Top Left Link Buttons
  • en
  • de

Geopolitics updates

Category Archives

Interview with Helga Zepp-LaRouche — U.S., Europe Need New Silk Road Cooperation More Than Asia Does


Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, called the “Silk Road Lady” in China and the first promoter with Lyndon LaRouche of this policy in Europe, was interviewed by TASS May 31, 2016 on the decision for a new global war or for economic development and cooperation.

TASS: How would you assess the current international cooperation?

Zepp-LaRouche: There are two completely different dynamics on the planet right now. On the one side you have the convergence of President Putin’s very successful military flanks, such as his intervention in Syria, which created the potential for peace, combined with his various diplomatic interventions in Asia, parallel to the Chinese New Silk Road initiatives.

These efforts represent a win-win perspective for over seventy participating countries already.

On the other side there is an extremely dangerous confrontation from the side of the United States, Great Britain, the EU and NATO against Russia and China, which has brought the world to a multiple crisis, more dangerous than at the height of the Cold War.

TASS: In what areas it is more active and where it is not?

Zepp-LaRouche:In the case of Syria the cooperation between Foreign Minister Lavrov and Secretary of State Kerry, as well as the Geneva cooperation between Russia and the U.S., is very positive. However, as long as the United States do not abandon their policy of regime change, the situation remains dangerous. President Putin has proven to be a brilliant strategist.

This allows confidence that the warhawks in NATO will not succeed to lure Russia into a trap, giving them a pretext for a preventive attack.

TASS: What are the issues we need to step up cooperation between the West and Russia? Why?

Zepp-LaRouche: The reality is, that the entire trans-Atlantic sector is bankrupt and about to blow up in a bigger way than in 2008. Japanese Prime Minister Abe, after a very important visit in Russia, made that point at the recent G7 meeting emphatically, but was rebuffed by President Obama, who insisted, that “the recovery is improving”, which is absurd in light of the negative interest rates of the central banks and the debate around “helicopter money”.

Therefore the West needs, more than Asia, the kind of economic cooperation of the One Road One Belt/Eurasian Economic Union cooperation, integrating Eurasia from Vladivostok to Lisbon, but also inviting the U.S. to participate in this perspective. The only way a catastrophe can be avoided, is if we succeed to overcome geopolitics and reach a new paradigm, based on a global development partnership and the common aims of mankind.

TASS: Why, despite the obvious threat of terrorism, cybercrime and other international challenges, does the West so hinder cooperation with Russia?

Zepp-LaRouche: Almost all important conflicts derive from the effort of the Anglo-American empire to maintain an unipolar world, at a point, where it has de facto ceased to exist already. More and more forces in the world realize that they have to make existential decisions, and that the interests of their nations are much better served by stopping sanctions and confrontation against Russia and China.

The fact that Russia and China have created a very strong strategic partnership, with India a third partner, has shifted the strategic balance in the world. More and more countries are seeing it as more beneficial to cooperate for joint development, than to be under the yoke of military confrontation. We are at a branching point in history, and at such moments, what counts is leadership of the kind we have seen from President Putin.





Ukrainian Government in Chaos, Leftist Opposition Appeals against Police-State Repression

by Rachel Douglas

23 Feb.—With Russian President Vladimir Putin’s dramatic Feb. 22 announcement of agreement between Russia and the United States on joint enforcement of a ceasefire in Syria, it is natural to ask: but, what about Ukraine? There is more than one potential trigger point for a global showdown and world war, and in recent weeks, the United States and NATO have announced plans for a huge build-up of forces in Eastern Europe, keyed off Ukraine as allegedly exemplary of “Russian aggression.”

As Ukraine marks twin anniversaries this month, that “What about…?” question remains wide open. Ukraine, and not its eastern regions alone, could explode in violence at any moment. The night of Feb. 21-22 was the second anniversary of the 2014 coup d’état, when elected President Victor Yanukovych fled Kiev in fear for his life, as crowds dominated by openly fascist armed bands threatened to storm his offices. One year later, on Feb. 11, 2015, all-night negotiations in the Belarusian capital among Putin, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, French Prime Minister Francois Holland and German Chancellor Angela Merkel led to the “Minsk-2” accords, calling a halt to the civil conflict in eastern Ukraine, the Donbass region, in which thousands had died and more than a million became refugees. The Minsk accords, coordinated with “contact group” talks among representatives of the Kiev regime and the eastern Ukraine regions that had rejected the coup, set forth a schedule for a ceasefire, force withdrawals, prisoner exchanges, and a longer-term settlement involving Constitutional changes to give semi-autonomy to the Donbass districts.

The force disengagement happened, but the Constitutional changes, recognition of autonomous status, and the planned subsequent return of control over the Donbass-Russia border to Ukraine, have not. Dr. Gordon M. Hahn of the Middlebury Institute for International Studies at Monterey (California), in an assessment published Feb. 19 under the headline “Who’s More in Violation of Minsk-2—Kiev or Donbass?” ( He concluded was that “Kiev is significantly more in violation of the agreement than the Donbass rebels and/or Moscow”, with the Ukrainian regime being “in violation of no less than seven articles and nine obligations” it committed to in Minsk-2.

The chaotic post-coup universe

On Feb. 3, Lithuanian banker Aivaras Abromavičius, imported by Poroshenko in Dec. 2014 to serve as Ukraine’s minister of economics, abruptly resigned. He stated, “My team and I have no wish to be a cover for open corruption or puppets,” citing alleged influence-peddling by Ihor Kononenko, an MP and businessman close to Poroshenko. Within a week, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde warned, “I am concerned about Ukraine’s slow progress in improving governance and fighting corruption,” hinting that the release of IMF funds pledged for stabilizing Ukraine might not be forthcoming.

Next, Poroshenko demanded the resignation of Prime Minister Arseni Yatsenyuk, the infamous “Yats” who was handpicked by U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland for his job in January 2014. On 16 February, the Supreme Rada (Parliament) condemned the performance of the Yats government, but several minutes

later failed to pass a vote of no-confidence. The sudden exit from the hall, before the second vote, of dozens of MPs, including opposition members and members of Poroshenko’s party, triggered rumors of bribery and dirty deals.

Yats remains PM, but two parties left the ruling coalition the next day. Either he forms a new coalition, or early elections could be called. Former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, whose party has risen from barely over 5 per cent of the vote in late-2014 elections to now polling 20+ per cent, and who was one of those exiting the coalition, visited Washington in early February, evidently to curry favor for a comeback bid.

The main issue in Ukraine, however, is not parliamentary scuffles. It is ungovernability, and economic breakdown. A major reason for non-performance of the Minsk-2 accords is that neither Poroshenko nor Yats could secure Parliamentary approval of the Constitutional changes required for Donbass autonomy. Meanwhile, in a country that saw the highest inflation in Europe (30 per cent in 2014, 45 per cent in 2015), people nationwide struggle to survive on wages that barely suffice for their home heating bills. The free trade arrangement with the EU, over which the Euromaidan coup was supposedly staged, has brought no boom for the Ukrainian economy.

The political problems are far deeper than the faction fights of the mid-2000s, when the victors in the 2004 Orange Revolution, Tymoshenko and then-President Victor Yushchenko, had a falling out, and that revolution “ate its own children”. This time, matters are complicated by the role violent neo-Nazi, ideologically fascist radical Ukrainian national groups played from the outset of the “Euromaidan” coup process of November 2013-February 2014. That role was revisited and confirmed this month in French filmmaker Paul Moreira’s documentary “Masks of the Revolution” (, which aired on French TV despite protests by Kiev, while the Hollywood nominated a rival documentary, a Kiev puff-piece called “Winter on Fire”, for an Oscar.

Rostislav Ishchenko, an insightful Ukrainian analyst currently exiled in Moscow, wrote 18 February that the country is experiencing not “dual power”, as there was during the Russian revolutions of 1917, but anarchy. The latest example, he said, is the blockade initiated by Right Sector and other viscerally anti-Russian paramilitaries, again Russian long-haul trucks crossing Ukraine to and from Slovakia and Hungary. In retaliation, Russia blocked Ukrainian trucks, forcing them to take circuitous routes to destinations like Kazakhstan, travelling south of the Caspian Sea through Turkey and Iran. This disruption of routine Eurasian trade is of no benefit to Kiev, but the government is powerless to override the radicals.

Fascist-style measures are found not only on Ukraine’s highways. There is another part of Ukraine’s political body politic, which receives little to no attention in the Western press. The Communist Party, which won 13.18 per cent of the vote and 32 seats in Parliament in 2012, was banned last year from running candidates for office, under new laws forbidding “communist symbols”. On Feb. 4 Dr. Natalia Vitrenko, leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine and co-chairman of the Left Opposition bloc, and 18 others released an appeal to UN and EU human rights officials, on the suppression of their fundamental rights and freedoms in Ukraine. The full text of their petition follows.

PETITION: from the All-Ukraine Public Association of Left and Center-left Political Parties and Public Organizations — “The Left Opposition”

to the United Nations and the Council of Europe Commissioners for Human Rights concerning the obstruction of the activities of opposition political parties and public organizations by the Ukrainian government, and need to start large-scale international verification of whether human rights and freedoms are being honored in Ukraine

Editorial note: The document below was sent on 4 February 2016 to United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra ‘ad Al Hussein and Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Nils Muizniek, with copies to Ukraine’s President, prime minister, chairman of Parliament, chairman of the Constitutional Court, and parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights. Official copies exist in Russian and in English. The English text below has undergone literary editing for clarity.

After the 2014 “Revolution of Dignity”, the organizers and ideologists of the Euromaidan, together with its active participants, came into power in Ukraine. But instead of the promised European standards of human rights and the rule of law, a totalitarian dictatorship has been established in our country.

This regime is flagrantly trampling our citizens’ right, provided for under international law and the Constitution of Ukraine, to political and public association in political parties and public organizations, including opposition organizations, for the purpose of organizing society on principles of political, ideological, and economic diversity.

The aforementioned rights are violated by means of:

* prohibition of unwanted political parties;

* wrongful interference in the affairs of political parties by government agencies such as the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the Security Service of Ukraine, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs;

* obstruction of the activity of parties and public organizations;

* criminal prosecution of opposition political activists;

* information blockade;

* defamation of opposition political parties and public organizations and their activities through the dissemination of false information;

* dissemination of wrong information for purposes of inciting to the physical elimination of opposition activists and shaping public opinion to support the banning of opposition organizations.

We believe that in regard to our activity the government of Ukraine is in violation of: Articles 18, 19, 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Articles 10, 11 and 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; Articles 3, 8, 15, 22, 24, 34, 36 and 68 of the Constitution of Ukraine; and the Law of Ukraine “On Political Parties in Ukraine”.

Today, Ukraine as a state is based on the dangerous principles of an effectively Neo-Nazi ideology, which tolerates no democracy whatsoever. The institutions of state deal with their ideological and political opponents using illegal means.

In order to organize political repressions. the Ukraine government adopted two laws: i) “On the condemnation of the Communist and National Socialist (Nazi) totalitarian regimes in Ukraine and the prohibition of propaganda of their symbols”; and ii) “On the legal status and the memory of fighters for Ukrainian independence in the twentieth century”. On the basis of these laws, the authorities have toughened up regulations and job instructions for government ministries and agencies.

Let us make you aware of following facts:

1) The government of Ukraine initiated a criminal case to discredit communist ideology and to ban the Communist Party of Ukraine. People who profess communist ideology and were not involved in any repressions or crimes of the “totalitarian regime”, are thereby deprived of the possibility of uniting into a political party and participating in the political life of the country, including participating in elections;

2) The Ministry of Justice refuses to register the Official Decision Note of the Extraordinary XXIX Congress of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine (PSPU), unlawfully interpreting the Charter of the PSPU in a distorted fashion. The Ministry of Justice thereby blocked issuance to the PSPU of a receipt of amendments to its Charter and Program, and thus deprived this political party of the possibility of full-fledged participation in the political life of Ukraine, including participation in elections;

3) The Ministry of Justice of Ukraine illegally refuses to register amendments to the Charter and Program of the Labor Party of Ukraine (Marxist-Leninist), and thus obstructs its activity and violates the rights of party members.

Moreover, Mr. Alexander V. Bondarchuk, the leader of the Labor Party of Ukraine and editor-in-chief of the newspaper Rabochy klass (Working Class) was arrested on the basis of accusations made by a pro-regime political opponent; he was held without grounds for 10 months at a pre-trial detention center, and continues to be the target of a cynical, politically motivated court case;

4) The activity of the Russian-Ukrainian Union Party is obstructed by the regime’s connivance in a “raider”-style takeover attempt against it and artificially drawn-out court proceedings;

5) Mr. Anatoliy A. Mayevsky, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Raboche-krestyanskaya Pravda (Workers’ and Peasants’ Truth), chairman of Central Bureau of All-Union Communist Party-Bolsheviks (ACPB) for Ukraine, Moldova and Transdniestria, and Secretary of the ACPB, was falsely accused and imprisoned for more than one year, before receiving three years probation;

6) From April 2014 until the present time, the Аll-Ukraine Women’s Public Organization “Gift of Life” has been subjected to criminal prosecution on trumped-up charges of supporting separatists and terrorists (for no other reason than the intention to carry out human rights work). The bank account of this organization was frozen and a campaign conducted to discredit the organization and its leader, Dr. Natalia M. Vitrenko.

7) The government of Ukraine illegally interferes in the affairs of the canonical Orthodox Church and abets the seizure of Orthodox churches by armed gangs and schismatics.

The law enforcement agencies of Ukraine and the neo-Nazi groups of armed fighters they patronize act in concert to obstruct peaceful opposition political gatherings and activities. Here several instances:

* On May 2, 2014, forty-six members of anti-fascist groups were brutally burned and killed during an action at Kulikovo Field in the City of Odessa;

* On May 9, 2014, a peaceful demonstration in the City of Mariupol in the Donetsk region was fired on;

* On September 1, 2015, in the City of Kharkov, armed bands physically prevented the Progressive Socialist Party from holding a peaceful rally under the slogan, “Peace and love for children, not war and hatred”;

* On January 29, 2016, in the City of Kiev, members of the volunteer Azov Battalion forcibly disrupted a conference of the Public Movement “Ukrainian Choice”, breaking into the premises and in effect starting a session of mob justice. The armed fighters’ action, which grossly violated the rights and freedoms of the conference participants and flouted the presumption of innocence, was overtly supported by Mr. Z. Shkiryak, advisor to the Minister of Internal Affairs.

Acts of vigilante justice and physical obstruction of the activity of oppositional political parties and public organizations, threats (including of physical violence), political murders and driving people to suicide (the cases of Mrs. V. Semenyuk-Samsonenko, Mr. O. Kalashnikov, the Priest Roman, A. Peklushenko, Mr. Walter, О. Buzina, and the editor of newspaper Khochu v SSSR [I Want to Go Back to the Soviet Union] Mr. S. Dolgov), are all being committed in Ukraine. The perpetrators are gangs of right-wing radicals under slogans such as “Ukraine above all”, “Ukraine for the Ukrainians”, “Glory to the nation—Death to the enemies”, “Knife the Muscovites, hang the Communists!”, “Bandera will come and bring order”. All of this is happening with the full legal, information and political support provided of the Ukrainian government.

According to information at our disposal, about 4,000 people are being held in Ukrainian prisons because of their political opinions, while 2.6 million citizens have been forced to abandon their homes, become refugees, and have left Ukraine, including some because of their political convictions.

We, the leaders of the political parties and public organizations, united in the Left Opposition, DECLARE:

The representation of our country by the Ukrainian government as being democratic and as respecting and defending the human rights and freedoms guaranteed by above-mentioned norms of international law and by the Constitution of Ukraine, does not correspond to reality. In fact, a totalitarian state is being built in Ukraine, with all the attributes of a neo-Nazi dictatorship. In is impossible, in such a political environment and using such methods of fighting against the opposition and intimidating the people, to build a democratic state, to ensure compliance with human rights and freedoms in Ukraine, and to conduct democratic elections.

We ask you to take this Petition under consideration and to organize a large-scale verification of compliance with to human rights and freedoms in Ukraine.

Natalia Vitrenko, Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine

Victor Silenko, Kiev Rus Party

Alexander Bondarchuk, Labor Party of Ukraine (Marxist-Leninist)

Alexander Luzan, Slavic Party of Ukraine

Vladimir Marchenko, All-Ukrainian Labor Organization “Ukrainian Confederation of Labor”

Lyudmila Drobyazina, Public Organization “Assembly of Orthodox Women of Ukraine”

Irina Kravchuk, All-Ukrainian Public Organization “Eurasian People’s Union”

Tatyana Ploshkina, All-Ukrainian Women’s Public Organization “Gift of Life”

Nikolai Lavrinenko, Slavic Committee of Ukraine

Valentin Lukiyanik, Public Organization “Union of Orthodox Brotherhoods of Ukraine”

Yelena Mazur, All-Ukrainian Public Organization “For the Union of Belarus and Russia” (ZUBR)

Gennadiy Selivanov, Public Organization “Union of Soviet Officers of Ukraine”

Evgeniy Pavlov, All-Ukrainian Union of Workers

Amar Al-Anni, Public Organization “St. Sergius of Radonezh Orthodox Brotherhood”

Rudolph Povarnitsyn,

Vladimir Yatsenko

Pyotr Tsybenko, Council of Veterans of Ukraine

Mikhail Kononovich, Komsomol of Ukraine

Georgy Buyko, Anti-Fascist Committee of Ukraine


To Top


A Resolution To Defend the Lives of Billions of People: We Say NO to the Paris COP21 “CO2 Reduction Scheme”

November 2, 2015 (EIRNS)—The following resolution was released today by Schiller Institute, with the intention of rapidly collecting signatures from qualified professionals, political leaders, and ordinary citizens internationally.

The conditions of life for billions of people depend upon rejecting the agenda being presented at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (“COP21”) to be held in Paris this December. The COP21 Paris initiative to adopt a legally binding agreement to reduce CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions must be rejected on two grounds: the scientific reality that mankind’s activity is not going to cause catastrophic climate change, and the very real, lethal consequences of the CO2 reduction programs being demanded.

There is no legitimate basis for having the COP21 conference. Put an end to this now!

Despite the climate-change narrative being presented by an extremely well-funded, top-down propaganda campaign, there is an immense amount of solid scientific evidence which clearly contradicts and/or refutes the claims of coming catastrophic climate change caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases. For example, satellite measurements have shown that there has been no average rise in global temperatures for over 18 years, despite the fact that human greenhouse gas emissions have been increasing at an accelerating rate. This underscores the reality that the climate simply does not respond to CO2 levels in the way claimed by climate alarmists; said otherwise, the Earth’s climate system is not highly sensitive to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

Because many climate models are using these false assumptions of high climate sensitivity to CO2, the predictions of these climate models have been consistently wrong, and with each year they are diverging further from reality. The gradual changes in the climate that have occurred over the recent decades, and the gradual changes which will continue to occur in the future, are not and will not be a cause for alarm. Most of these changes are natural, and any impact mankind may have would be relatively minor. A healthy and growing world economy will be able to adapt to these changes.

We must also recognize that CO2 is not a pollutant—it is an essential part of the biosphere. Because the present atmospheric CO2 levels are well below the optimum for plant growth, human-caused increases in CO2 concentrations are already contributing to increases in agricultural productivity and natural plant growth—creating a measurably greener planet.

But the Paris 2015 summit is not only about nations potentially wasting time and resources on a phantom problem existing only inside computer models—the ugly reality is that the CO2 reduction programs being proposed would increase poverty, lower living conditions, and accelerate death rates around the world. The world simply cannot support a growing population with improving conditions of life using only solar, wind, and other forms of so-called “green” energy.

More to the point, this scheme is being intensely promoted by modern followers of the population reduction ideology popularized by Thomas Malthus. Organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund for Nature have repeatedly declared that current human population is billions of individuals beyond the Earth’s “carrying capacity,” and must therefore be reduced by some billions of people. The present push for a CO2 reduction program is deeply rooted in this Malthusian ideological motivation. But Malthus was wrong in the Eighteenth Century, and his followers are wrong today.

Energy-intensive scientific, technological, and economic growth is essential to human existence. This can be measured by transitions to higher levels of energy flux-density, per capita and per area. Such progress, growth, and development is a universal right, and CO2 emissions are presently a vital part of that process for the overwhelming majority of the world’s population. The adoption of a legally binding CO2 reduction scheme at the COP21 conference in Paris will condemn billions of people to a lower quality of life, with higher death rates, greater poverty, and no ability to exercise their inherent human right to participate in the creation of a better future for society as a whole.

This is deeply immoral.

For these reasons the CO2 reduction scheme of the COP21 conference in Paris must be rejected.

(In signing this statement, I authorize my name to appear in its publication.)




[tp_table id=9 /]


In the Face of the Refugee Crisis: Realizing a Grand Vision

von Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Helga Zepp-LaRouche is the founder of the Schiller Institute and the Chairman of the German Civil Rights Movement Solidarity political party (BüSo)

The escalating refugee crisis has split Germany into two fundamentally opposed camps: the majority (as of now) of people who respond as good Samaritans to the distress of the refugees, and actively help in one way or another to alleviate some of this distress. With her statement “We will do it!”, Chancellor Merkel expressed the attitude of that majority.

Then there’s the other side, which ranges from Christian Social Union head Horst Seehofer, to Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière, to Schäble’s son-in-law Thomas Strobl, Bavarian Finance Minister Markus Söder, the Alternative for Germany Party, and the xenophobic Pegida movement.[1] Their common denominator is stoking the fear and resentment of the population and offering proposed “solutions” which ultimately violate human rights, in some cases marked by open racism, all of which share one thing—total inadequacy for solving the problem.

The political climate between these two camps has now become so hot, aggravated by an objective overload on the municipalities and inadequate housing capacities for the refugees, that the situation in Germany is about to become uncontrollable. If it should come to that, this crisis would have fateful consequences for all of Europe, due to the relative weight of Germany on the continent.


A Syrian woman and her children, among the lucky ones who made it to the Greek island of Lesbos after crossing the Aegean Sea from Turkey (UNCHR)

This is not a crisis whose end is in sight; on the contrary, on an almost daily basis, streams of incriminating pictures come out of bodies of refugees washed up on the Mediterranean coast, among them babies and small children, a mirror-image of the failed EU policy, which has ignored the looming catastrophe for years, and left primarily Greece and Italy to handle it alone. Officially, 2,600 people have drowned this year alone; the number of unreported cases must be much higher. But it’s not only desperate Syrians who are risking their lives in the attempt to escape death; millions of people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and many more African countries, or in refugee camps in countries such as in Turkey, see no future, and set off for Europe.

There are some, who, like Frontex director Fabrice Leggeri[2], are demanding that deportation prisons (or jails) be established in the so-called hotspots of Italy and Greece, in order to prevent the refugees from entering EU territory through its external borders. Others want to deploy Frontex-ships against the traffickers—which obviously puts the lives of the refugees in great danger.

Striking the same tone are proposals like those of Markus Söder to change the Constitution in order to restrict the right of asylum to specific quotas—a clear violation of the Geneva Convention. Human rights organizations also consider the new asylum proposals by Interior Minister de Maizière to be unconstitutional and totally inappropriate for solving the problems in managing the refugee crisis, not least because they increase the panic among the refugees at having Europe’s gates shut on them.

It is dawning on some that this refugee migration is in reality a mass migration comparable to the great migrations of late antiquity. They are the result of a decades-long failed policy of the geopolitical wars of Bush and Obama in Southwest Asia, which were based on lies; and of the conditionalities policy of the IMF, which suppressed economic development and created the breeding ground for terrorism through the resulting poverty.

The idea that you could remedy this situation which is totally coming apart at the seams, by building a new Limes Wall around Europe, and declaring the Near East and Africa terra incognita,—as is proposed in the 1991 essay by Jean-Christophe Rufin “The Empire and the new Barbarians: North-South Rupture,”—is absurd, and ultimately reflects the moral and political bankruptcy of its advocates. Should pictures of terrorized refugee children shown between NATO barbed wire and tear gas, who are the victims of a failed policy,—should shot refugees and drowned bodies become the “new normal?”

With reference to the xenophobic Pegida demonstrations and the burning refugee shelters, Die Welt wrote that Mrs. Merkel could only survive the next two years if she gets the refugee problem under control. A fair assessment, and even more so in view of the fact that the trans-Atlantic financial system can implode at any minute, and the gigantic derivatives bubble evaporate in a super-crash, as, among other things, the Glencore crisis calls to mind. It should be clear to any thinking human being that the chaos which would result from such a crash, would destroy the foundations of society, and scuttle all calculations on the refugee question.

A New Paradigm

There is a way out—but it requires a totally new paradigm and a totally new way of thinking. Only if the military operation by Russia, and now China, in Syria, and possibly Iraq, is followed by a comprehensive economic reconstruction program, that actually develops the Southwest Asian region which has been bombed back into the Stone Age, and permits people there to have the future which they don’t have now, can the mass migration be stopped. The same goes for Africa.

Development Plans for the Middle East and Africa on the Table in 1991

Prior to the escalating wars and terrorist onslaught in the region, these projects proposed by Lyndon LaRouche were all under discussion

Already in 2012, the Schiller Institute worked out an extensive development program for Southern Europe, the Mediterranean region, Southwest Asia and Africa, which was based on earlier development plans. In 2014, the Schiller Institute’s associates at the news magazine EIR—this magazine—published the report “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge,” which includes those development plans.

The basic idea is to develop the whole of Southwest Asia with a comprehensive development program; the greening of the deserts with desalination of large amounts of sea water, and other modern methods of fresh water production, such as ionization of the moisture in the atmosphere, together with the building of integrated infrastructure projects, industry and agriculture, and new cities will totally change the characteristics of the region.

Only if poverty is eliminated, and, most important, young people, and especially young men, are given a real perspective for the future, can the problem of terrorism be overcome. Naturally, the known sources of funding this terrorism—for example, through drug cultivation in Afhganistan and certain Wahhabi “charity” organizations, must be cut off.

It is clear that such a change in paradigm is only feasible if all the major neighbors of the region—Russia, China, India, Iran, Egypt, and the European nations—and hopefully also the United States—work together. To stop mass migration from Southwest Asia and Africa, geopolitics must be shelved, and replaced by the common aims of mankind. Among these aims is victory over terrorism, which threatens Europe, as well as Russia, China, India, and the United States,—and the need to preventing the refugee crisis from shattering the foundations of European society.

In addition to adopting a development perspective, the problem of the integration of those refugees already in Europe must immediately be addressed. In Germany today there are about 45 million employable persons; in 2050 that figure will only be 29 million, and in many other countries the situation is similar. The integration of such a new workforce is therefore in our own fundamental interest.

Why should the young employable refugees not be involved immediately in the construction of a half million units of subsidized housing? The financing could be undertaken by the Reconstruction Finance Bank (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) just as it financed the German economic miracle after the Second World War, and it would have the same economic effect. The mere announcement of this project, in combination with an extension of the New Silk Road toward Southwest Asia and Africa, would eradicate the current despair and anxiety for the future, and give way to a spirit of optimism.

The mean-spirited skeptics should ask themselves the question: do they really believe that the current policy toward the Middle East and Africa can actually go on forever? On the positive side: With China’s policy of the New Silk Road and President Xi Jinping’s offer of “win-win” cooperation for building the New Silk Road, we already have the framework in place for the perspective outlined here. The fact that the report “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge” has just been published in Chinese translation, and at the book launch received the enthusiastic support of ten representatives of leading Chinese economic institutes, demonstrates that this perspective presents a realistic opportunity, for which cooperation from Russia, China, and India can be relied upon, to resolve the refugee crisis in a totally new way. That opportunity need only be seized.


[1]. PEGIDA stands for Patriotic European Against the Islamicization of the Occident. The movement was founded in Dresden, Germany and has been holding anti-Islam demonstrations since October 2014.

[2]. Frontex is the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union. It was established in October 2004.

Council of Foreign Relations Demands Military Confrontation With China To Stop Silk Road

Elizabeth Economy, the Asia Studies Director at the Council on Foreign Relations, penned a chilling call for military mobilization to confront China, to stop the New Silk Road process introduced by President Xi Jinping, whom she describes in the title of her Foreign Affairs article as “China’s Imperial President” (quite a mouthful for the Asia chief at London’s premier Imperial think tank in the U.S.).

Economy does not hide the fact that the target is the New Silk Road, the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the BRICS. She writes:

“For Xi, all roads lead to Beijing, figuratively and literally. He has revived the ancient concept of the Silk Road — which connected the Chinese empire to Central Asia, the Middle East, and even Europe — by proposing a vast network of railroads, pipelines, highways, and canals to follow the contours of the old route. The infrastructure, which Xi expects Chinese banks and companies to finance and build, would allow for more trade between China and much of the rest of the world. Beijing has also considered building a roughly 8,100-mile high-speed intercontinental railroad that would connect China to Canada, Russia, and the United States through the Bering Strait. Even the Arctic has become China’s backyard: Chinese scholars describe their country as a near-Arctic state.

“Along with new infrastructure, Xi also wants to establish new institutions to support China’s position as a regional and global leader. He has helped create a new development bank, operated by the BRICS countries to challenge the primacy of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. And he has advanced the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which could enable China to become the leading financier of regional development. These two efforts signal Xi’s desire to capitalize on frustrations with the United States unwillingness to make international economic organizations more representative of developing countries.”

Then she drops the bomb, calling for a U.S. military mobilization, economic warfare and “color revolution” subversion:

“Xi’s nationalist rhetoric and assertive military posture pose a direct challenge to U.S. interests in the region and call for a vigorous response. Washington’s rebalance, or pivot, to Asia represents more than simply a response to China’s more assertive behavior. It also reflects the United States most closely held foreign policy values: freedom of the seas, the air, and space; free trade; the rule of law; and basic human rights. Without a strong pivot, the United States role as a regional power will diminish, and Washington will be denied the benefits of deeper engagement with many of the world’s most dynamic economies. The United States should therefore back up the pivot with a strong military presence in the Asia-Pacific to deter or counter Chinese aggression; reach consensus and then ratify the TPP; and bolster U.S. programs that support democratic institutions and civil society in such places as Cambodia, Malaysia, Myanmar, and Vietnam, where democracy is nascent but growing.”

Appeal to Artists & Scientists: Prevent World War III Before It’s Too Late

March 2014

The Schiller Institute has issued the following appeal for circulation and signature among scientific and artistic layers. If you feel addressed by this appeal, please sign it and send it in to the address below.

This appeal in PDF format, fits 1 letter-size sheet on both sides

Never since the beginning of human civilization has the danger been as great, that we will cause our own extinction as a species. Since November 21, a coup, long prepared by Western hands, has been activated in Ukraine, culminating on February 22 in an open putsch, forcing the legally elected President Yanukovych from office, and putting Rada (parliament) Chairman “Yats,” the darling of U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, in power as Prime Minister. Throughout the country since then, armed bands of stormtroopers, comprised of right-wing radical, anti-semitic, anti-Russian elements, have been terrorizing elected officials and the population at large.

Photographs and videos are now circulating worldwide, documenting the brutality of these groups, who, with flags, symbols, and martial songs, flaunt their adherence to the Nazi tradition of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera and his Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN). And yet, the official line of the United States and the European Union continues to be that these are simply individuals who want to escape from Russian oppression and to join a free and democratic Europe.

Even western think tanks have admitted that without a friendly Ukraine at its doorstep, Russia cannot defend itself. The entire assortment of military doctrines, ranging from the stationing of U.S. missile defense systems in Eastern Europe, to the Prompt Global Strike doctrine, to the AirSea Battle doctrine in the Pacific, are all doctrines that no longer proceed from the old NATO doctrine of MAD—Mutual and Assured Destruction—but rather proceed from the utopia idea that in our nuclear age, a first-strike strategy can succeed in winning wars.

The first phase of such a planned war, is the creation of an enemy image. The intended adversary must first be demonized by means of an orchestrated media campaign—a tactic made famous by Dr. Goebbels and later refined by the British intelligence service. “To out-Goebbels Goebbels” has been the credo, then as now: People must be made to believe that snow is black. Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the policy of “regime change” has been on the agenda for any government that refuses to knuckle under to the imperial order of globalization; and in every case, the Big Lie has been liberally applied.

Remember those Kuwaiti babies, brutally torn from their incubators by Saddam Hussein’s troops? or Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, which in 45 minutes could wipe out any location on Earth? or the great democratic sentiments of the anti-Qaddafi rebels in Libya? or the alleged proofs of Assad’s use of poison gas? And now? Today it’s President Putin who is the man-eating dictator, who throws poor, helpless oligarchs and blaspheming punk rock singers into prison—acts which, of course, completely justify nuclear confrontation. With an unprecedented campaign of lies, individuals and entire peoples are denounced, dissension sown, and the population indoctrinated and made confused with such persistence, that they finally adopt this enemy image as their own, take up the old Cold War rhetoric, and advocate hot war.

And, what then? If it does come to this threatened thermonuclear exchange with Russia and China, the majority of humankind is exterminated within approximately one and a half hours, and the dead will be the fortunate ones in comparison to those who will only perish some days later.

But mankind’s nature is not what we would be led to believe by the morally degenerate attitude of most national governments today, or by the stupefied state of the masses. Humanity is the only species which, by exercising its creative capacities, is capable of repeatedly pressing forward to attain deeper understanding of the laws of the physical universe, and of utilizing that knowledge for the improvement of humanity’s conditions of life. Human beings are also the only living creatures who can have a vision of the future, and who can shape that vision into a material power of ideas which creates that future.

It is precisely because we scientists and artists understand universal principles in science and art, and develop them further—in other words, that we seek the Truth—that in this dark hour of human history, we call upon the world public to fight to preserve peace, and, in this age of thermonuclear weapons, to abolish, once and for all, the very idea of resolving conflicts through warfare, and to drive out of office those politicians who, with their ideology of geopolitical confrontation, are putting the very existence of humanity at risk.

As the discoveries and compositions of Nicholas of Cusa, Leibniz, Einstein, Planck, and Vernadsky, of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven, of Dante, Shakespeare, and Schiller, of Brunelleschi and Rembrandt demonstrate, to name only a few, their creations are an expression of the immortality of the human soul, and of the potential immortality of the human species. We, the living, have the awesome duty to make our life’s work contribute to ensuring that the creativity of those great minds of the past, provide a foretaste of the potential for limitless possibilities with which the human species is endowed. The kind of international cooperation for the common aims of mankind which all scientists and artists have experienced at countless conferences, joint research projects, concert tours, and lively cultural exchanges, must provide the inspiration for solving all political, economic, and even military problems. As Nicholas of Cusa already wrote back in the 15th Century, peoples can only arrive at mutual understanding when they all bring forth their own scientists, artists, and philosophers.

For the sake of our love for humanity, as our expression of gratitude to all generations whose accomplishments have contributed to our present level of development, and as our sacred commitment to the immortal identity of the human species, we call upon the world’s people to put an end to the threat of our collective annihilation.


Signed: _____________________________

Please include your affiliation and contact information with your signature, and mail this to the address below.
Schiller Institute
Appeal to Artists and Scientists
PO Box 20244
Washington, DC., 20041-0244


Zepp-LaRouche speech to Chinese think-tank: On the Common Aims Of Mankind

Speech by Helga Zepp-LaRouche

On the Agenda: Common Aims Of Mankind

Helga Zepp-LaRouche gave this speech to a Chinese think-tank on Feb. 19.

EIRNS/Mike Billington
Helga Zepp-LaRouche in China, Feb. 23, 2014.

I am very happy to be here in China, because when I was here in ’71, China was quite different then. And then I came back in ’96; there had been gigantic development. And having had the advantage of being here at a time when the Cultural Revolution was still a dominant factor, and then seeing how the development had occurred, I think I can appreciate a bit more than most people, what a gigantic leap China has really made.

And now I’m coming back here in a happy mood, on the one side, because I see that President Xi Jinping has adopted the New Silk Road, which is exactly what we have been proposing since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Now, the not-so-nice aspect of this present trip is, naturally, the fact that we are at a very dangerous moment, and I would like to speak a little bit more about the war danger, at the beginning, and then in the second part of my presentation, to talk about where I see solutions. But I think the recent developments in Ukraine in just the last two days, where the violence has completely exploded, demonstrates that we are potentially in a terrible crisis. Because, contrary to what Western media have been saying about what is going on in Ukraine, reality is quite different.

As you know, the recent escalation started when President Yanukovych did not sign the EU Association Agreement at the last EU summit in November, and then suddenly, these demonstrations erupted, and the Western media portrayed it as if this would be the disappointment of the freedom-loving Ukrainian people, who want to join Europe, and do not want to be under the dictatorship of Putin, and Yanukovych.

The reality is quite different. President Putin said that what had been activated was something which had been prepared for the presidential election of 2015, but has been activated earlier. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov also pointed to the fascist character of these demonstrators, and if you look at the pictures from today and yesterday—people throwing Molotov cocktails against the police, occupying ministries and other buildings—these are not peaceful demonstrators (see this week’s cover story).

We know that what led to the Orange Revolution in 2004 was the result of 2,200 NGOs, which were deployed in Ukraine alone, financed and developed by such organizations as the National Endowment of Democracy, the IRI (International Republican Institute), the National Democratic Institute, which had groomed activists, who were selected on the basis of their anti-Russian profile. And many of these people were not ideologically motivated; they just got money. They were paid to do a job.

Naturally, the situation in Ukraine is complicated by the fact that the Western part of the population is traditionally more Catholic- and European-leaning, and the Eastern part is more Russian- and Orthodox-leaning; but that alone would not account for this present conflict.

What is different between the 2004 Orange Revolution and now, is the fact that we have the emergence of hardcore Nazi networks. The most well-known one is the Svoboda party of Oleh Tyahnybok, but there are also other groups like the Right Sector, who all are referring to the Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, who helped the invasion of Ukraine by the Nazis in the ’40s. These are people who are hardcore Nazis. They have a party logo which is almost identical with the swastika; they’re singing the old Nazi songs. And I think that the only way to characterize this, is that this is a full-fledged Nazi coup, trying to create civil war in the country for a pretext, for later perhaps to intervene.

Now, if you look at the territorial position of Ukraine, it reaches far into the territory of Russia. Kiev at one point was the capital of Russia, and if Ukraine would come under the influence of NATO and the EU, Russia would not be defensible. This has even been the estimate of American think-tanks like Stratfor, because the distance between the Ukrainian border and Moscow is only 480 kilometers, and it is a flat stretch of land, which is very difficult to defend.

So, last week, the Russian Izborsk Club [see EIR, Feb. 21, 2014], which is a group of very influential intellectuals in which such people as Sergei Glazyev are members, and also Gen. Leonid Ivashov—had put out a memorandum appealing to the Russian government, to Western people, but also to the Chinese government, to understand the nature of what is going on. And they say that the aim of this is to drive the Russian population out of the Eastern part of Ukraine into Russia, to create a flood of immigrants; to then forcibly deny the Russian Black Sea Fleet access to the ports of Sevastopol and Odessa, which, strategically, would also cut off Russia from access to the Mediterranean and the Aegean. And then, basically, establish NATO bases in Ukraine, and place Ukraine under the influence of NATO.

Build-Up for Nuclear War

We think that the situation is even worse than that. Because first of all, you cannot see the effort for eastward expansion in respect to Ukraine apart from the eastward expansion of NATO, which has been going on since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the present situation, where you have the U.S. missile defense system set up in Poland and Romania. Just last week, NATO sent an Aegis destroyer to Spain, to the base at Rota. And the Russian government had made very clear, in a conference two years ago, where the Chief of the General Staff Gen. Nikolai Makarov had shown video animations that they naturally see as indicating that the U.S. missile defense system is not directed against Iranian missiles, but that the physical location of the system at the Russian border means it’s directed against Russia. And nobody has any doubt about that.

Now, this U.S. missile defense system is based on a first-strike conception, aimed to take out the second-strike capability of the Russian nuclear forces. And that has been stated by the Russian Chief of the General Staff; that they cannot accept the system to be built at stages 3 and 4, because there comes a point when Russia would become indefensible, and therefore, General Makarov even said, it may force Russia to go for a first strike, and it may come to the exchange of nuclear weapons in Central Europe [see EIR, May 18, 2012].

The additional aspect is the Prompt Global Strike doctrine, which is also a utopian conception which assumes that you can use traditional ICBMs, put non-nuclear warheads on them, conventional weapons, and then take out the weaponry—which again, is a first-strike conception.

Then, if you look at the world situation: the deployment of the Patriot missiles in Turkey, which were supposedly positioned with respect to Syria, but is really part of a forward deployment of NATO. Then you have to see, since the Asia Pivot policy of the U.S. Administration, the Air-Sea Battle doctrine is again a first-strike doctrine, which has even been admitted by American military analysts, with several articles discussing this problem. It is based on the illusion that it can take out the second-strike and other capabilities of any opponent, which in this case would naturally be China. The critics of this doctrine have noted that it is a doctrine which is, by its nature, causing a spiraling danger of a first strike, and a nuclear showdown.

China’s Nuclear Second-Strike Capability


This map, published in all Chinese media in October 2013, shows the reach of China’s submarine-launched nuclear missiles in case of war.

China has also, like Russia, made clear that it will not accept that. In October, there was, on one Monday, simultaneously, the publication of maps in all Chinese media showing that China has 70 strategic submarines which are located in the Pacific, which could launch a second strike, if China were be attacked, at the [U.S.] West Coast, and that the radioactive fallout would go all the way to Chicago. And that you would have a second strike through the North Pole, attacking the East Coast.

This has been stated very clearly, and also the fact that China has these strategic submarines in places which are not necessarily easy to detect. Therefore, the utopian character of all of this is that, if you think about the number of nuclear warheads worldwide, that they’re placed in so many different places—in submarines, in strategic bombers, in hidden places—then the idea that you can win a first strike without the danger of mankind’s extinction, is complete insanity and a criminal kind of thinking.

The Financial Detonator

Now, that this is all related to the collapse of the trans-Atlantic financial system, is really obvious. Some of these things have developed since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, we proposed a Eurasian Land-Bridge, as a peace order for the 21st Century, and if that had been implemented, we would not be at this moment. But unfortunately, at the moment of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the neo-cons in the United States emerged in the old Bush Administration, and they decided that now was the time to go for a world empire. They wrote the New American Century doctrine, and one of the authors was Robert Kagan.

Now it happens to be that Robert Kagan is the husband of Victoria Nuland, who, as was revealed in her discussion with U.S. Ambassador in Kiev Geoffrey Pyatt, was shown to be meddling in the internal affairs of Ukraine. The scandal was not her vulgar language; that’s her problem, how she behaves. The real scandal was that it was a complete admission that the United States government is fine-tuning, step by step, an intervention into who should be the government in Ukraine—which is a complete violation of the UN charter, of international law, of everything. But it is not surprising if you know that she is married to this neo-con, who has promoted this for a long time.

This has been in place for a very long time, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, but what is advancing, and triggering, and speeding up this present development, is the condition of the trans-Atlantic financial system, which is about to blow out.

If you take it back to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008, there was a general recognition by many people in the G8 and G20 countries, that the international financial system was disintegrating, and there was a tremendous panic. For a very short period of time, people were willing to consider reforms to rein in the speculation, to re-regulate the banking system, which had been deregulated since the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999, but that shock lasted only a couple of days. And then the Too-Big-To-Fail banks, and the international financial institutions, reasserted their control of the governments, and two months later, at the G20 meeting in Washington, on the 15th of November, basically decided to deal with this problem in a different way—not through any reforms, but by just pumping money, quantitative easing, and using taxpayers’ money to make bailouts of banks.

In the five and a half years since the outbreak of the Lehman Brothers crisis, they have pumped in, in the United States, probably somewhere between—it’s very difficult to say, because there’s not total transparency—$25 and $30 trillion, through a combination of rescue packages and quantitative easing. And this money has accumulated in the system as a gigantic bubble. It exists in the form of derivative contracts, which now have gone up, according to our best estimate, to $1.4 quadrillion. A gigantic bubble.

And naturally, eventually, like in Germany in 1923, when you print too much money, if it be paper money or virtual money in the form of electronic money, eventually this creates hyperinflation. In 1923, in Germany, when the Reichsbank printed money to pay the war debt, and to pay the Versailles Treaty payments to the Allies, you could not see the inflation for four years. But then, when the French troops occupied the Rhineland, production stopped, and in half a year, the hyperinflation exploded, so that people were buying a piece of bread for 1 Reichsmark, then 100, then 100,000, then a million, then a billion, and at the end, they went with wheelbarrows to the baker before 12 o’clock, because at 12 o’clock the price was increased. Then by November, the whole thing ended, because it had become absurd.

This is now not only happening in one country, like it did in Germany, but it’s happening in the entire Eurozone, and in the dollar zone—which is obviously not only the United States.

Therefore, there was a debate for a very long time in the Federal Reserve, that there should be a reduction of the liquidity pumping of $85 billion per month, to $75 billion, to $65 billion; but there was a worry that you cannot really do that, because if you start to “taper,” then the danger is of a reverse leverage of this bubble, and that you could cause a new explosion of the system.

The Bank of International Settlements published, about two weeks ago, a very strong, stern warning, saying that the tapering should not occur, because it could lead to a complete blowout of the system. And that is exactly what is happening now: a collapse on the emerging markets. The currencies of Brazil, South Africa, Turkey, Hungary, and others have taken a downward turn in the last period. And that is just the beginning.

The other problem is naturally that the Eurozone is in a terrible crisis. And I know that people in China have the idea that Europe is doing better, but I can tell you it is not doing better. Officially they are saying there is an improvement, and small growth of 0.5% or some such remarkable magnitude. But the reality is that, if you look at the figures, what is happening in Greece, in Italy, in Spain, in Portugal—the policy of the Troika, which has been the most brutal austerity imaginable—has led to these economies dying, and the population is dying.

The death rate in all of these countries is going up, and the birth rate is going down. Half of the pensioners in Greece are starving. The suicide rate is going up in all of these countries. Millions of people have no health care. The youth unemployment in Greece is 65%. In Spain it’s over 60%, and that, despite the fact that there has been a tremendous brain drain, because the young and educated people have left Greece and Spain, because they have no opportunities anymore. So the policy of the Troika is to destroy these countries, and, in our view, they’re doing it deliberately.

It’s not just incompetence, which is present also, but there is an intention behind it, to turn Europe into a feudal entity.

Now, the fact that this system is about to blow is the reason for the war danger. In a certain sense, it’s very difficult to explain. On the one side, there is an automatism. We are dealing with an empire, a global empire, where all these moves have been installed, and now there is a certain automatism, which is very, very dangerous.

The Obama Issue

This is the reason why my husband has been making the point—and you may think that this sounds very dramatic, but I can only report to you what he is saying—that the only way to stop World War III is the impeachment of Obama.

Many people had illusions about Obama. They thought he was the big Messiah. He promised change, he promised, “Yes, we can.” You remember all these nice slogans from the 2008 campaign. He even got the Nobel Peace Prize before he did anything. But I think many people, both internationally and domestically, have lost their illusions. And he’s committed several impeachable offenses. One of them is that he conducted war against Libya, without the approval of the Congress. He lied. He said this is just a humanitarian intervention, we will not put boots on the ground. But he did put boots to the ground; there were thousands of secret service agents and special forces on the ground, and whether they had boots or not, doesn’t really make a difference.

Then, immediately after the brutal assassination of Qaddafi, Mr. LaRouche said, the only way to explain what is happening is that we are on the course towards a Third World War. The real policy was regime change.

We came very close to that in the case of Syria. Because in Syria, it was not that the Assad government was shooting peaceful demonstrators which caused the escalation: It was part of the regime-change policy from the very beginning. And a lot of the rebels—al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and other such terrorist groups—were sponsored, on the one side, from the CIA station in Benghazi, Libya, which is now an issue of discussion in the Benghazi hearings in the U.S. Congress; but the main sponsor was Saudi Arabia, in particular the head of Saudi intelligence, Prince Bandar, who has been financing and running these terrorist networks in Syria.

So, at a certain point, the U.S. military attack was about to happen. On the Friday night before the attack was to start, we got information from well-placed contacts in the United States, that the U.S. military attack was supposed to occur in the night between Sunday and Monday. And then on Saturday, about noontime, we got another report saying that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey had made a last-minute intervention at the White House, telling Obama that he could not start a war where you do not know how to end it. This, and the fact that the American population was against this war, and that Congress was against this war, changed the opinion of Obama, so that he then asked the Congress for a vote on the matter, and it became clear that the votes were not there, and the agreement with the Russians on the chemical weapons gave Obama a way out. This is how, at least for the time being, the military intervention was stopped. Had Congress voted, they would have voted no.

But, as you can see with the developments in Ukraine, this has not changed the general character of the problem.

The impeachment of Obama is now being considered by more and more Congressmen, who have made up a list of the many impeachable crimes. For example, that Obama is disregarding the separation of powers by making recess appointments. In his recent State of the Union Address, he said, I will not go to the Congress if the Congress has a different opinion—I don’t care. That has caused a lot of people to say, this has to be stopped.

Obviously, people are also afraid to take that step, but there is a growing momentum for such an impeachment. In the light of the escalation toward thermonuclear war, it is absolutely essential that the United States return to its character as a constitutional republic. Obviously, this is a matter for the Americans to decide.

Stop Monster Globalization

But I think the other necessary thing to do, is to stop the casino economy. Because what is driving this present crazy development of globalization, is the fact that globalization has become a monster, where people, entire continents, are sacrificed. The rich are becoming richer. Recently there was a study published by Oxfam, which stated that 85 individuals in the world own as much as 3.5 billion people. And that means in practice, that Africa, for example, is a dying continent. This globalization has consequences: It is not just a moral issue; it means people are dying.

For example, you have, right now, every week, thousands of people getting into tiny boats, trying to flee across the Mediterranean from Africa to what they perceive as a safe haven in Europe. Half of them are drowning. And this is well known. But they take the risk nevertheless, because the war, the hunger, the disease in Africa is such that they prefer to take a 50% chance that they will survive rather than stay where they are. I wrote a poem about this problem, about Lampedusa—that’s the island in Italy where people flee to. It is a synonym for a completely morally bankrupt system. If you cannot treat people in such a way that this is eliminated, civilization is lost.

It would be so easy to stop this. We have all the technologies to make Africa a growing continent, to eliminate poverty in half a year! If the whole world would say that we will stop hunger in Africa, we will build ports, railways, agriculture, irrigation, this could be stopped in half a year, maybe even less. And for me, this is a big moral issue: that this world order must not stay the way it is.

This is what we propose for the United States as a recovery program today, which would mean to re-implement Glass-Steagall, and we have organized in the last two to three years about 80 Congressmen, 11 Senators, and legislatures in about 28 states out of the 50, where resolutions for Glass-Steagall have been introduced and/or passed. And I can actually say that there is growing ferment from the lower level of mayors, of city councils, of state legislatures, because they feel the brunt of the collapse, much more even than the Congress.

We have organized in Europe important forces for Glass-Steagall. In Italy, we have several laws before the parliament, and in other countries we have mayors supporting it, and legislation being discussed.

So, if this happens, if Glass-Steagall could be implemented, it will end the investment bubble; because if the investment banks no longer have access to the assets of the commercial banks, and no longer have rescue packages from the taxpayers, they would have to bring their books in order, and declare insolvency.

Then, however, we would need to have a new credit mechanism, which also existed at one time in American history, in the form of the American System of Economy, introduced first by Alexander Hamilton, who was the first Treasury Secretary of the United States, and who created a national bank, and the idea that the only institution which has the power and right to create credit, is the sovereign government, and not the private banks.

This was then repeated by Lincoln, by Franklin D. Roosevelt, and it was done also by Germany after 1945, which created the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, based on Roosevelt’s Reconstruction Finance Corporation, to give credit lines for well-defined projects.

Now in the case of the reconstruction of Germany after the Second World War, this led to what became famous as the German Economic Miracle, because Germany, which was a complete rubblefield at the end of the Second World War, through that method of state credit financing reconstruction, became, in a few years, the economic miracle which was admired by the whole world.

Programs for Global Development

So, what we propose, therefore, in this crisis which is now upon us, that we overcome it by establishing a Glass-Steagall system, and by the creation of credit by the sovereign governments in each nation. And then we can agree on what we used to call the Eurasian Land-Bridge, and which we proposed, as I said, in the first place, when the Soviet Union disintegrated, in order to combine the industrial and population centers of Europe with those of Asia, through development corridors.

World Land-Bridge
View full size

When we made this proposal, we looked at the map and the geographic conditions of the Eurasian continent, and it turned out that the best geographical locations for such corridors, were the Trans-Siberian Railroad; the old Silk Road; and other lines, like from Kazakstan all the way to India, to Indonesia; another line from Iran to Turkey, and from there to Europe. But in the meantime, since we proposed this for the first time really in 1989, and then worked on it in ’91, and in the 23 years since, we have completed this program into something which we now call the World Land-Bridge, which is the idea to have several infrastructure projects which would get the world economy out of this crisis.

For the United States, we have proposed something which is called NAWAPA, the North American Water and Power Alliance, which will be the biggest water-management project that ever existed in history. It’s based on the idea of taking the water which now flows unutilized in Canada and Alaska into the Arctic, to take these waters through a system of canals and river systems, and pumping stations, along the Rocky Mountains, all the way to Mexico. And if you ever have been in the United States, travelling by air from the West Coast to the East Coast, you see that California is green, then comes a strip of desert states, and then you have the Rocky Mountains, passing to the Plains of the Midwest, and further to the green East Coast. And this program would turn these desert states into the most lush agricultural and forested areas, because it’s also an intervention into the biosphere.

Because if you start irrigation in a desert area, you have the possibility to plant vegetation. This vegetation then evaporates water, creating clouds, and the clouds bring rain. Then, you have a cycle of water recycling, and only after three or four such cycles, this water ends back up in the ocean, but you have improved the biosphere through what Vladimir Vernadsky called the noetic capability of man. You create new weather systems, you improve your entire environment.

For Mexico, this is vital, because they have now great starvation. They have deserts with a terrible situation—this would improve it.

Then our idea is, you combine this NAWAPA project, which would immediately create 6 million jobs; it would help to overcome the depression in the United States. You combine that, then, with the building of a tunnel under the Bering Strait, which is this short strip between Alaska and Siberia. This is a project which has been put on the agenda by President Putin, since he became President again, and they have decided to build that, no matter what the intention on the U.S. side may be.

The next connection is to develop the Arctic region of Siberia. The region of Eastern Siberia is the richest area of raw materials. You find there all the raw materials, all the elements, which are in Mendeleyev’s Periodic Table, but naturally, they’re under permafrost conditions, so you cannot just go there and mine them, because if it’s minus 50°C, it’s not so pleasant to work there. So, therefore, you need to develop cosmodromes, new cities which are suitable for human beings to live there; and that, in a certain sense, is also very good, because you need to develop these kinds of technologies as a test for space colonization. If you build such cosmodromes in Siberia, this is exactly what you will need when you colonize the Moon, or later, other planets. So, it’s a step in the next evolution of civilization.

And then, naturally, we want to connect this with the Eurasian Land-Bridge, which we proposed in great detail in many reports, and extend that to Southern Europe, because Southern Europe needs an urgent development plan, to include the Near East and the Middle East/Southwest Asia.

The New Silk Road

Now, this is another problem we have to solve, because right now the region from Afghanistan, Pakistan, all the way to the Caucasus, to the Mediterranean, Syria, to Northern Africa, Central Africa, is a region which is completely destabilized. We have terrorist networks, which have spread, ever since the Trilateral Commission decided to build up the mujahideen in the 1980s in Afghanistan, against the Soviet Union. This terrorist network has grown and spread. In Chechnya, in Dagestan, in Pakistan, in Northern Africa. And it’s a real problem, because it is now being financed by the drug trade from Afghanistan, which has increased 40-fold since NATO moved into Afghanistan 12 years ago.

The Ancient Silk Roads (Land-Based and Maritime)


Creative Commons

The good news is, that with the adoption of the New Silk Road policy by President Xi Jinping, this is now on the agenda. This is, in our view, the best development which could have occurred, because you need to put an alternative on the table. The New Silk road which connects China to Central Asia, could potentially be extended into Central Europe and Eastern Europe, as this was presented by Prime Minister Li Keqiang when he visited Romania and met with 15 heads of state. There, he proposed that China build a high-speed-train system in Eastern Europe, and this is what the EU is not doing. They cancelled all transport corridors which had already been agreed upon by the EU Transport Ministers in a meeting in 1994 in Crete, but then, because of the stupid austerity policy, all of these were canceled.


Russian Presidential Press and Information Office
Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin, in Moscow, March 22, 2013. Russians are enthusiastic about the prospect of working with China to develop Central Asia.

I know that there was a concern by China as to how Russia would react to China’s developing Central Asia, and also building infrastructure in Central and Eastern Europe. And I’m very happy to tell you that my recent communication from our best contacts in Russia, have indicated that they think that that is the best way for China and Russia to cooperate, on these projects. And they have said that the developments in Ukraine have made very clear, that there needs to be a change in policy. And developments in Sochi had the same effect. What they mean by that is not the Olympic Games, but the fact that the investment in the Sochi region transformed an entire region, through infrastructure and other developments, as a model of what can be done everywhere else.


EIRNS/Bill Jones
Zepp-LaRouche at a maglev station in China during her recent visit.

So, therefore, we are optimistic that there are solutions, because we can extend this Eurasian Land-Bridge into Africa, into Latin America, and have a World Land-Bridge, where you can travel in a very short period of time—maybe in 20 years, with a maglev train, like the one you have between Pudong and Shanghai—from Chile, all the way across the Bering Strait, to the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, or through the maritime Silk Road into Indonesia, and that we have a completely different conception of foreign relations, and how people can be together.

An End to War as Policy

Now, we have to do a couple more things. If we want to get out of this crisis, we must consciously take the next step in the evolution of civilization. We need to say good-bye to certain accepted axioms, like the idea of solving conflict through war. Because in the time of thermonuclear weapons, to have the idea that you can solve conflict through war, means you risk the extinction of civilization. If it ever would come to nuclear war, within one and a half hours, all of mankind could be dead, and extinct. And since that is not acceptable, we have to say good-bye to the idea of geopolitical thinking.

We should not think, “this is German interest,” “this is Chinese interest,” “this is American interest,” but we must consciously define the next higher level of reason, where the common aims of mankind are what motivates us all. And the common aims of mankind are many. For example, to make thermonuclear weapons obsolete, which was already the idea in 1983, when President Reagan adopted the Strategic Defense Initiative, which was a proposal by my husband, which he had developed, and about which he had back-channel discussions for one year with the Soviet Union, with their representatives in the United States, which was in agreement with the National Security Council of the United States. And for one year, this was discussed, and at one point, the answer came from Moscow, no, we don’t want that.

Nevertheless, President Reagan in March 1983, made it official policy of the United States, and even offered to the Soviet Union to apply the technologies based on new physical principles, which would result from such a program, in the civilian sector, where Russia had the most bottlenecks.

Now, this was a completely different conception than what is generally thought, and had nothing to do with a “Star Wars” scenario, which the Western media tried to make of the SDI proposal. Rather it was a grand design to get rid of nuclear weapons through technologies based on new physical principles, and then have, out of this increase in productivity in the civilian economy, a gigantic technology transfer to the Third World. The idea was to dissolve the blocs, to dissolve NATO, and to dissolve the Warsaw Pact, and really reorganize world affairs. And we were very close to that.

There was a disruption, because the Soviet government and the Bush faction in the Reagan Administration moved to sabotage it. But getting rid of thermonuclear weapons is an absolute necessity, because they imply the possibility of mankind’s extinction.

There are other problems to solve jointly, like getting a joint fight against terrorism. The fight against drug traffic. Drug traffic is a big problem for Russia. [Russian anti-drug chief] Victor Ivanov has declared the drug traffic to be the national security issue number one, because every year 100,000 people are dying from the drug traffic.

Then there are other problems, like the defense of the planet Earth against asteroids, comets, and meteors. One year ago, in Chelyabinsk, the meteorite, asteroid shower, occurred. This was not on the radar screen of the U.S. NASA, ESA, nor of the Russian government, and it showed how vulnerable our planet is to the impact of such objects, which right now, we have no technological possibility to defend against. We must work together internationally to develop the technology to divert such objects once their orbit shows that they’re heading in the direction of the planet.

We have to improve our prognosis of earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, which after Fukushima, the Russian, Italian, and other scientists have focussed on, and I have heard from our friends in Russia that they are making big progress in their ability to forecast earthquakes and tsunamis.

Space Exploration and the Fusion Economy

There are other things to be accomplished. The other most promising development, apart from the announcement of the New Silk Road, was the Chinese landing on the Moon, where the Jade Rabbit started to operate, with the idea that this would be a step in the direction of mining helium-3 on the Moon, as a fuel for a future fusion economy on Earth.


China’s Chang’e-3 lander on the Moon, December 2013. The landing is a step in the direction of mining helium-3, as a fuel for a fusion economy on Earth.

Zepp-LaRouche talks with Xu Dazhe, the head of the Chinese Space Agency, during a forum in Washington in January 2013.

This is the absolute next step, because in the evolution of mankind, we have to go from lower to higher energy-flux densities. Because, as Mr. LaRouche, who developed the idea of physical economy, has pointed out, as compared to monetarism, the increase of energy-flux density in the production process is the law of the universe. With each energy-flux density level, you have a corresponding relative population density. And therefore, we are strongly opposed to solar and wind energy, which can fill minor functions here and there, but which cannot serve as the basis of an industrial society, because if you would transform the entire energy production to these low-energy-flux-density levels, it would only support a population of 1 billion people. But we have presently already 7 billion. And we urgently need to go to the fourth generation of nuclear fission reactors which are inherently safe, the pebble-bed reactors, high-temperature reactors, and to a nuclear fusion economy, and beyond.

So, therefore, one of the next joint cooperation tasks for civilization must be the joint development of a crash program for fusion power, collaborative space colonization, and in general, to move the identity of mankind to a different level. We are not beasts. Mr. LaRouche has made a very big emphasis on the fact that the human species, unlike all other living species on the planet, is the only species which has creativity, which has cognitive powers, which can, again and again, improve the conditions of life for all citizens, and especially, we can shape the future. We are not victims of simply continuing the past, but we are the only living creatures capable of having a vision of what the future should be, and capable of moving to get the future implemented through our own action.

A Cultural Renaissance

So, therefore, we are emphatic that we must combine economic program with a cultural renaissance; that we cannot stay in popular culture, because with globalization, the culture has become, particularly in Europe and the United States, decadent and degenerate. If you look at the youth culture in Europe and in the United States, I can tell you it is satanic. Many of the pop varieties are openly bestial and satanic. And it has bred a culture of violence, where in the United States now, you have school shootings every second month. You have meaningless murder on the streets, for no good reason, because people are just crazy.

We are approaching a Dark Age, like in the 14th Century, when the Black Death was raging, and people became completely crazy. You had self-flagellants, you had witchhunts, you had a real collapse of civilization. And if you compare what is happening in the culture today in Europe and in the United States, you see we are already in a Dark Age.

How many people in Europe know and love Classical music culture? They are rapidly becoming a minority. And therefore, we need to do the same thing which was done in the transformation from the 14th to the 15th centuries, when the Golden Italian Renaissance was consciously created by a few people, who went back to the great Greek tradition of the Classics, of Plato, of the tragedians, and by reviving Plato and Dante, they created the Golden Renaissance of Italy. And we must do the same thing today.


EIRNS/Bill Jones
Helga Zepp-LaRouche in China. She proposed a Dialogue of Cultures, where each country would draw on its best traditions from the past: “We have to build a new Renaissance, and create a civilization on this planet which is really worthy for man to live.”

We have proposed for a long time, a Dialogue of Cultures, where each country would go back to its best tradition, which in the case of Germany, would mean to revive the German Classical culture of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schiller—even Goethe has a little place—and also in science, we have to go back to Nicholas of Cusa, Leibniz, Gauss, Riemann, Einstein, Planck, Vernadsky. In the case of China, you have such a rich culture of 5,000 years. There were many periods which contributed much to world culture, and I think one was really the Song dynasty, where a lot of beautiful things were happening in art and culture.

We have to revive that, and out of this revival, we have to build a new Renaissance, and create a civilization on this planet which is really worthy for man to live.

These are, in short, our ideas, and we are really fighting to implement them; not just to have a nice vision, but to make it happen.

Urgent Appeal to the UN General Assembly

This statement by the President of the Schiller Institute was distributed at the opening of the 68th UN General Assembly in New York.

by Helga Zepp-LaRouche
President of the Schiller Institute

We all know that the current economic order in the world only allows a very small percentage of the population to live a life of luxury, that only a relatively small percentage live decently, that many languish in inhumane poverty, while what Pope Francis called “hidden euthanasia” is widespread.

Only a few people know that, just a few weeks ago, mankind avoided by a hair’s breadth the danger of extinction in a thermonuclear war, because that would have been the consequence of an escalation following a military strike against Syria.

Both of these dangers, which threaten the very existence of the human species, are ultimately the result of the economic system of globalization, in which “anonymous decisions” — signed by high-level officials — sacrifice man’s unique dignity and his life to mammon, the god of lucre.

The diplomatic initiative around Syria raises the hope that the danger of a regional and possibly world war has been once again averted. But as urgent as war avoidance is, it is not enough. If we, as a species, are to have a future, we need a real perspective for peace, a completely new paradigm, that leaves behind for once and for all the geometry of solving crises through war, and replaces it by defining the common goals of mankind.

Is it not in the interest of all people on this planet to ensure energy security and raw material security as quickly as possible, and by so doing to overcome an essential cause of hunger and of the war danger? Is it therefore not in the interest of all people and all nations to launch the best possible crash program for the use of thermonuclear fusion, along the lines of the “Manhattan Project” for developing the atomic bomb during the Second World War, but this time for peaceful purposes and for the good of all mankind?

Likewise, it is high time to put the legitimate demand of the Non-Aligned Movement for a just world economic order back on the agenda. Such a new order could begin with the proposal of Chinese President Xi Jinping at the latest SCO conference, to build the new Silk Road as the basis for peaceful cooperation among all the countries along that route. This proposal is totally in line with the proposal for a Eurasian Landbridge that the Schiller Institute advanced in 1991, in reaction to the disintegration of the Soviet Union. That concept has been expanded, in the meantime, to an international Landbridge to bring people together, which has gained many friends and supporters throughout the world. Such a worldwide infrastructure and development program would hoist us onto the next higher economic platform where hunger and underdevelopment could be eliminated forever.

If the nations united in the UN General Assembly decide to replace the profoundly immoral and unjust system of globalization by an order allowing an alliance of sovereign Republics — in the tradition of John Quincy Adams — to work together in the common interests of mankind, our civilization can enter, consciously, into the next phase of evolution.

Why should that not be possible? We are the only creatures who, thanks to human creativity, can consciously improve the basis of our existence through scientific and technological innovation, and thus raise our living standards and life expectancy. Likewise, we are the only species which can scientifically determine with precision where the next step of research into the physical order of creation must lie, to ensure the continued existence of our species in the universe.

The Earth is not a closed, entropic system with finite resources. Our solar system and our galaxy are only a tiny part of the universe, which develops itself anti-entropically. What is wonderful about our order of creation is that there exists a verifiable concordance between the laws of the macrocosmos — the universe — and of the microcosmos — our creative reason — which is expressed in the physical power of our immaterial ideas.

What we need today more than anything else is tender love for mankind, an audacious vision for the future which looks at our planet from the perspective of astronauts and cosmonauts who see no borders, but only one mankind, while at the same time looking to the stars.

Friedrich Schiller said as much in his poem, and Ludwig van Beethoven in his 9th Symphony put those words to music:

Every man becomes a brother
Take this kiss throughout the world!
Brothers, o’er the stars unfurld
Must reside a loving father.

Our tormented mankind needs courageous leaders, committed to the mission of leading the world out of the danger zones of destruction into a better future, which is within reach!

Two Opposing Worlds Meet; Development or Death

This article appeared in the September 14, 2012 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

by Hussein Askary
September 9, 2012

The Stockholm World Water Week, Aug. 26-31, sponsored by the Swedish state’s International Development Cooperation Agency, and such global cartel companies such as Nestle and PepsiCo, but dominated by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Stockholm Environmental Institute, and similar malthusian propaganda outlets, promised to be orgy in green ideological madness, where African and Asian nations are regarded by Europe and the U.S.A. as an embarrassing burden, and that those nations should be convinced that their misery could only be reduced, but not relieved, by small hand-outs, instead of large-scale industrial and infrastructural development.

In recent years, World Water Week (WWW) has become an exhibition exposing the economic and moral bankruptcy of the trans-Atlantic world, while the rest of the world, Africa especially, is on its way to getting a divorce from it.

The world has changed dramatically since the Copenhagen 2009 Climate Change Summit where nations of Africa and South America, backed by China, India, and South Africa, nearly staged a walkout from the conference. Their message was: Our national sovereignty and right to development are still sacred principles. The demise of the British-dominated financial and banking systems since then, has made this bankruptcy even more obvious. This year the Africans came to Stockholm with a different character and attitude, proudly presenting their relatively bold development programs, telling Europe and the United States (still in a friendly tone to avoid political tension): “These are our visions. Take them or leave us alone!”

The only ones who dared to mention the fact of the trans-Atlantic bankruptcy were the LaRouche movement organizers who, not being invited, stood outside the conference compound, distributing hundreds of pieces of literature and talking to many delegates. Their discussions with the attendees reflected the same phenomena observed inside the conference.

Almost exclusively, all European and American attendees attacked the idea of nuclear power, and any large-scale or continental water projects, as proposed by the LaRouche movement. Sometimes, their reactions became violent, because the presence of the “LaRouchies” disturbed what they intended to be a controlled environment inside the conference. On the contrary, African and Asian delegates welcomed these large-scale infrastructure ideas, and expressed their support for them.

One aspect which shaped the discussions is the shift in the economic tendency in the world, as in the Pacific region, where China, Russia, India, and their allies have taken a different course for dealing with the economic crisis. Their method is based on the best of those utilized by such great Western leaders as American President Franklin D. Roosevelt, putting emphasis on large-scale infrastructure and science programs. These policies have been abandoned in the West since the murder of President John F. Kennedy, and replaced by the anti-industrial and superstitious green ideology on the one hand, and financial speculation on the other.

The impact of the real economic cooperation between China and Africa was discussed on the sidelines, though not openly. China’s own development programs, such as dam building, were attacked by several Western speakers in the conference (see below).

For the first time, EIR was inside the conference, as this reporter was covering the conference as part of the press corps.

Confab Host: Africa Biofuels Scandal

The main sponsor of World Water Week, the Swedish Ministry of International Development Cooperation (IDC), is itself involved in a number of scandals related to depriving African farmers of their land and water for food production, in order to produce biofuels. The scandals around the IDC, which were revealed by a reporter of the Swedish radio program Ekot, are related to the Swedfund, a wholly IDC-funded hedge fund. Ekot focussed on one of the many Swedfund projects which is carried out in Sierra Leone.

The available evidence shows that Swedfund, in collaboration with the biofuel company Addax, has fraudulently stolen productive land from farmers to produce biofuels. This has caused both water shortages and hunger among the farm families.

In the village of Woreh Yeama, for example, the contract made with the farmers, which they did not really understand, states that they will lease their land for 50 years (!) to Addax for $3.20 per year/acre. The farmers were promised jobs in Addax, and health care and schools for their children. None of this materialized.

The water in the area is used for irrigating the sugar cane to produce ethanol for automobiles in Europe. So, the population is starving and thirsting in Sierra Leone due to the Swedish aid project.

This is your host of the World Water Week!

Biofuels Defended ‘Objectively’

A one-day WWW seminar was arranged to deal with the question of biofuels, water, and food security. Here, the organizers had the following to say about the disgusting use of land and water resources for the production of biofuels:

“Bioenergy and water are inextricably linked. In an already water-stressed world, bioenergy development may in places compete with other water and land uses such as crop cultivation for food production. At the same time, by leveraging the introduction of efficient water management techniques and providing energy for water pumping and cleaning, bioenergy development also provides opportunities to improve water productivity and increase access to water. Proper integration of bioenergy systems into forestry and agriculture can even reduce some of the impacts of present land use, such as eutrophication and soil erosion. Concerns remain however, that exploitation of water resources in bioenergy projects may undermine sustainable livelihoods in producer countries, and that existing policy frameworks and voluntary sustainability standards are inadequate.”

Thus did the seminar deal with the issue “objectively,” as stated above, while no mention was made of the crimes committed by the state-funded companies and their collaborating “charitable” hedge funds and companies in Sierra Leone and Tanzania.

Solving Problems or Dying Slowly

The most striking phenomenon between, on the one hand, the African and Asian WWW participants, mostly from the Indian Subcontinent and Southwest Asia (as China and Russia, interestingly, were not participating or probably not invited), and their European and American counterparts, is that the former focused, in their presentations, on solving the water-and-food crisis, while the latter focused on the problems themselves, as allegedly caused by population growth, and the aspiration of the developing nations to develop modern economies. The malthusian ideology of Limits to Growth of the Club of Rome and the WWF’s anti-human population prejudices, were predominant in the presentations of the European and American delegations.

These trans-Atlantic nations’ speakers focused solely on “environmental” crises, repeating ad nauseam such sickening jargon as “ecological foot prints,” “carrying capacity,” “scarcity,” “conflicts over limited resources,” “pollution due to population growth,” “transparency,” “governance” of resources (meaning abolishing the responsibility of the sovereign governments to make decisions about their natural resources and economic policies, by handing power down to local inhabitants, international NGOs, and multinational corporations), and similar gobbledygook.

Their arguments, put simply, are that human beings cannot create new resources. They base everything on the Second Law of Thermodynamics, claiming that everything—including life and human civilization—will, sooner or later, die off, in a heat death. Human beings speed up that process by attempting to alter nature’s order, through their selfish aspiration to have higher living standards, by using their creativity to develop ever-more advanced forms of technology, and thus, higher and more dense forms of power.

So, the only way to deal with this, the green ideology asserts, is to “slow down” human activity, and condemn life to a slow death instead!

But since human nature rejects such notions, they have to be packaged in glossy pseudo-scientific computer models, or, simply imposed by force on weaker nations, or by denying them the technological means for development.

Having excluded nuclear power, and creation of new water resources through desalination or transfer of water, the only thing left to think about is how to survive in a vicious world with limited resources. For Africa, Asia, and South America, this means to coexist with misery and poverty in a “transparent” way, and by managing the poverty equally and with “good governance.”

This is no mere academic chatter. It is the strategic policy of the U.S. Administration under President Barack Obama, among others. This was revealed in “The Global Water Security” report, issued in February of this year by the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. It is based on the same premise, i.e., that you can only manage scarcity, not create new resources. “We assume that water management technologies will mature along present rates and that no far reaching improvements will develop and be deployed over the next 30 years,” it stated. It foresees “water wars” and social upheavals as a consequence.

The Trans-Atlantic Non-Vision

A screening of the various papers presented at the conference (Source: “Abstract Volume, World Water Week in Stockholm, August 26-31, 2012, Water and Food Security”), gives a taste of the deadly non-vision from the trans-Atlantic elites. For example:

Two papers presented an attack on China’s development plans, which, in reality, are inspiring other developing countries. One, by Dr. Thomas Henning, Philipps University, Marburg, Germany, is titled “Implications of Yunnan’s Aggressive Hydropower Development on Regional Food Security, Changing Land Utilization and Livelihood.” The second, by Stuart Orr, WWF International, Switzerland, titled, “Dams on the Mekong River: Lost Fish Protein and the Implications for Land and Water Resources,” attacked China and its allies in the Mekong River Basin.

Henning writes:

“China is aggressively developing its energy sector in which hydropower plays a crucial role. Within China, Yunnan province has a key role for hydropower development, making it even a global key region for hydropower. In about 15 years it will have an installed hydropower capacity of more than 90 GW. It is based either on often controversial large projects (LHP) along major rivers or on smaller projects (SHP), both creating hydroscapes. SHP are often considered a priori an environmentally and socially sound renewable energy. But in Yunnan they are falling into one of the richest bio-, geo- and ethnic[ally] diverse regions. There is a notable lack of knowledge studying the cumulative implications of the SHPs, including its consequences on food security, changing land utilization and livelihood for the diverse ethnic groups.”

The WWF, which is generally concerned with wildlife, is suddenly worried about the threatened loss of protein intake of human beings in the Mekong River Basin region, from potential changes in fish habitat and migration in the river, were China and its neighbors to proceed on their plans to develop hydropower, modern agriculture, and industries in the Basin.

Orr writes:

“Most of the 12 million households in the Lower Mekong Basin would be affected by alteration of fish availability, as fish is the main source of dietary protein. Estimating the water (water footprint) and land area (land footprint) that would inevitably increase in order to replace lost protein from fish catch, is one of the most important challenges in terms of addressing key impacts of the Mekong River basin dams.”

Having excluded aquaculture (fish farms), a common practice in northern Europe, as “impossible” in the Mekong River, the WWF is attacking the idea of allocating new land for modern agriculture and livestock to produce more protein for the population as man increases his “footprint” on nature.

These arguments, like Thomas Malthus’s attempt to prove his theory of population as mathematically sound, by excluding from the equation—or computer model for his modern-day followers—technological improvements from the production process that yield increased food production per capita/square kilometer, these quackademics are not falling far from the tree. However, this is no mere academic discussion: If these types of persons are allowed to shape policy in the Western world that can hinder real development in the developing world, they would contributing to massive crimes against humanity.

Pessimistic Prognostications

Another case of locking the doors of the theater and shouting fire, is a paper introduced by Dr. Dieter Gerten from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, the same institute which was co-founded by such anti-human population ideologues as Prof. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. While on the face of it, Gerten’s paper sounds positive, as it is titled “Water Requirements for Future Global Food Production, Potentials of On-Farm Green-Blue Water Management to Increase Crop Production,” all his arguments in the paper go contrary to this objective.

“Climate change, population growth and changing diets will put joint pressure on the world’s fresh-water resources via increased demand for the production of crop and livestock products,” he writes. Discussing his institute’s computer models, which exclude nuclear power, hydropower, and water desalination to produce new freshwater, he adds with pseudo-scientific precision: “This global-scale model study quantifies how much water is required to produce a balanced diet. By comparing the requirements with available blue and green water on present agricultural land per country, water scarcity can be determined in more detail compared to previous scarcity models” (emphasis added).

The conclusion is that under Gerten’s 17 climate models, by 2070-99, water scarcity will increase under rising atmospheric CO2 concentration and population growth.

“Water scarcity will aggravate in many countries, and that means a number of countries are at risk of losing their capacity to be self-sufficient.”

So, what happened to the positive impulse suggested by the title of his paper? Well, Dr. Gerten states: “But improved on-farm water management can significantly relax this situation: Methods to increase crop water use efficiently, such as reduction in unproductive soil evaporation and harvesting run-off water for use during dry spells, can increase crop production by up to ca. 20% globally.” But then the hammer of death comes down, as he concludes: “However, adverse effects of climate change cannot be fully buffered by such management, and even if maximum efficiency increases were achieved, green-blue water resources will not be sufficient to meet the requirements for producing the specific diet for more than 9 billion people.”

The real conclusion he wants to be drawn from this is that only population reduction, and decreasing the rate of economic development across the globe can “solve” the problem.

That is the message which was delivered from the highly developed Germany and Europe to the Africans who came to Stockholm to see what solutions can be adopted to solve the grave water, food, and poverty crisis!

Other such depressing cases were presented by, for example, the extremely cynical paper of Prof. Jurgen Schmandt from the Houston Advanced Research Central (U.S.A.) and Prof. Gerald North from Texas A&M University, under the title “How Sustainable Are Engineered Rivers in Arid Lands?” They argue that river engineering and dam-building and modern irrigation systems, as the case in the U.S.A. proves, are useless in the face of climate change and sedimentation! They take the case of the Rio Grande River, which they studied as proof that the storage capacity in the river’s reservoirs will decrease by 6% annually, leading to massive environmental damage. Or, without adding new water resources—as the waters that can be generated by such projects as NAWAPA XXI[1]—the only thing left is to “conserve” and “shift to less water-consuming crops.”

Even worse than the theory that you must dig a hole and lay down and die slowly, is that these two honored professors intend to travel around the world and spread the word, that river engineering, dam building, and modern water irrigation systems do not help. It is not clear yet, if Schmandt and North will be joined in their global tour by a preacher from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) of Texas, to garnish their scientific work with biblical citations from the Book of Revelations.

The African Perspective

Contrary to this anti-human and satanic view, the Africa Focus Day held on Aug. 28, and attended by several African water ministers, concentrated on solving the problems of food and water, in spite of the fact that Africa by itself does not have the means to accomplish this, and that many of its leaders are still suffering from the control of the British empire’s institutions and agents. However, the presentations and discussions, which this reporter had the opportunity to follow closely, were held in a freshingly normal human atmosphere.

Africa’s massive problems need massive investments, and need a new way of looking at the question of cooperation between North and South and East and West, different from the now-traditional policies of small handouts of aid. The African representatives, especially the African Minister’s Commission on Water (AMCOW), headed by the Egyptian Water Resources and Irrigation Minister Mohammad Bahaa el-Din Saad (see interview below), presented important and realistic visions for solving Africa’s problems.

Although these plans lack such important elements as the investment in science-driven technologies such as nuclear power, and large-scale transcontinental water projects such as Transaqua for refilling the Lake Chad from the Congo River waters, or transcontinental high-speed-rail networks (see review of PIDA, below), their discussions were completely opposite to those of the doomsday prophets from Europe and the U.S.A.

Whenever such serious issues as nuclear power, railway integration of Africa, creation of new water resources through water transfer, or nuclear desalination to create new water resources, were brought up in the discussion inside the conference by this reporter, or by the LaRouche movement activists outside the conference, the answer from the majority of the African and Asian participants was: “Of course!”

In one of the exhibition halls, the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) had a booth proudly presenting plans for hydropower projects, especially on the Blue Nile in Ethiopia, and in Sudan. Dr. Abdulkarim Seid, an expert of the NBI’s Water Resources Planning and Management Projects in Ethiopia, gave this reporter a tour of the dam and water-management projects being built in the region. He focused especially on the Ethiopian Millennium Dam which is being built on the Blue Nile near the border with Sudan.

This dam will produce 6,000 mG of electric power, making it the largest hydropower project under construction in Africa. Together with its auxiliary water management schemes, it will reduce water sedimentation in the downstream dam reservoirs, especially in Sudan. This fact was confirmed by Sudan’s Federal Minister for Water Resources Seif Eldin Abdallah, who lamented the fact that Sudanese dam reservoirs are affected significantly by the sedimentation problem emerging from soil erosion in the Ethiopian highlands during the rainy seasons, which extend from August to October. He referenced the case of the massive dredging costs in the canals of Al-Jazeera Agricultural Project in Sudan, one of the most important agricultural zones in Africa, and which is threatened by this problem.

However, Dr. Seid was, like other African participants, focused on the solution. He gave the example of the Ethiopian cooperation with China to raise the level of the Roseires Dam on the Blue Nile to increase its reservoir capacity. Contrary to reports about conflicting interests among the Nile Basin states regarding the construction of new dams upstream, Sudanese President Omar Hasan Al-Bashir met with Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi in April, to express Sudan’s support for the construction of the Millennium Dam in Ethiopia.

Although many of the papers by African and Asian participants in the seminars mentioned above were plagued with the greenie jargon used by the European and American participants, in an attempt to be accepted by the conference organizers, they were generally solution-oriented. For example, a paper presented by Abby Muricho Onencan from the Nile Discourse group from Uganda, under the title, “Greening the Nile Basin: The Nexus (water, energy and food), the Key to Cooperation,” argued for increasing regional cooperation in the building of modern multi-purpose hydropower projects, as a self-evident fact.

Onencan wrote:

“Through the cooperative arrangements under the Nile Basin Initiative, it has become evident that broad-based water service interventions in energy utilities and irrigation services benefit everyone and play a major role in improving sustainable and dignified livelihoods. Through various designed multi-purpose projects like the joint Multi-Purpose Project, the NBI has clearly indicated that it is better to approach a project with the aim of reaping a myriad of benefits…. As water resources become scarce, water will be pumped long distances or be produced through alternative means, such as energy-intensive desalination processes. Modern water management, including establishing monitoring networks and data centers is dependent on reliable access to electricity. To achieve water security, which means the provision of an acceptable quantity and quality of water for health, livelihood, ecosystems and production, energy must be available.”

No further comment is necessary.

‘No’ to the Oligarchy’s Four Horsemen!

Africa’s and the world’s water, food, and energy requirements are clearly threatened, and both the cause and solution of the crisis is a shift in the view of the human race’s role in nature and the universe. This also means a shift in the political-economic practices nationally and globally. If we accept the British empire’s malthusian religion, then we need not do anything, as we wait for the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse to descend upon us.

Otherwise, as free men and women, belonging to sovereign nations, we should reject this oligarchical notion, and embrace instead, the Promethean, humanist vision, that we, as created in the image of a creative universal soul, are capable of being masters of our fate, not slaves under the whims of nature and the imperialist oligarchs and their hypocritical quackademics.

To translate this vision into policy for nations, regions, and continents, view the policies presented by Lyndon LaRouche and his associates (

Page 4 of 4First...234