon to you.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Hello.

GALLAGHER: Let me start by saying, just in terms of setting our situation here, the Nord Stream natural gas pipeline is a submarine pipeline project of Russia and Germany under the Baltic Sea, that they worked on jointly for more than 15 years. It was suspended in 2022 under U.S. pressure, and on Sept. 26, it was sabotaged, by powerful explosions which were aimed to destroy it completely. It appears that this has had an impact on German political life, despite the fact that it’s being covered up.

Helga, can you analyze for EIR what has happened here, and what does it mean for Germany and the threat of war between NATO and Russia?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, the first thing to say is that the official media and channels are obviously trying to say as little as possible about it, which is already extremely ominous, given the fact that this worsens the energy situation of Germany for some time to come. Military experts have stated that the sabotage was of such a kind that it could only have been done by a state; it could not have been done by private divers, and that naturally limits the number of states which had access. Now the questions to ask is the cui bono, who had the capacity, who had the opportunity, and who had the motive? And then, as some military experts are saying, well, if it would have been Russia, it would have meant that Russia would have to go with submarines and other devices for 300 km through the Baltic Sea under the total surveillance and control of NATO, and therefore, if it would have been Russia, it would prove that they had a huge superiority in undersea warfare, in order to do that, practically under the nose of total surveillance of NATO. If that would be the case, it would have completely other implications about military balances.

But there are also now many people saying, if there would be any proof that it was Russia, you would have seen a barrage of press conferences by NATO, by the EU, by the governments; all the tabloids would have been full of it. But since nothing of this sort has happened, it doesn’t look like it was Russia.

Instead, in an answer to a question from a parliamentarian, the German government put out an official answer, which is also extremely odd: They said that they know it was sabotage—now how did they know that if there was no official investigation? Sweden, by the way, pulled out, and so there was some strange investigation involving only Germany and Denmark, but the German divers didn’t have the diving equipment to go to the depth of 70 and 80 meters, so the whole thing is very ominous. And the statement by the German government says that, for the sake of the wellbeing of the state, they will not reveal any other information.

Now, that is extremely strange: For a sabotage of such enormous economic, and therefore social and political implications, to leave it at that, naturally raises the suspicion which is being said by many people, that this was done by another state which is not friendly to the German government. Now, given the fact that the only states which could have done it would have been the U.S., the British, Poland, maybe Lithuania, but everybody says—also and knows—that nothing in this highly surveilled area of the Baltic Sea could have been done without the control and OK of the United States.

So why is the German government not saying anything? People more and more have the feeling, this present German government is not defending the interests of the German people, and that despite the fact that the German economy is going to crash against the wall this fall and winter, in a dramatic way, to which the sabotage of these pipelines will have played a crucial part.

GALLAGHER: Is anyone in Germany, given the tremendous escalation of prices and the sabotage of the German economy as the result of the loss of natural gas supplies, and oil supplies—but particularly natural gas—is anyone arguing there that Russia and Germany should fix this pipeline? Or are there actions at all against this NATO policy of full warfare against Russia?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I would say so! Just today, there are many demonstrations, and there have been many demonstrations in the last days and weeks, not only in East Germany, but especially there, but also, today, in many West German cities. And what people were saying in these demonstrations is that it is exactly like it was in 1989: This was the demonstrations in which the Berlin Wall came down as a result. And the demands are, stop the sanctions against Russia, stop the weapons sales to Ukraine; this is not our war, we demand a diplomatic solution. And most interesting is, the action of the city of Stralsund, where the parliamentary groups of the Christian Democrats (CDU), the Free Democrats (FPD), and the Linke (the Left Party) and the Social Democrats (SPD), and a citizens alliance called “Citizens for Stralsund,” all signed up for an initiative, offering the city of Stralsund to be the site for Ukraine peace talks. And they say that there’s nothing more important than peace on our Earth, and they refer to the great history of creating the Peace of Stralsund, which is a reference to the conflict resolution from 1370, when a war between Denmark and the Hanseatic League (including Stralsund) ended in the so-called Peace of Stralsund. So, more than 650 years later, they want to have a new Stralsund Peace, and that is just a most spectacular intervention, and I think the spirit of 1989 is clearly revived in these demonstrations. And they’re also demanding the resignation of the present German government.

GALLAGHER: Ah, so there is the spirit of 1989 for sure! There’s one well-known blogger and strategic expert, Alexander Mercouris, who argued in a video that this coverup of the situation with the pipelines, despite some very clear indications of what happened, that it means that the German government is under the control of a foreign power, which is unfriendly to Germany—that was the way that he put it. What’s your view of this argument? Does it bear on these demonstrations that are coming up and the behavior of the government?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes. There are many calls for this government to resign, which many people think is the worst government Germany has had in the entire post-war period. That applies for sure, for the Green Party—this is a so-called “streetlight coalition” involving the Greens, the Liberals [FDP], and the Social Democrats, of which the Greens are really the war party, the NATO party, with the most hawkish, belligerent policy, and you cannot differentiate what they say from Stoltenberg or Blinken. And the so-called Economic Minister Robert Habeck, who used to be very popular in the polls, has now plunged and has become an object of public contempt, because he is clearly pushing a policy which means the deindustrialization of Germany. And we are therefore facing a huge social explosion, not “facing,” we are in the middle of a huge social explosion in Germany.

GALLAGHER: Interesting. We’ve seen this recently in the United Kingdom, where Liz Truss, who was ready to push the nuclear button and a real warrior, she came in like hell on wheels into the prime ministership, and then very quickly her wheels fell off, and now she’s resigned, and they’re in a government crisis as well as a financial crisis. So, we see these things across Europe.

Let me ask you: You’re frequently featured and interviewed in the media in China, again yesterday, on CGTN’s “Dialogue” broadcast. In one interview, they focussed on your assessment of the situation in France and Germany, what can you convey to the Chinese people about the situation in Europe? What do you think is most important that they understand?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, they are looking at Germany, in particular, with complete disbelief: A once-proud people of poets and thinkers, and admired for its scientific and technological excellence in the whole world, is committing economic suicide in front of the world’s eyes. And it’s very difficult for people in Asia in general to understand why Europe is on such a self-destructive course.

What they are doing as a consequence is to speed up the construction of a new economic system, which consists of the countries of the BRICS, the SCO, the CICA [Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia], and other organizations of the Global South, where they building an economic system which is focussed on the alleviation of poverty in the entire developing sector; and cooperation in mutual benefit; and it has to be said, to the grace of China, or to (there’s a word I’m missing), that they continuously offer to the United States and the European countries that they should cooperate rather than try to fight. But right now, it doesn’t look like people in the West have the wisdom to respond to this offer.

GALLAGHER: Well, if German business and households’ access to natural gas coming from Russia has been destroyed, as a result of this economic warfare on Russia, are the Biden administration’s economic measures against China reaching that same scale of the all-out economic warfare on Russia? And what do you think China’s reaction will be?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: You know, if you look at the policy of the Biden administration and such people as German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, who have said many times that they want to (quote) “ruin Russia,” or (quote) “prevent Russia from diversifying from oil and gas”—this was said already on Jan. 25 by some unnamed White House official—it did not work out so well.

The effect of this was that Russia turned to Asia and did relatively better than Germany, where you now have a complete blowback, and the country is under the immediate danger of deindustrialization, and given the size of the German economy, this will have a devastating effect for all of Europe.

Now, therefore, the threat to now do the same with China, what was done with Russia, I think it would only occur at the complete price of deindustrialization of the West, at least the European part of it. And China is working with about 150 countries in the context of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the Global Development Initiative; and just at the present ongoing party conference of the 20th party congress of Communist Party of China (CPC), the report that was delivered there proudly states that Chinese economic policy is focussed on continuous innovation, scientific and technological progress, and furthering the creativity of their citizens. And the result has been a continuously prosperous economy. So, if the West wants to decouple from China, they will do so at their cost, leading to their own self-destruction: So, hopefully, they will wake up before it is too late.

GALLAGHER: Well, that was the last thing I wanted to ask you about: That the Schiller Institute is obviously mobilizing a large number of leading people around the world, and also young people around the world, to stop this nuclear war threat. And you’re the one that has launched these mobilizations: What do you think can make it possible to reach a situation of peace, and perhaps even development, before we are in an unsurvivable nuclear war?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, if you look around the world and ask normal people, like normal parliamentarians, elected officials, trade unionists, industrialists, farmers, fishermen, and so forth, nobody wants World War III! It’s a very small apparatus which is pushing this geopolitical confrontation which threatens the annihilation of the human species. So, this initiative you’re referring to comes out of meeting with Latin American parliamentarians and ex-parliamentarians, and we recognized that a similar desire for world peace and against this confrontation is prevalent all over the world. [Live event: Stope the War Before It is Too Late, Eliminate the Causes of the War Danger.] So the fact that what is at stake is the possible destruction of mankind, that makes, automatically, every citizen on the planet, to be a world citizen who has the right to speak out for the interest of humanity as a whole. And given the fact that the Schiller Institute is named after the poet Friedrich Schiller, who argued that there is no contradiction between a patriot and a world citizen—or that there doesn’t have to be—basically, we are now appealing to world citizens from all over the world to stand up against this war, and make sure that people understand that we have to make a jump in the thinking, to think in terms of a new paradigm, where everybody learns to think as a world citizen; which doesn’t mean you’re not a patriot, it just means you have to make one more step, you have to take the interest of humanity as a whole into account, and make sure that your understanding of your national interest is not in contradiction to that larger interest of humanity as a whole.

Because only if we all start thinking about the fact that we are sitting in one boat, and that if there is a nuclear war, nobody will live, and that we have, and that we have to find a new model of international relations as the precondition to get out of this crisis, that we will actually make it. And the response so far has been tremendous, because I think everybody who is concerned about world peace and the danger of war, is responding very well about this initiative, once they know about it. So help to spread the knowledge about it. [Second Seminar of Current and Former Elected Officials of the World: For World Peace, Stop the Danger of Nuclear War.]

GALLAGHER: OK, so five days from now, on Oct. 27, there is a second conference of those present and former elected officials whose deliberations you’ve been describing, and of course, at the same time, there are other meetings and discussions of potentially a new money system, a new credit system internationally, which are going on within the BRICS and elsewhere. Do you think that this can lead to an actual formation of development, an actual economic architecture, which can make development possible in the developing sector?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think the need to implement that could arrive very suddenly: Because if you look at the panicky reactions in Great Britain, the desperate action to go for quantitative easing, jump to quantitative tightening, go back to quantitative easing—there’s a rapidity like that of Liz Truss going into 10 Downing Street, out of 10 Downing Street, and now they’re talking about Boris Johnson—“BoJo”—to come back, which is the farce of the century: I think the system of the City of London, and by implication the entire trans-Atlantic financial system, is teetering on the verge of dissolution. So the need to put a New Bretton Woods system, a new credit system on the international agenda may erupt more quickly than people think.

GALLAGHER: Great! OK, for EIR, I’ve been talking with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, head of the Schiller Institute, about those prospects and about this extremely complicated and dangerous situation around Europe, and Germany in particular. With that, I think we’ll wrap up our interview. Helga, thank you very much for your answers, and for taking the time with us for today.

For World Peace: STOP THE DANGER OF NUCLEAR WAR ~ 2nd Seminar of Officials

October 13, 2022by Mary Jane Freeman in Activity of the Schiller Institute, General, General updates, Geopolitics updates, Global Diplomacy, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Ibero-America SI activity, Mexico, Russia, Sanctions, Ukraine, World war danger updates

For World Peace

STOP THE DANGER OF NUCLEAR WAR

 Second Seminar of Current and Former Elected Officials of the World

Date: Thursday October 27, 2022

Time: 10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EDT)

Place: Conference Room E, Chamber of Deputies, Mexico City; and via Zoom (with English-Spanish simultaneous interpretation)

Eight months into the war between Russia and Ukraine, with the active role of the United States and NATO, there are many dead and wounded, great destruction of all sorts of property, and very damaging economic and social consequences in Europe and the whole world, creating shocks which are worsening the very profound problems of the world economy, with consequences of a worsening crisis and greater unemployment, poverty and hunger.

It is known that this war can have far more serious consequences than what we are already suffering, including massive destruction and a crisis of global proportions never before seen, because it can lead to a confrontation with nuclear weapons between Russia and the United States and NATO.

Among the growing voices calling for a sensible approach, we highlight that of Pope Francis, calling for a negotiated, peaceful solution.

The undersigned political and social leaders, current and former legislators, and other elected officials from various countries, urge Russia, Ukraine, the United States and NATO to reach an agreement which, first of all, rejects the growing loose talk about the possible use of nuclear weapons and reaffirms the fundamental commitment of the Reagan-Gorbachev Formula of 1985, that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.” To be lasting, such an agreement must also establish a new international security architecture that recognizes and respects the legitimate security interests of all the planet’s nations.

We recognize and emphasize that Russia, like the United States, NATO, Ukraine and all countries, has legitimate security concerns which must be taken into account and become one of the cornerstones of the new security architecture. A return to the successful principles of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia – respect for sovereignty, commitment to the good of the other, and forgiveness of debts that make true economic development impossible – is the kind of architecture we seek today.

The common good of the One Humanity is the obligatory premise for the good of each and every nation. In that way, among all the nations of the world we will be able to help build an organization of citizens in collective global action, and establish ourselves that way as a force to influence the international policy debate.

We call on people of good will around the world – notwithstanding our diverse and natural differences – to participate in this process of deliberation and search for peaceful solutions, including a thorough examination of the alternative economic policies to replace speculation, which has generated so much poverty and suffering, with a system of production and progress to meet the needs of a growing world population.

We reject all attempts to limit, intimidate, or prohibit such a deliberative process. And we call on the United States, NATO, Ukraine and Russia to advance in the direction that we present in this respectful call.

SIGNATURES:

  1. Donald Ramotar (Guyana); former President (2011-2015), former member of parliament (1992-2011, PPP)

2. Helga Zepp-LaRouche (Germany); founder, Schiller Institute

3. Jorge Robledo (Colombia); former Senator (2002-2022, Partido Dignidad)

4. María de los Ángeles Huerta (Mexico); former Congresswoman (2018-2021, MORENA)

5. Dr. Kirk Meighoo (Trinidad & Tobago); former independent Senator (2004, United National Congress)

6. Dr. Rodolfo Ondarza (Mexico); former Representative, Mexico City Legislative Assembly (2015-2018, PT)

7. Diane Sare (U.S.); candidate for the U.S. Senate from New York (2022, independent/LaRouche)

Page 4 of 36First...345...Last