Top Left Link Buttons
  • English
  • German
  • French
  • Russian
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Spanish

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: The New Silk Road Is Transforming The Planet – A NEW ERA OF MANKIND

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: The New Silk Road Is Transforming The Planet – A NEW ERA OF MANKIND

Helga Zepp-LaRouche

President Schiller Institute

Audio


All the slides in PDF format: Download


Ladies and Gentlemen, I greet you all to this extremely important conference, and I’m giving you, in the beginning the most heartfelt greetings of Mr. Lyndon LaRouche, who is in spirit with us, in this conference, and whose prophetic work has contributed very much that there is a solution in the world today.

But I have to tell you that we are in a crisis moment of unprecedented dimensions. Humanity right now is on the edge of a genocide which could become worse than anything that ever happened in history, and as of now, if the present policies of the trans-Atlantic sector are continued, it will happen. In the short term, we face the coincidence of three mortal dangers: We have the expansion of the ISIS terrorism, which is already causing genocide against the Kurdish Iraqi/Syrian populations as well as religious minorities. And that could very quickly reach the point where the nations against which this terrorism is directed, have no other possibility left than to fight wars, and that then could blow up the entire Southwest Asia region, and it could ignite a global war.

The second, equally mortal danger, or equally dangerous situation is the pandemic of Ebola, which is already completely out of control, and it is right now, not only ravaging several West African nations, but it is spreading to Europe, to the United States, and to Latin America. And contrary to irresponsible assurances that in the so-called “advanced sector” it is absolutely not possible to spread, and that the so-called advanced countries are prepared, due to the cuts in the health sector, that could also go completely out of control.

And the third mortal danger, is that is we are facing with an absolute certainty, a new financial crash which is going to be much worse than 2008, and if then the EU and the United States are going for the so-called bail-in, that is, the Cyprus model, taking a haircut off all the people who have accounts in the banks, then that would throw the world into Dark Age, and with that, you know, also a war would result and the danger of all weapons in existence would come to be used.

Now, the key to emphasize is that all of these three dangers are not the result of inevitable processes, but they’re all man-made and therefore, they can be remedied, but it has to be first recognized, that they are the results of policy failures of the establishment of the trans-Atlantic region, and they can only be corrected, if the political will can be mobilized to do so.

Now, concerning the first threat, the IS Caliphate, which is right now advancing massively, despite the bombing, my husband Lyndon LaRouche produced a movie in 1999, which had the title Storm Over Asia, which was characterized by a prophetic prescience showing where the policies of the Anglo-Americans would lead to. Please, first clip–I’m sorry, we apparently have a technical problem.

In this clip of this movie, which Mr. LaRouche produced in 1999, he, in great detail laid out how the new version of the Great Game against Russia at that point, and against China, was practically using terrorism for the preparation of what would become eventually a new world war; and, among other things, he emphasized the very treacherous role of Turkey. I would suggest that people who are interested in this can watch this clip on the website of LaRouche PAC, and I would really urge people to do that. [http://larouchepac.com/storm-over-asia-15-years-later]

Now, to use the “Islamic card” against the Soviet Union was originally the idea of Brzezinski who presented this policy at a conference of the Trilateral Commission in Kyoto, in 1975. But then, after the mujahideen were trained for the fight against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, that movement took on a life of its own, and it spread from Afghanistan to Central Asia, to Dagestan, to Chechnya, to Pakistan, and beyond.

This already created havoc enough, but then, what was added was the policy of “regime change,” which was the result of the intention by the Anglo-Americans to turn the world into a global empire, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. And the policy of regime change worsened the situation by dismantling states as organizational principles of the international order.

In 2003, the war against Saddam Hussein and Iraq, which was based entirely on lies, manufactured by Tony Blair and the MI6, indeed, turned Iraq into a country “bombed back into the Stone Age,” and it was left as a breeding ground for the present terrorism wave which we see.

Then the war against Libya, which again, was based on lies, where the UN veto powers, Russia and China, were betrayed by being told that it was just a “humanitarian intervention” and no war, which is why they voted neutral in the vote in the UN Security Council; now if you look at Libya, it’s a country in complete and total chaos.

Then the lies against Syria, that the Assad government would have used chemical weapons, which is not proven, but to the contrary it is proven that it was used by the rebels which were supported by Saudi Arabia and the West; nevertheless, the lie that Assad has used chemical weapons is being maintained by the official mass media up to the present day.

The military strikes were prevented in the last minute, but as a result, if you look at the entire region, Iraq and Syria today are too weak to cope with ISIS, and in Europe you have right now completely foolish proposals, like coming from the Green Party to use German troops under UN mandate which as of now which not occur, not least because the Green policies of backing a Nazi coup in Ukraine helped to contribute to the isolation of Russia and therefore, the chances that under present conditions, a UN mandate for such a mission will not happen.

The German Foreign Minister makes that point, but then he goes, of all places, to Saudi Arabia, to emphasize the leading role Saudi Arabia should play in the fight against IS! Now, you can go to the goat, if you want to protect to the cabbage, and ask him to guard the garden. The political spokesman of the CDU Philipp Missfelder, says that for Syria, there can only be a political solution without Assad, but temporarily we may have to back Assad, because otherwise ISIS will take over.

Now, this is “Amateur Night”! These dabblers in politics play with a situation which could lead to World War III in the short term. In the United States right now, there is a growing revolt, the demand to get to the bottom of the present crisis with ISIS, by looking at what were the real circumstances of 9/11, and to publicize the entire official Sept. 11th report [of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into intelligence activities surrounding the 9/11 attacks] which was produced at the time under the leadership of Sen. Bob Graham, and investigated the circumstances of Sept. 11.

Now, the big fight in the United States, which could determine where the world goes, is the fight to release the 28 pages, which are classified to the present day; they were classified by George Bush, and Obama promised in the 2008 election campaign, that he would declassify this chapter of the report, and give the 3,000 families whose family members were killed in the Twin Tower attack, the right to find out what really happened.

Now, there is right now, not least due to our own efforts, a growing number of congressmen who demand that this 28 pages be declassified. Now, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. a week ago, had an 11-minute program where they discussed exactly the importance of these 28 pages. First clip: “Our biggest problem is our allies. Our allies in the region were our largest problem in Syria.” Now that was the voice of Vice President Biden, who made a much-notified speech about two, three weeks ago, where he said that the problem with the present bombing of the ISIS by the United States, is the fact that the “allies” — Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the Emirates — that they are pursuing quite different policies and that the United States has no allies.

But much more to the point is what [former] Sen. Bob Graham, who is still under obligation of secrecy because it’s classified, however, he is increasing the pressure that these 28 pages must be made public.

Next clip: [Graham:] “The connection is a direct one. Not only has Saudi Arabia been promoting this extreme form of religion, but it also has been the principal financier, first of al-Qaeda, then of the various al-Qaeda franchises around the world, specifically, the ones in Somalia and Yemen; and now the support of ISIS…”

Now, this is dynamite. And the scandal is obviously, I mean, all the heads of state of Europe, and beyond, know this! Because Sen. Bob Graham is an extremely recognized and highly reputed Senator. He was the head of the Joint Congress Inquiry [into intelligence activities] around Sept. 11, and for example, Mr. Steinmeier who in his capacity as Cabinet Chief of Schröder, when Schröder was Chancellor, was in charge of secret services. And now, being foreign minister for the second time, there is no way how he cannot know that, and so that goes for all the European governments.

So, the scandal which we have to really make public and use for a change in policy is the fact that the same countries which have been financing and building up, first the mujahideen, then al-Qaeda, then al Nusra, and now ISIS, they are supposed to be the ones in the coalition to fight ISIS, which obviously is a complete farce.

Now Bloomberg, the news service, had also a couple of days ago a story, where they say the Islamic State grooms Chechen fighters against Putin, and the one of the top ISIS commanders who is a Georgian, whose nickname is “Omar the Chechen,” his name is Omar al-Shishani, openly says the ultimate target of ISIS is President Putin. We also know that the majority of ISIS fighters are actually from Chechnya, and they are preparing to bring the fight which is right now raging in Southwest Asia into Russia.

The leader of the Nazis in Ukraine, of the Right Sector, Dmytro Yarosh, called on the Chechen warlord Doku Umarov to take up arms against Russia; and this Yarosh, by the way, fought in the first Chechen war against Russia on the side of the Chechens.

So as we can see very clearly, these operations are not just in the Middle East, but they are directed against Russia and also China. On the 4th July of this year, the ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi published a map which showed the extended Caliphate they are trying to build, into Xinjiang in China, and he also named 20 countries that supposedly seized Muslim rights.

Now, what conclusion can we draw out of all of this? Rather than allying with countries that help to groom and finance terrorist groupings from the mujahideen to ISIS to the present day, if we want to prevent the escalation of this situation into World War III, we have absolutely have to change course and form an alliance that includes Russia, China, India, Iran, Syria, and Egypt, and only if we change the policy in this direction can this crisis be stopped.

It also means, urgently, to put the question of a new all-inclusive security architecture on the table, because it is basically a situation where you cannot have some countries on a confrontation course Russia, and basically hope to avoid World War III. We have to go back to the rule of international law. We have to go back to the absolute respect of national sovereignty, as it developed during the Peace of Westphalia negotiations, and as it is represented today in the UN Charter.

Also, the entire paradigm of regime change through color revolution, which is warfare, even if it’s not declared, has to be outlawed, but especially the Blair Doctrine of so-called “humanitarian intervention.” In 1999, Blair gave a speech in Chicago, which changed the doctrine of NATO and the West completely, basically by saying that from now on, humanitarian military interventions are allowed by NATO even without UN mandates, and the first time this was applied in this war, in this period in the Kosovo war against Yugoslavia. We also have to absolutely, urgently scrap the “right to protect,” which was a consequence of this Blair Doctrine, and it was adopted in 2005 by the world summit of the United Nations. Because this policy has led to the present erosion as we see it in Southwest Asia and Africa, right now.

We have to go back to the Peace of Westphalia of 1648 — next clip — which ended successfully 150 years of religious war, and which represented an absolute breakthrough, and the first time the establishment of international law. If you look at the principles of the Peace of Westphalia, the first principle said, for the sake of peace, all crimes of all sides must be forgotten. And the second principle was, that from now on, foreign policy must be based on the “interest of the other”: There must be an absolute respect for national sovereignty, and that means today, that we absolutely must end the idea of geopolitical interest of one nation or a group of nations. Because it is geopolitics which has led to two world wars in the last century, and it is about to lead to a third world war, coming out of the Great Game policy and the encirclement against Russia and China.

We have to replace geopolitics with the idea of the common aims of mankind, and we need to build a new security architecture, that must take care of the interest of every single nation on the planet. Chinese President Xi Jinping has said, repeatedly, that you cannot have security in the world for some nations, and chaos for others.

Now, if we look at the second mortal danger, the Ebola pandemic, this is already completely out of control. As of now, there is no treatment, no cure and no vaccine, and Ebola is an extremely aggressive virus with a mortality rate of 70-80%. The rate of growth is increasing exponentially, and the present estimates are, that by January of next year, there will be probably, conservative estimated, 1.5 million people infected! There are presently anywhere between 10 and 20,000 new cases per week. Basically, health workers have given up counting, because it is completely out of control.

In March, when the first outbreak was known by West African countries, essentially Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Guinea, these countries asked for help from the World Health Organization and the United Nations and they did not get any help. Now, it is right now practically a situation where the medical personnel have given up in these countries, because they just — it’s a situation like described by Boccaccio in the Decameron, where basically people were first put into treatment camps, then into holding camps, because there were too many people; but then these holding camps just turned into death camps. And then people were just told, stay at home, here you have some aspirin, don’t leave the house, and that simply meant that the families soon would be all affected.

Now, already in 1972, my husband had called for task force to investigate the long-term implications of the IMF conditionalities policies and he, at that time, said, if the IMF policies will be applied, then it will lead to a biological catastrophe down the road. But, as we know, in 1974, you had Henry Kissinger, when he was National Security Advisor in the United States, who published the infamous NSSM-200 memorandum, which simply said that the population in some countries in the Third World is the biggest threat to the national security interests of the United States, because too many people use up too many raw materials, and therefore, this population growth should be discouraged — now, with means of the IMF conditionalities. Because if you tell a Third World country, “You cannot invest in health policies, you cannot invest in infrastructure, but you have to pay your debt,” the consequences are very clear. And the wretched condition of many countries, especially in Africa, in the world today, are the deliberate intention of the present world system.

Now, we should also remember that the British policy has been population reduction at least since World War II, where by the end of it, Bertrand Russell, in an article in Science magazine, with the title “The Impact of Science on Politics” said, it would be very advantageous if in every generation would have a deadly pandemic because then population would be reduced and the remaining survivors could procreate more freely without causing overpopulation. And we should also keep in mind that Prince Philip has been on the record many times in public conferences, saying that if he would be reincarnated, he would like to come back as a deadly virus, to help to reduce the population.

Now, in 2008, CDC, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, in the United States, wrote a memorandum to the incoming President Obama, or actually already during the election campaign, which was published yesterday due to the “Freedom of Information Act” in the United States, — this was published in the Washington Times where the CDC in 2008 said that the planned funding cuts could lead to a situation where simple diseases like rabies, hepatitis A, and Ebola, could become a mortal danger. Now, obviously, this was completely ignored and the cuts were absolutely dramatic.

Now what we have to do today, is basically to remedy a situation where, you know, I mean, the situation in Europe and the United States, is much, much worse, because it turns out that, for example in Spain, where the first cases emerged, and then many of the nurses got infected, there was no protocol for the health workers! Instead of bringing people to a Level 4 hospital, there was a complete lack of preparedness, and basically the nurses were left to figure out what they should do. In the United States there are only four hospitals which can treat on Level 4, such patients; in Germany, there’s only room for 50 patients. And last Wednesday [Oct. 15], there was a conference call in the United States where the National Nurses United nurses trade union, was on a conference call with 11,500 nurses on the call, and they basically blamed Obama for the utter lack of preparedness of the U.S. health-care system, where they have received no training, no protective gear, and no means of disposal of the infected material, no respirators.

And there is also research by Rebecca Milner of the International Medical Corps, from the University of Minnesota, that contrary to the official line, Ebola can be transmitted on an aerosol level. In other words, that it’s not true that only bodily contact can transmit it.

Now, the Spanish military proposed last August, that is two months ago, when this case was known, to basically use the army’s highly trained ABC teams — atomic, biological, chemical weapons teams — to take charge of handling the situation, because they are trained to do so. But this was rejected by the government. Instead, people were sent to Madrid’s Carlos III Hospital, and basically Spain’s most advanced infectious disease unit had been dismantled a year earlier to cut costs and due to privatization. So therefore, untrained personnel were given a 20 minute video instead, and naturally, now many people are infected.

Now, the angry military ABC experts gave an interview to El Confidencial Digital, basically reporting that when their teams are being trained, they are trained to put and to take off the protect gear hundreds of times, and an officer is standing behind them and tells them at every error, “If this was a real case, you would be dead now.” Now, 500 doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel put out a statement that the most deadly virus is the policy of the Spanish government and the health officials who are tearing apart the public health system by privatization. And that obviously, does not only apply for Spain.

Now, the European health ministers basically still have the line that it’s not out of control, and it’s not transmittable by aerosols, but, we have to absolutely say, that the worst risk for the rapid spread of Ebola in Europe right now, is the policy of austerity by the Troika, because they have dismantled the health systems of Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and you can actually see the criminal negligence of these governments by the fact that they focus now mainly on the screening in airports and railroads of arriving passengers, to check their temperature, which absolutely does not prevent any infection or contagion at all.

If you look at the figures in Europe, the hospital beds per 100,000 inhabitants, have decreased from 2003 to 2014, with the austerity policies of the Troika: In Germany by -6%; in France by -16%; in Italy, -18%! And Europe at this point is not prepared, because it takes up to 20 medical personnel to treat one single patient, so you can imagine what the situation is.

Obviously, what should be done, is we should absolutely go into an emergency mode, to stop the crisis in Africa, which is not being done right now. What we would need is to send the hospital ships of every army around the world, because the worst stricken countries in West Africa are on the Atlantic coast. So then you could at least treat a lot of patients already. Also, there are 3,500 American soldiers who have been deployed there, to build up facilities, have not built up one single building! So rather than waiting and losing more precious time, one should simply take buildings, turn them very quickly into Level 4 hospitals, and really try to contain this epidemic before it is completely too late. And use especially those sections by the international armies which have been trained for biological warfare, because these are the only existing capabilities right now, which can do so. And there again, without the cooperation of the United States, Russia, China, India, European countries and others, this cannot be solved.

So we have two situations where the continuation of the confrontation against Russia is absolutely suicidal for the human race, and I can assure you that there will be in the next weeks and months a growing panic in the world about all of these situations, and we have to help to turn that panic into the recognition that the human race must change its course, that we must have an international, new security architecture, where all of these countries are working together to contain these mortal dangers.

Now, already the 1970s, LaRouche called for a Biological Defense Initiative; this occurred then in the context of the IMF measures. He reiterated that call after the anthrax attacks in the United States in the context Sept. 11, and he called for a national defense against germ warfare, drawing on the lessons of the principles which were drawn in the Korean War and which were then turned into the Hill-Burton Act in the United States.

In February 2006, I called for a Biological Defense Initiative, after the bird flu had reached three continents and there was the immediate danger of mutation of this virus, that it could be transmuted to be communicated from person to person. Now the World Health Organization reported at that time, in ’91, that there would be a window of 10 years before the combination of old and new pandemics and antibiotic-resistant diseases would create the conditions for a biological holocaust. Now, this was 14 years ago, and obviously, it is more urgent to pool all international resources of all medical facilities, and avoid the kind of duplication which is now occurring because people are still looking for patents to make profits, when this is a question where a Black Death could diminish the world population as it did in the 14th century.

Now, this biological initiative would basically require a thoroughgoing crash program, to find the solutions, but it should have a completely different approach — not the profit of pharmaceutical companies but to look at the fundamental question, what life really, namely from the standpoint of the connection between the biosphere and the noösphere, in the sense of the Russian scientist Vladimir Vernadsky.

Now, it was already clear since the ’70s, that we’re heading toward a new financial crash, and a new danger of a new fascism. This was the famous prognosis of my husband, Lyndon LaRouche on the 15th August, 1971, when Nixon decoupled the dollar from the gold standard, and dismantled the Bretton Woods system. And he predicted at that point, it would come to a new crash.

In the meantime, the international financial system has become more criminal, and it turned into what Jean Ziegler, who is the new UN commissioner for the investigation of vulture funds, has called a “cannibalistic system” where the most criminal element are the vulture funds, which basically are responsible, in large part, for the condition of not only Argentina, which is fighting a very courageous battle, but also for example, Africa, because the same vulture funds which demand from Argentina to have full payment for junk bonds which they bought for $48 millions, they want to have now $850 millions, which would mean a profit rate of 1,608% over six years! Now, they have done the same to Congo Brazzaville: A fund called Elliott Management, owned by the same Paul Singer who is in the war against Argentina.

Now, we should just simply know how many medicines, how much food, how much housing one could build with the millions these vulture funds and criminal activities are costing. Lots of these lives could be saved and could have been saved in the last four decades, and we at the time, said that the IMF policies were a hundred times worse than those of Adolf Hitler, and if you look at how many people have been killed in the meantime, that was not an exaggeration at all.

Now, this system basically, which has led to a situation where 85 individuals own as much as 3.5 billion people, this is about to crash. It will disintegrate and as of now, if nothing is changed in time, it will be much worse than in 2008, because the too-big-to-fail banks are 50% bigger, they’re 50% more indebted, and there is right now a chorus of financial experts who say that the “big one is about to happen.” William White, the ex-chief of the Bank for International Settlements; Guy Debelle, the head of the BIS Markets Committee says this will be a relatively violent crash; Thomas Hoenig, the vice-chairman of the FDIC, said recently, if one too-big-to-fail bank comes down, it will be the entire system; and basically all the EU and U.S. administration have prepared is a bail-in, which is a haircut on the Cyprus Model.

Now, what I said in the beginning, these three existential threats coincide, and if there is not a dramatic shift in the paradigm, we all, as well as those who are responsible, are as good as dead.

Now, fortunately, there is a solution and a way out, because there is a parallel development, which has developed as a direct reaction to the utterly immoral and criminal casino system of profit maximization for a few, and poverty and death for millions, if not billions. The preparation for this alternative system has been under way for a very long time. It was the fight of the Non-Aligned Movement in ’60s and in the ’70s for a New World Order, but at that point it was crushed, and it suffered many setbacks. This organization has been fighting for this parallel system since Lyndon LaRouche called for an International Development Bank in 1975, and we have been fighting for this for the last 40 years.

But now, a new era of civilization began when President Xi Jinping announced last year that there should be a New Silk Road policy built when he was in Kazakhstan.

Next clip. The ancient Silk Road, which was basically built 2,000 years ago, during the Han Dynasty. At that time it led to an exchange of goods, technologies, ideas, cultures, and it indeed was a tremendous victory because it had to overcome unbelievable challenges, like the Taklamakan Desert, where people had to travel with horses, camels, and by foot and ship.

Now, this is a place where I had the fortune to visit, end of August, on the invitation of the China Soong Ching Ling Foundation and the Dunhuang Academy, where we were invited to make a trip last August along the ancient Silk Road, from Lanzhou to the Great Wall in Jiayuguan, Dunhuang, and the Great Wall even farther west in the Gobi Desert. Now, this, by the way is very interesting. You see there is only desert, but there you see these arches: This is the beginning of the new rail line, which will go all the way from Lanzhou to Urumqi and beyond. It is being built with very fast speed.

Now the New Silk Road is not just a connection from China through Central Asia to Europe; it’s an open concept, every country on the planet is invited to join.

Next: Then in November, Xi Jinping added to that. This is the BRICS countries and the other countries working with the BRICS — in November last year, Xi Jinping added the Maritime Silk Road and in May, there was the breakthrough summit in Shanghai, between President Putin and President Xi Jinping, where they concluded the agreement with the 30-year gas deal and 40 agreements. In July, there took place the summit of the BRICS countries in Fortaleza, Brazil, and also the CELAC countries, the 17 heads of state, the Unasur countries, and then later meetings of the ASEAN and the [Brazil? 44:36].

And go back to the green map you had before, this is now the new system. This represents more than half of humanity, and these countries are engaged in a completely different paradigm than you have any inkling of, we have in the United States or in Europe. There is a tremendous cultural optimism in China. China is a country which has developed in the most unbelievable way in the last 30 years. In 30 years, they have undergone a development which, for most countries of the so-called advanced sector, it took several centuries, and they’re now offering that kind of development to the participating countries of the New Silk Road.

It is also a new conception of man, mankind’s identity as defined from future and its relationship to the cosmic order. This part of the world is presently operating in completely different principles, and the Silk Road is not a geopolitical conception, but it is superseding national interest as the basis for collaboration among nations for the common interest of mankind. In Fortaleza, a gigantic number of large development projects were agreed upon among various nations, and I only want to name a few, to give you a feeling for the magnitude of these projects:

First, new credit mechanisms and commitments to principle were agreed upon, as the basis to lift the entire planet onto a completely new trajectory of development. Three banks are being built now, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the New Development Bank, the Shanghai Cooperation Bank, which are no longer giving credit for speculation, but only to finance projects. And these three banks, even though they are not yet in full development, will become the lifeboat when the Titanic of the trans-Atlantic system is collapsing.

Now, among the many projects which were included was the idea to build, with Chinese help, a second Panama Canal in Nicaragua, connecting the Pacific and the Caribbean to become the focal point of an entire Central American/Caribbean Basin and this was designed with the top Chinese water-management, rail, aviation, port design company which basically worked out two seaports, one airport, an artificial lake, a cement and steel plant, and this was designed by the Changjiang Institute of Survey, Planning, Design and Research, which also had designed the Three Gorges Dam. Russia, in the meantime, has expressed interest to participate in this concept.

Next, the Brazil-Peru transcontinental railroad: This is a gigantic project, where basically, for the first time, a railroad is going to be built from Brazil from the Atlantic coast to the Pacific coast in Peru. Now, at a meeting between [Brazil President] Dilma Rousseff and Xi Jinping, Dilma Rousseff said this is fundamental to the South American integration and an outlet for the Brazilian exports to Asia. Now, Bolivia in the meantime, has asked China for help in building the Bolivian part, an alternative transcontinental route from Brazil, through Bolivia to Peru.

There is a whole series of projects between Russia and Nicaragua, Russia and Cuba, between China and Cuba, 29 big projects; between Russia and Bolivia, nuclear plants, infrastructure; between China and Bolivia, they’re working on satellite cooperation; Argentina and Russia, infrastructure, nuclear design, construction, the operation of nuclear plants and a research reactor; water desalination, and many other projects. Then, between Russia and Brazil, trade, military, nuclear cooperation — they want to double the trade per year; and they also are building together an anti-aircraft defense system, to expand the Glonass GPS navigation system. Between Brazil and China, there has now developed a truly strategic partnership. They are deepening space cooperation, joint satellite work with Africa, and also Brazil is selling jets to China, and they have large scientific exchanges. Between Argentina and China: infrastructure, nuclear cooperation, altogether 19 agreements. Between Venezuela and China; China and Mexico.

China and India: And when, on Sept. 17-20, this year, Xi Jinping visited India in a big state visit, they agreed upon ten major economic deals, and collaboration of nuclear science, especially the thorium-based nuclear reactor and also the Chinese pebble-bed solid fuel 100MW demonstration reactor.

All of these projects are extremely important because they show the way to the future. They are doing high-speed things, the entire trans-Atlantic region has given up, like nuclear energy, for the sake of speculation in worthless money and profit. But even if these projects are obviously extremely important, the spirit of a new Renaissance of the nations of the BRICS and the countries collaborating with the BRICS is even more important. Because the population in the U.S. and Europe has become culturally so pessimistic that it is very difficult to imagine that there are leaders in the world who are indeed fighting for the common good of their own people.

If you look at the speech of Xi Jinping in New Delhi during his state visit, I urge all of you to read that speech, because it is a speech which represents the highest level of statecraft and indeed, he expresses the principle of the Peace of Westphalia.

He said that China and India share a long history of friendship of over 2,000 years. Buddhism developed from India and was brought to China by monks. He mentioned Ji Xianlin the master of Chinese studies who was an expert in Sanskrit. He mentioned the Admiral Zheng He of the Ming Dynasty, who made seven voyages of exploration and visited India six times. And from China, they brought astronomy, calendars, literature, architecture, which were all introduced to China. And in turn China brought paper manufacturing, silk, porcelain, tea, music to India.

India, Xi Jinping said, supported China during the Opium War and China encouraged the Indian Independence movement. Then he quoted at length Rabindranath Tagore, the great Indian poet, who is adored by the Chinese people, and he quoted him, saying, when he came to China, “I don’t know, but I feel as if I’ve come back home, when I’m in China.” And when he left, he said, “my heart remains here.”

Then Xi Jinping addressed the Chinese and Indian youth in the audience, and said, “I hope you can absorb the wisdom of the ancient history of China and India, and continue forward in the pursuit of truth. Keep youthful hearts in China, and keep youthful hearts in India. Let’s be of the same mind and create a better future, hand-in-hand.

One who wishes to be successful seeks to help others to be successful. One who wishes to be understood, understands others. While China is seeking its own development, we sincerely wish India to be prosperous, striving and powerful. We are the driving force of Asia and global development, and now, we once again are at the frontier of times, China and India work together for the benefit of each other, the Asian region and the whole world.”

Xi expressed that he already had deep interest in Indian civilization since he was young, and then he very knowledgeably pointed to the great periods of Indian history: The Ganges River civilization, the Veda culture, the Gupta period, and then had many beautiful quotes from Tagore.

This is exactly the same spirit in which the schiller institute was created 30 years ago, that if a nation wants to live in peace with other nations, we have to highlight and emphasize the high cultures of the others. Not only will the New Silk Road economically benefit the other, and create a higher economic platform, a progress for all participating nations, but the New Silk Road is also a metaphor for a new cultural Renaissance, where each nation will emphasize and revive the best, most beautiful poetry, music and philosophy.

Xi Jinping, at the occasion of the 2,565th birthday of Confucius, basically said at an international seminar, “If a country or nation does not cherish its own thinking and culture, if they lose their soul, no matter which country or nation, it will not be able to stand. ” And that is the problem of Europe and that is the problem of America, that we have lost our culture and we have lost our soul.

And Xi Jinping said also, “Classics should be embedded into the student’s mind, and become the genes of the Chinese culture.” For China, Confucius, Mencius, and the 5,000 years of its history, is right now becoming very rapidly the identity of the entire nation, and the Chinese government makes a tremendous effort that everybody finds out about 5,000 years of Chinese history, and adheres to that. In India, a similar effort is being made to study the Vedic writings, the Rig Veda, the beautiful song of creation; the Sanatana Dharma, which means there is an eternal religion above all other religion, which is exactly the idea of Nikolaus of Cusa, that there is a higher truth that unites all of mankind, and a higher being which is above religion. Or as Tagore said in his famous dialogue with Einstein, “When our universe is in harmony with man, the eternal, we know it as truth, we feel it as beauty.”

Now, for Russia, that means that the power of Pushkin’s poetry and the prescience of Vernadsky, must be equally made a question of national identity. And if we in Europe want to survive, we better revive our great tradition of Plato, Leonardo Da Vinci, Cervantes, Rabelais, Rembrandt, Nikolaus of Cusa, Leibniz, Bach, Beethoven, and Schiller, and revive the noble self-conception of man, these people had.

We need, as Narendra Modi said, a mass movement for development, not only in India and other developing countries, but we need a mass movement for development especially in the nations of Europe and in the United States. We need a movement to join the BRICS countries for the creation of a better, more harmonious world, for the development of all nations on the planet. And this mass movement for development must be inspired by a passionate love for mankind!

For Russia, this new paradigm must be based on the beauty of Pushkin’s poetry and Vernadsky, who, as Lyndon LaRouche wrote already in this book Earth’s Next Fifty Years, must be defined as the sublime notional reference for which it includes the serious question, what is the difference between countries in a quasi-axiomatic way? How will the noösphere basically look in two generations from now? What is the best approach for the fulfillment and requirements of national and personal sovereignty in the course of the next two generations or more, as well as the creation of an urgently needed improvement of the characteristics and quality of the noösphere.

We have to define the solution for the present problems of the world from the standpoint of the future: Where do we, as mankind, want to be in two generations, or in a hundred years from now? If we don’t want to be in a dark age, where only a few million miserable people are cave-dwelling in the wilderness, or have a mankind which is extinct, because we could not get rid of the Empire in time to avoid thermonuclear extinction, then we have to affirm the identity of mankind as the only known creative species in the universe so far.

Let us, therefore, create a mass movement for the common aims of mankind, for a vision of the future, a world where we have accomplished energy and raw materials security for all of humanity, because we have established an industrial base on the Moon, for mining of helium-3, for fusion energy production and other raw materials, which will give us the condition for an isotope economic, precision medical procedures, and manufacturing space propulsion with one-gravity constant acceleration, space travel to farther away heavenly bodies, Mars and asteroids. And where we will be able to have the defense of the planet Earth against asteroids, meteorites and comets.

We will have new scientific revolutions to find out what our Solar System, our galaxy, what is the universe with its billions of galaxies, what it really is? This new inclusive security architecture has to proceed from that standpoint. The New Silk Road concept will not only be a connection among nations on the planet, like the ancient Silk Road, but it will be a World Land-Bridge connecting all continents, but it will also lift mankind up to the stars, together, elevate us to think on the level of the coincidentia oppositorum, the coincidence of opposites, developed by Nikolaus of Cusa.

This must become the identity of mankind in the New Silk Road, that of a creative species, which will be in cohesion with the laws of the cosmic order.

Next clip:

ANNOUNCER: A Chinese dream since ancient times has come true. The lunar probe, named after the mythical Chinese goddess Chang’e, began its descent towards the Moon on December 14th, at 9 p.m. Beijing time. About 12 minutes later, a touchdown on the Moon crater Sinus Iridum, the Bay of Rainbows.

[Chinese announces touchdown success to excitedly to wild applause.]

ANNOUNCER: Just one day after the Chang’e-3 landed on the surface of the Moon, the six-wheeled Yutu rover was sent out to begin exploring. As it reached 9 meters north, the lunar lander and rover snapped photos of each other. The color images were transmitted right back to Earth, via a deep space network designed by China. It was the first time images of the Chinese national flag had been taken on an extraterrestrial body! As photos from outer space were being transmitted back to the Beijing Aerospace Command and Control Center, cheers and congratulations where shared all around. The chief command of the lunar program declared the Chang’e-3 mission a complete success!

[Ending of Beethoven quartet plays to end of video.]

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Next.

So. It is in our hands: Do we want to have a humanity to become truly human. This is a short excerpt of the Sistine Chapel fresco where God is touching the hand of Adam, and that is a symbol for man becoming the divine creative species. And as a last picture, I want to show you a design of a Chinese man at a recent conference, to show how China is reaching out to the United States.

Next:

[laughter]

And in that spirit…!

[applause]


All the slides in PDF format: Download


 

 


To Top

 


Prof. Shi Ze: “One Road & One Belt” & New Thinking With Regard to Concepts and Practice

Prof. Shi Ze

Director for International Energy Strategy Studies, and China Institute of International Studies Senior Fellow, Beijing, China

Audio (Chinese/中文)


Honored Schiller Institute President Madam LaRouche, honorable experts, distinguished friends, hello.  I am from Beijing, China, a senior research fellow of the China Institute of International Studies. Today, I’m very happy to be able to attend the Schiller Institute’s 30th anniversary activity.  I must, towards the Schiller Institute and Schiller Institute President Madam LaRouche, for her earnest invitation, express my deeply felt thank you.

Within China, I’ve attended many conferences on “One Belt and One Road”.  However, this is the first time that I’ve attended a conference outside of China that touches upon China’s governmental policy and international diplomacy.  So, very importantly, I must earnestly express my heartfelt thank you to Madam LaRouche, for having provided me with such a great opportunity to introduce to you the relevant concepts and thoughts of our “Silk Road Economic Belt”.

Madam LaRouche is someone who, in China, is received by everyone as a much liked and respected social activist.  I have, in many of China’s media outlets, read her speeches and interviews. Her expert opinion regarding China is something that I deeply respect. And as a friend of China and the Chinese people, she has provided many sincere and earnest ideas towards China’s development.  So, we very much honor and respect such an old friend of China.

Today, I will discuss some of my thoughts on the “New Silk Road Economic Belt” innovation.  Everyone knows that in 2013, our Chinese leader [President Xi] presented two very important development proposals: the Silk Road Economic Corridor and the 21st century Maritime Silk Road.  These two new proposals, are to develop and deepen cooperation in a new form, and have very meaningful implications for the development of the relationships between China and the other nations along the New Silk Road. So, how do we actualize these proposals that China’s leader proposed?   Well, first, from the standpoint of ideas and concepts, we must have innovation. In the detailed development of the New Silk Road Project, we must also have innovation in the implementation.  So the topic of my speech today is “Silk Road Economic Corridor and the Innovations on its Conceptualization and Implementation”.  I’d like to discuss its four main points.

First point, the innovation in conceptualization/outlook 

In the innovation of conceptualization, I’d like to emphasize three areas.  Firstly, China in the course of its “reform and opening up”, initially adopted a “bringing-in” strategy, that is, to attract outside countries’ technology and investment to do development in China.  We call it a policy of “hitching a ride,” to draw in support from international assistance to push forward our economic development. This kind of policy in the beginning of our opening up of China achieved obvious results in developing China. A lot of international financial organizations and friendly nations came to China to invest and engage in economic cooperation. The second phase, is the “going-out” strategy. That is, to better accelerate the development of China’s economic policies, we pushed for our Chinese companies and enterprises to go out, to go out abroad to do international development, to develop everywhere in the world; to go out for international economic cooperation.  This, I think had very obvious results in the recent past.  This very well used national resources to go aboard and allow Chinese enterprises to learn more advanced technology. This advanced our R&D capability and facilitated the foundation for our own advancement.  So in the ‘walking out”, we broadened and expanded the scope of our “reform and opening up”, increasing the scale and the momentum of economic development. At this point, the central government proposed the New Silk Road Economic Development Corridor —the “One Belt and One Road” strategic concept, which lawfully took the foundation brought about from the “bringing-in” and the “going-out” strategies, and both expanded and merged the two concepts.  So, when China’s friends study our “One Belt One Road” development proposal, this policy possesses a much broader and richer conceptual significance.  This is the first, the innovation on the conceptual level. 

The Second Innovation in Conceptualization: following China’s own economic development, in what way do we adapt to the needs of our own “reform and opening up”, while at the same time interacting in a process with the countries on our periphery and along the Corridor, giving them a share in the benefits of our own development, and then proceeding in broadening collaboration between China and the other countries of the world, in order to achieve our common development? That is, to allow our cooperation to achieve mutual and equal benefit.  This is not that China is alone receiving benefit, but rather, how in our cooperation, we all share in the development dividends.  This is a very important shift in development of China’s international policy.

Furthermore, our leaders have brought about new concept on “Benefit”. That is, in terms of “profit/benefit”, to consider how we, in our cooperation with our partners, allow our partners to achieve benefit and development, so that our partners will not receive diminished benefits against what we achieve in the course of our cooperation. This is something that our leaders, especially President XiJinPing, have recently emphasized as the necessary outlook for our cooperation with other nations.  And I think that in our “New Silk Road Economic Development”, he also emphasized a very important concept—that this kind of development must be both balanced and equal; that this is not only China having increased development in both its own scope and quality, but rather, that in the course of this cooperation, it will allow our partners to benefit from a parallel as well as equal scope and quality of development as China. This is important, because recently some friends have said to me that China’s proposal of the New Silk Belt only considered how it will be beneficial to China.  I think that is only half right. That is, any proposal for China’s international development project will, of course, consider the benefit that it will have for China. But in that course, we are also considering its benefit to our cooperative partner, and that it is both a mutual and equal pace of development for our partners.  I think that this equal development for our partners is a very important point to emphasize for the “One Belt One Road” policy and development of the New Silk Road Economic Development.

Thirdly, in sponsoring the “One Belt One Road” policy, our leader emphasis the concept of the “Three No’s”.  That is, first, we do not interfere in the internal affairs of other nations; second, that China does not seek to increase the so called “sphere of influence”; and third, China does not strive for hegemony or dominance.  That is, we are all equal partners.  So our leaders are proposing this “three No’s” concept. I think that for all of our friends present today at this conference, this is something to heavily empathize about China’s foreign policy and to emphasize that such policy is on the basis of “peaceful development” with others.

I think that the promotion of the New Silk Road Project reflects how China seeks to position itself internationally—to propose such an important concept and such an innovative proposal, China is proposing a stand on how we seek to align ourselves in our relationship with the international community. This is to say, after the Cold war, in the Eurasian region, we are seeking to provide equilibrium. In this area, all the major countries, including China, Russia, United States and European Union, there exists a situation of checks and balances between the major powers where not one single major country in Eurasia has dominance. That is, be it United States, Russia, or China, or the EU, none in the Eurasian area should have a dominating or hegemonic position. China’s goal, in promoting the “One Belt and One Road”, is not to disrupt this equilibrium in the Eurasian area, but rather, to ensure the stability of this area. We seek that each region form and develop mutual assistance, mutual friendship, and mutual cooperation. This, I think, is a necessary development, is a necessary basis, and pre-condition, as well as reason for our development of the New Silk Road Project.

I would like to say a few more words about the fact that in the Eurasian region, there are many regional economic cooperatives, including the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and other European cooperative organizations. What is the relationship among these organizations? I don’t think that these organizations are there to negate or work against each other. Rather, I feel that these organization are there to learn to work with, to cooperate with each other, to benefit from each other. To motivate each of these cooperatives to investigate in our mutually beneficial development. Only that way, can our New Silk Economic Corridor have real development. So, I feel that our New Silk Road Economic Corridor is a proposal that is of the nature of spearheading and opening possibilities rather than the closing or blocking out of relationships. Today in the audience, we have mostly European friends, and our New Silk Road Economic Corridor’s basis is that Europe will be at one end of its center and China at the other end. It’s just like a linked dumbbell; the development of this corridor between China and Europe not only will strengthen both Europe and China on each end, but will bring about the social and economic development in the whole of all of the regions of Central Asia, South Asia, Middle East and Eastern Europe. So, I think that the New Silk Road Economic Corridor can have direct impact and importance to the European nations. The European nations in this regard, already have a great foundation in their technological basis and the New Silk Road Corridor is something that we think will greatly develop all of these nations. Again, we must emphasize that in promoting the New Silk Road Corridor, we seek friendly cooperation with all major nations on concept of “求同存异”—finding common ground while existing differently—especially the seeking of common ground. This is central to our conception. So, we do not oppose the United States joining us in this, or Russia or European nations. We welcome all nations. That is why this proposal is inclusive and open.

This is my first major point. My second major point is that for our New Silk Road Corridor’s “One Road One Belt” Concept, I’d like to emphasize the question of how to innovate on a model of cooperation.

How do we advance the building of “One Road One Belt”? Typically, whether in discussions inside or outside China, when people talk about the overarching idea (理念) of the New Silk Road, the discussion centers more on the practical concepts (概念)―when China makes the proposal, what is the content of its proposal, as in “what regions will it cover”, or “what is China’s goal”. But what we often leave out is, how do we cooperate together? That is, what is the model for cooperation? How do you develop cooperation? If we don’t solve that question, in actuality, this initiative will not be realized.

So, I think that the point to emphasize is that when we consider how we promote the New Silk Road Project–the level of economic development in these areas surrounding the corridor is very different. There are developed nations, large countries, relatively developed nations, and some underdeveloped nations. So under the condition of very large differences in the level of economic development among these nations, to push forward the process of this project, I think, involves high degrees of difficulty. We are not proposing that in the future three or five years, or even ten years, to have already developed the New Silk Road Corridor Project. I think that this is a long-term goal on the part of China. It has no definite end. Where and when we can push forth the cooperation, we will. So, when China promotes the New Silk Road initiative, this not on the basis of force, of forcing anyone. Our cooperation partners are only those who freely and willingly join us in this project. Whoever is interested is welcomed to join us. Also, for those joining us in the project, we want for each side to enjoy equal privilege. So the New Silk Road Project, for any nation, is a development opportunity, utilizing China’s “Opening Up” policy to broaden each other’s economic cooperation. This provides all kinds of opportunity for entrepreneurship and employment.

So what is the cooperative model? In the Eurasian region, the economic development level is varied, unlike the European region which is mostly developed. So in the Eurasian region, the differences is very large and it is something that must be considered. Second, in the course of considering the model of cooperation, when we talk about the Eurasian region, we’re talking about a process of strengthening the region (调壮). It is not like some of the other existing economic regions around world, where the purpose is that of “expansion” or “encompassing”. For example, the ASEAN or EU cooperation or Latin American cooperation, they are all a kind of “encompassing”. However, our emphasis for the Eurasian region is that of strengthening it. So, whether we can use ASEAN or EU or the Latin American experience, I think that we do not exclude their experience. We must study and learn from them. More importantly, we must enjoin the unique potential of our various regions along the corridor. I think the important thing for us is how do we set up our cooperation? That is, this process of strengthening the region, how do we go about it? We cannot simply take from the existing models. Often, economic experts, even our own in China, take the Western European model and attempt to simply impose the whole of that model on the new concept. Well, we don’t reject others’ models, but we must seek to develop new ones. In this regard, I very much hope that our European friends will provide us with their thoughts and new suggestions.

So this New Silk Road Project is very new and this type of cooperative vision has little precedent in world history―the regions that it encompasses are many; the length of the Corridor is very great; the countries that it will reach are many. So, there is no precedent. So the road in front of us is, that we must innovate, we must develop new ideas and thoughts, to find a way that would work for the common goals and aspirations of China, and the nations along the new Silk Road Corridor.

Third point: I like to talk about the content of cooperation for our New Silk Road Corridor

First, I talked about conceptualization and methodology. Now, I will talk about the details of the areas for development, the content of development. First, I must again emphasize, that building the “One Road One Belt” long-term process of development is not something to be finished in a few years. We are very clear about that. There are opportunities and at the same time, there are challenges. So we must retain a clear head about this.

I feel that in the process of building the “One Belt One Road”, in the innovation of the character of its development, there are a few elements that must be noted and emphasized. In accordance with the existing economic foundation and condition, and the pre-conditions of our cooperation, our efforts must first be put to energy resources, the transportation grid, electricity systems, communications networks, other such basic infrastructure platforms, and the networking together of such platforms. There is a saying in China, “to develop wealth, you have to first build roads”. The development corridor’s economy can only prosper when human resources, logistics and economic flow (人流, 物流, 资金流) have all been brought on-line and integrated. These basic conditions must be there.

In promoting the development of the “One Road One Belt”, we are not talking about creating a new cooperation mechanism. I must emphasize this. Rather, we are building on the foundation of existing cooperation and existing regional cooperation, ever expanding the scope. This is a cooperative process, not imposing any specific kind of mechanism over the process. Second, we must improve and strengthen each nation’s development strategy and development planning as well as advance the mutual communication and integration of these improvements. We do this so that nations can understand what each other’s next five-ten-year development goals are, and cooperate on that basis; what areas of your strategy are similar to mine; and we must find particular areas and projects for cooperation on the basis of those mutual and common strategies. China, in promoting the “One Belt One Road”, is not seeking unilateral oneness. We only seek to push forward the process of cooperation. Third, I think that in the course of cooperation, we must walk on the frontier of technological advancement. We must nurture and pay serious attention to the most advanced scientific achievements that are being developed in the world. We must take the existing level of development in the Eurasian region and carry-out large scale cooperation on a non-natural resource-taking and non-energy-resource-taking basis. Because in the Eurasian region, each nation’s economic endowment―its national and natural resources―plays a large role in existing cooperation. So I think that there is not enough cooperation not based on natural resources. This means especially development of agriculture, of infrastructure, of the manufacturing industry, and such areas which I think are all retarded areas of needed improvement. We must emphasize a basis of cooperation based on non-natural resource-taking basis, so that it will allow our economic advancement to reach a new high-standard of cooperation.

Lastly, I must place emphasis on the multi-sided attributes for our “One Belt One Road”. We must emphasize high-level multi-dimensional cooperation. For example, we can and should, for the nations along the Silk Road Corridor, develop the effect of “city alliances”. We should develop urban industry alliances―for example, international railroad associations, international transportation associations and other similar associations, including international cooperative-network associations. That is, to develop cross-regional, existing industry cooperation, so as to develop bi-lateral or multi-lateral cooperative networks and cooperation systems. At the same time, China encourages plans and programs that would develop the “One Belt One Road” proposal even though they do not include China as a participant. So that some of the programs China will not participate in, but such program will be beneficial to all. What we seek is to be able to promote regional development, and any such program that develops regional economy, China supports. It is not that we will only support those programs that China participates in. No: programs that belong to and are developed by others, we also support. So we seek an inclusive and open cooperation framework.

Fourth point: innovation of the System

The “One Belt One Road” is a grand vision. For China, the challenges are great. First, it not only touches on the necessary cooperation of some of the regions and department within China, but also on China’s overseas organizations and entities. It not only concerns the domestic interests and prerogatives of each region and department, but also private and state-owned enterprises abroad, as well as international enterprises with muti-income and profit sources. And we must consider the development of these multi-profit sources. We must consider coordination between these national and international policies. So, in order to facilitate the development of the New Silk Road Corridor, our central government has been compelled to increase the pace and reform of our economic system, so that this system can better facilitate the development of the New Silk Road Corridor.

In promoting the New Silk Road, we have taken examples from how other nations have carried out their international strategy. For example, the United States, in conducting its own “New Silk Road Plan” looked at South Asia and Central Asia as an entity with regard to their own development needs and combined the original Department of Central Asian Affairs and the Department of South Asia Affairs into a single Department of South and Central Asia Affairs. I think that this kind of experience is something that we can learn from. Russia, in order to promote the development of the Far East and regional cooperation created the Ministry for Development of the Russian Far East. In this manner, we intend to be able to take those examples that suit the development of the “One Belt One Road” system and utilize them to develop our proposal. So, in the future, in the course of our development of the “One Belt One Road”, we earnestly hope to work with the international community, the various nations, the different regions, and on the basis of equal and mutual developments, to promote a program that benefits all of mankind. Thank you to everyone!


Dr. Fatemeh Hashemi Rafsanjani: Iran’s Role in the New Silk Road Strategy in the 3rd Millennium

Dr. Fatemeh Hashemi Rafsanjani

President of WSA (Women Solidarity Association), Teheran, Islamic Republic of Iran.


[Dedication in Arabic]

Honorable audience, Ladies and Gentlemen, I am very glad to be here with you in this session, in which I want to recall a few historical periods and facts showing that Iran is committed to the development and revival of the Silk Road.

Iran’s relationship and critical role in the construction, maintenance, and renewal of the Silk Road is entering its Third Millennium. The ancient cultures of Iran, China, and the Middle East generally had cooperation not only on commercial but also on security, diplomatic, and cultural issues.

As history attests, toward the beginning of the First Millennium, the Parthian Dynasty ruling over Persia benefitted massively from customs duties levied on goods transported between Roman-dominated Europe and China on the Silk Road that stretched under their dominions from the Euphrates in Mesopotamia to Western China. The Parthian Dynasty, which was in favor of expanding East-West trade relations, closely supervised and maintained the road.

The Silk Road consisted of a series of land and marine routes that linked various civilizations. This road made a great contribution to the development of human civilization. In Iran, the Silk Road was of special importance. Considering the role of silk in ancient times, it can be said that the history of Iran and the Silk Road were intertwined. The trade and cultural exchange between the two great countries of Iran and China were carried out via the Silk Road.

It seems that as early as the 6th Century BC, King Darius the Great established military checkpoints on these roads in order to ensure the safety of the caravans. The road between the cities of Shush and Sardis was the continuation of the Silk Road, which had been built to boost the silk trade between East and West. By playing a key role in the Silk Road, Iran made great contributions to the booming of the silk trade and other commodities to the West. During the Parthian era [247 BC-224 AD], the Silk Road was still an important route for the exchange of commodities among various countries. Some steps were taken to repair and expand the Silk Road during the reign of the Parthian Emperor Mehrdad II, the Great [123-88 BC].

The Islamic Renaissance

Around the end of the First Millennium and the beginning of the Second Millennium, Iran was at the center of the Islamic Renaissance. The Islamic state had extended from western China, the Indus River, and all the way westward to North Africa and Spain. Iran’s role as a scientific, philosophical, and cultural center was boosted by its geographical location and heritage. With the help of Chinese paper production techniques, Chinese, Indian, Persian, Arabic, and Greek science and philosophy were translated and proliferated over most of the inhabited globe. This was the greatest process of exchange of ideas between cultures ever, leading into the European Renaissance in the 14th Century.

The revival of the Silk Road would have considerable benefits for Iran, China, and their neighbors, and would prove the geopolitical role of Iran as a commercial and diplomatic intersection in the world.

Iran has made great endeavors to revive the Silk Road in the last decades of the Second Millennium and the beginning of the Third.

The railroad of Mashhad-Sarakhs-Tejen (in Turkmenistan), which was located on the ancient Silk Road, was put into operation in the presence of his Excellency Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, the former President of Iran, with the presence of 11 heads of state, and diplomatic representatives of 45 countries from around the world, on May 14, 1996. On that occasion, Ayatollah Rafsanjani stated that “one can easily notice that, even though the Silk Road was a trade route for ferrying goods, it played an important and effective role in cultural, social, and artistic communications. The revival of the Silk Route, through construction of the lengthy Persian Gulf (or Bandar Abbas)-Sarakhs-Tajan railway, which once again links China to Central Asia via Iran, is in continuation of efforts of Iran to expand the Silk Road.”

In 1998, Iran completed a railway connection to the northwest from Tabriz to Van in Turkey. Thus, the New Silk Road was connected to Europe again. In 2001, the Mashhad-Bafq-Bandar Abbas line was completed, connecting landlocked Central Asia to the Persian Gulf. Iran also completed the Bafq-Kerman-Zahedan railway to Pakistan’s border, connecting Iran to the Indian Subcontinent. The North-South Corridor connecting Russia, Iran, and India is being constructed now through Armenia and the Caucasus. From India, through Chabahar Port in southeast Iran, and the completed Iranian railway system, Southeast Asia and the Indian Subcontinent will be connected to Northern Europe.

By constructing this network of railroads, commercial transit on a global scale has been reduced between East-West and South-North by weeks, compared to sea routes. Besides trade, this development corridor-building has massive implications for the economic, social, and political developments for the peoples involved. From the very beginning, the construction of this railroad and revival of the Silk Road, which was accomplished by contrivance of Iran’s authorities, was meant to provide the basis of economic growth and diplomatic relations promotion in the region. As was stated at the inauguration ceremony in 1996, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani wished the Silk Road to be the road to peace and friendship by connecting this railroad to it.

The Islamic Republic of Iran also welcomed the recent initiative announced by President of China Xi Jinping to launch the Silk Road Economic Belt. Last May, President Hassan Rouhani, after meeting President Xi in Shanghai, spoke to the press on Iran-China relations. He said: “China is now Iran’s biggest trade partner. We have many cooperation agreements with China on international and regional issues. . . . We agree with the idea of the revival of the Silk Road. In the past, China has been engaged with the countries alongside the Silk Road in the aspects of culture, economy, and trade, and also in other areas like energy and transportation. These ties between China and Iran and other countries in the region can be resumed. So the plan of the Silk Road Economic Belt could be successful.”

Last month, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Summit convened in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, which was a strong reminder of the ancient Silk Road that is being reconstructed.

Toward Global Peace

The world needs peace and friendship. The New Silk Road can extend to Europe and become our ambassador to Europe and the world. It does not mean that we should forget peace and friendship in other arenas. In my capacity as the president of Charity Foundation for Special Diseases (CFSD) I have felt the pain and suffering of special patients who have been negatively affected by unpeaceful measures, especially sanctions that can compromise people’s health. We all should do our best for peace in all aspects of human life. CFSD has made appropriate reactions to echo the harms, and communicate the voice of patients for peace, and illegality of any sanctions that target innocent people. I, also as the secretary general of Women’s Solidarity Association of Iran (WSAI), have always tried to cooperate with other NGOs in the world for the purpose of peace that could be motivated by women, both in and out of Iran. WSAI has done its best to promote women’s organizations and an active presence of women in social and cultural arenas, and to help the process of development of their societies by striving to solve problems facing women.

Now the Schiller Institute, by having a brilliant and credible history of efforts to maintain and ensure peace and progress for all nations, fighting against war and violence, and launching endeavors for respecting human rights and dignity, could propel public opinion toward global peace through holding such conferences. In the end, I would like to thank you for all your initiatives and efforts.


Jayshree Sengupta: BRICS and the New International World Order

Jayshree Sengupta

Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, India

Audio


A group of Emerging countries called BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) came into existence at the beginning of the 21st century when Goldman Sachs coined the name for them in 2002. Today BRICS signifies the dawn of a new era. It signifies a grouping that for the first time represents the new power behind five Emerging nations in the world that are rich in human and material resources and have a rich history of civilization and culture. The group also has a great growth potential even though at present they may be termed as developing. The group is diverse yet there is a kind of glue or ‘cement’ that will bind them together in the future. Three of the members are resource rich and sparsely populated and two others are highly populated and some of the biggest consumer of resources.

They have set upon themselves an agenda which includes a quest for a new world order in which they would play a very critical role and this may bring an end of the unipolar world and the rise of a polycentric and multipolar world. The first BRIC meeting was at Yekaterinburg, Russia, on June 16, 2009, in the backdrop of the Global Financial crisis. South Africa joined in 2011.

BRICS are and will be very important in the future in terms of the share in world output, trade, population, investment and incomes. Today BRICS represents 18 per cent of world trade and account for 46 per cent of the global population and has a total GDP of $11 trillion. The countries represent 26 per cent of the world’s land mass. As India’s Prime Minister Narendra  Modi said “For the first time it brings together a group of nations on the parameter of ‘future potential’ rather than existing prosperity or shared identities. The very idea of BRICS is thus forward looking.” Such a group is indeed a cause for worry for countries that have dominated the present international order, especially the twin Bretton Woods Institutions.

BRICS nations seek to assume a leadership role in the global political and economic governance paradigm and want greater equity for the developing world. They want to bring about significant reforms within institutions like the United National Security Council, The World Bank, and International Monetary Fund.

The Case of India and the BRICS

India, a country known for its ancient civilization and rich cultural heritage is a member of the BRICS. Despite the fact that it has some of the most beautiful monuments of the world and it is still populated by the finest craftsmen and weavers, it is today a developing country. In GDP terms however, because of its huge population of nearly 1.3 billions, it is the third highest economy in the world. India has a huge potential for growth if things go right but if policies go wrong, there is bound to be chaos.

It has a young population with 65 per cent of the population below age 40 and a rising middle class that could amount to 350 million. It is still fighting abject poverty and deprivation and has to create millions of jobs in the future.

After the exploitative and oppressive British colonial rule of 200 years, India won its Independence in 1947. The leaders Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru envisioned an India of self-rule and democratic values, non- violence and greater harmony for humanity. They chose to go for self- reliance and Nehru greatly favored the building of capital goods industry first for rapid industrialization and economic growth. He launched India’s first Five Year Plan in 1950.

Many things went wrong however in the first four decades after Independence and India went through many crises of food shortages, slow growth, foreign exchange problems and wars with neighbors. It had to approach the IMF for a bailout in 1991 as the government became bankrupt and India’s development path changed to one of market reform and liberalization.

From 1991 the liberalization of the Indian economy has led to many advantages but also disadvantages. Globalization had led to vast wealth creation for some with 10 dollar billionaires and 14,800 dollar millionaires. It bred corruption and creation of power elite which cornered privileges and assets for themselves. A large section of the population was left behind bereft of assets and skills.

Thus there came to be two Indias due to two decades of liberalization. One which is prosperous and living in First world lifestyle and the ‘other’ India in which people are living without human dignity and suffering multiple deprivations.  Regional disparities have also led to disparate standards of living. Some states have more lawlessness and lack of governance than others. Values especially patriarchy and class, caste and gender discrimination have remained unchanged even though the economy has been liberalized.

A key feature of liberalization –land acquisition for building real estate, factories, EPZs has also been anti poor as they have not been adequately compensated for land that has been taken over. Just as liberalization has brought immense wealth to some people, it has pauperized large sections of the population. A balance has to be reached through better governance and a dedicated leadership.

The Informal or organized sector still absorbs 90 percent of India’s 465 million strong labour force. Globalization has led to the increased role of the private corporate sector but it absorbs only 8 per cent of the labour force. Similarly the rapidly growing ITC sector absorbed only 2 per cent of the labour force. India’s problem ahead is job creation for 12.8 million youth entering the labour force every year.

A change of government has taken place after ten years of neo liberal policies and we have a common tea seller who has risen to be the Prime Minister, a man who is keen on making India great but following its own development path and not the diktats of WTO, EU, World Bank and the IMF. He has already declined to open up the multi-brand $500 billion retail sector of India to multinational retailers like Walmart, Tesco etc. This is because there are 40 million small retail traders whose livelihoods are threatened if the giant retailers gain a foothold in India.  He has also refused to sign the TFA.[1](Trade Facilitation Act) under the WTO because it would compromise India’s stand on food security. The reforms under Narendra Modi hopefully will be different and will help to empower the common person rather than the rich only.

In the years of neo liberal policies, there has been a rape of India’s mineral resource and there has been exploitation of the tribal and indigenous people who lost their land to the land mafia. Disgruntled and impoverished, with no skills and assets, the tribal poor in one third of India’s 600 districts took to armed struggle which still remains as a major non- traditional security threat in the country. The mining sector under the pressure of multinationals has also been ridden with scams and corruption.

India needs infrastructure more than anything else for growth and prosperity. While western FDI is clamoring to enter the Indian market to sell to its growing middle class their consumer goods especially through a take over the retail trade, few infrastructure development companies are laying their bets on India’s future. It is in this context that India would welcome the BRICS’ New Development Bank which will give loans for infrastructure to the developing world without strings attached.

The New Development Bank

There is much skepticism regarding the establishment of the New Development (BRICS) Bank which was agreed upon in the BRICS summit in Fortaleza, Brazil recently. It is viewed as a competitor of the Asian Development Bank and a challenger of the twin Bretton Woods Institutions –the IMF-World Bank which have dominated the international financial architecture in the post-World War II years.

The global development discourse unfortunately has been largely driven by institutions that were formed in the twentieth century and do not reflect the contemporary realities. For instance the only development consensus today seems to be the Washington consensus which stresses on maximizing the role of the market and minimizing the role of the governments in developing countries. Clearly in the Twenty First century, this has not offered a panacea for global development deficits. The ‘one size fits all’ development approach has not been successful and is evident by the variable levels of progress by developing countries in meeting the MDGs.

The New Development Bank will be a viable alternative for the developing countries which are not getting a proper representation in the IMF-World Bank system. Reforms of the IMF quotas and voting rights have not been undertaken as the bill for passing such reforms has been languishing in the US Congress since 2010. The reform could have corrected the heavy weightage given to the industrialized countries in the IMF and could have led to a better representation of the Emerging countries. BRICS comprise over one fifth of the global economy but together they wield 11 per cent of votes in the IMF. China whose economy is only second to the US economy has fewer votes than Benelux countries.

With the exception of Russia, BRICS is still a forum of developing countries and the interest of the developing world matter to them most specially borrowings for infrastructure development. Hopefully when the bank is in place, there will be fewer delays in credit availability and there would be less conditionality. It will offer a protection to the member countries against global liquidity pressures and will include currency issues where members’ national currencies are being adversely affected by global financial upheavals. For this purpose it was decided in Brazil to create a Contingent Reserve Arrangement of $100 billion.

There is fear in some quarters that China with its high contribution to the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) which is directly related to its having the highest foreign exchange reserves, would dominate the bank. China will be contributing $41 billion, Russia, Brazil and India $18 billion each and South Africa $5 billion. But this may not be the case despite the headquarters being in Shanghai.

There is going to be a democratic approach to governance and each member will get equal voting rights.  Regarding the management of the bank the first President will be an Indian, the first Chairman of board of governors will be a Russian and first Chairman of the board of directors will be a Brazilian and the first regional centre of the bank will be in South Africa.

There are of course problems within the members of BRICS with China and India having a longstanding border issue that needs to be resolved. India and China went to war over it in 1962. There is also the need for revival of economic growth in all the member countries and it is increasingly important that they have a forum of their own and a bank of their own in which they have control.

The BRICS bank is not trying to replace the IMF-World Bank but will play a complementary role which will cater to the needs of developing countries. Many smaller countries in South Asia and Africa may approach it for loans and the terms could be easier than the big regional banks that have been functioning in the past. The New Development Bank will succeed if it follows a robust credit appraisal mechanism.

The Bank’s membership will be open to other countries but BRICS’ share cannot fall below 55 per cent. In fact when it starts functioning in full steam the era of western countries’ (G7) monopoly on setting the global agenda will be over and the voice of Global South will become prominent.

The BRICS hopefully with their own bank will have greater flexibility in crafting monetary policy and enhancing leverage in global markets. The BRICS can, with the help of the NDB, work together without being boxed in the rigid framework of the Washington Consensus.

There will be focus on capacity building under NDB in the nations that take loans. It could support existing domestic capacities for project management and implementation as well as new institutions which can facilitate the measurement of developmental impact of recipient countries. This could be done through special funding windows available with NDB.

The MoU on cooperation between Export Credit Guarantee Agencies and the inter-Bank Cooperation Agreement on Innovation will spur further cooperation among BRICS.

Agenda for the BRICS

BRICS agenda is bound to be complex if it wants to be a forum of might and global importance. It is working hard to identify new areas of convergence. It is time now not to conform to old templates and paradigms because it is an age where groups will be theme specific.

The agenda for BRICS will be first, to bring about change in the global financial architecture and reform the global financial institutions. The setting up of the NDB signifies that the Emerging countries need their own financial system and follow their own rules and voting rights since the IMF reforms for voting rights have been languishing.

The second point in the agenda is to bring about intra BRICS cooperation in food security , water stress, health care, inclusive growth, urbanization, education, trade and investment.  The members have different needs and their levels of human development and infrastructure are different and in many cases need massive improvement.

For example in health, the BRICS suffer from uneven development and there is great need for cooperation. The BRICS’ NDB can help in accessing resources to improve the functioning of the health sector especially in India, Russia and South Africa.

Collaboration in urbanization and healthcare needs of almost half of the world’s population represented by BRICS are being worked out. Sharing of resources, technology, mutual research and development, coordination across key sectors such as IT, energy, and high end manufacturing is also on the agenda for development of the five members. The BRICS are intending to share indigenous practices and experiences to learn and respond to the immense social economic challenges from within and outside their countries.

BRICS have repeatedly stressed on reduction of inequalities and poverty. Measured by the Human Development Index, most of the members lag behind those of developed countries. BRICS have an average Gini coefficient of 0.49 as compared to 0.31 in developed countries and life expectancy is 68.1 years whereas in developed countries it is 80 years. Also in terms of mean years of schooling, BRICS average is 8.14 years and in developed countries it is 13 years.

The weighted average of infrastructure investment in BRICS will need roughly 7 per cent of the respective country GDP which is much higher than the percentage required in developed countries. India will require 9.6 per cent of its GDP in the next 5 years.

 

Infrastructure Indicators, Selected Countries

country Electricity Fixed broadband internet subscribers (per 100 people) Rail lines (route-km) Roads paved (% of roads) Quality of over infrastructure  (rank)
Brazil 2,438 10.08 29,817 13.5 104
Russia 6,486 16.62 84,249 72.2 100
India 684 1.16 64,460 53.8  86
China 3,298 13.63 66,298 63.7 69
South Africa 4,604 3.06 20,500 17 60
Japan 7,848 28.84 20,140 80.4 13
US 13,246 28.54 228,218 65.4 24
Germany 7,081 34.58 33,509 100.0 10

Source: World Development Indicators, World Economic Forum, CIA Factbook

 

Third, it aims at increasing the use of currencies of the five members to facilitate the intra-BRICS trade and a vibrant mechanism for greater cooperation among stock exchanges of the five countries.

Fourth, the agenda includes larger global political issues, no use of ‘threat of force’ in international relations, importance of multilateral approach in addressing global issues and the recognition of G20 as the premier institution for dealing with global economic and financial matters. It seeks to establish a roadmap for a multipolar world. It seeks leadership role in the global political and economic governance paradigm and seeks greater equity for the developing world.

It wants to further market integration and to ensure that the five members become less dependent on cyclical trends in the global economy and the ups and downs in the value of the dollar due to US monetary policy changes.

The emergence of BRICS reflects the twentieth century Third World Movement and the rise of south-south solidarity movement. South- South Trade amounts to $2.2 trillion and exceeds North–South trade. The BRICS’ NDB carries the promise of becoming a major source of capital for developing world which is in dire need of infrastructure development. India, Brazil specially need both physical and social infrastructure improvement that will require trillions of dollars.

BRICS also intend to intensify their cooperation in tackling terrorism, cyber security and climate change.

BRICS are home to some of the world’s more valuable region of bio-diversity. They would proactively work to protect these areas and promote sustainable development and preserve the ecological base within each of the BRICS. They would also cooperate in preventing climate change conflicts that some of the BRICS are prone to in the form of migration of people living in coastal or flood prone areas.

Indian Prime Minister has said that BRICS should champion Sub-national level exchanges and champion engagement between BRICS states, cities and other local bodies. He has insisted that BRICS should be driven by people to people contact and the youth should take a lead in this.

BRICS are growing in strength and will be an important challenger of the old world order which came into existence in the post World War II era and which needs to be amended in view of the realities of the Twenty First century and the need for a multipolar world.

BRICS is bound to expand and countries waiting to join the BRICS are Turkey, Indonesia and Mexico. Other smaller countries may also seek membership as the path of BRICS becomes clear and established.


[1]India is forced to give indirect subsidies to its 80 million small farmers because they do not have bank accounts .Stockpiling of food for 1.2 billion people is absolutely necessary but the WTO regards it with suspicion because it could cause price distortions in case India decides to sell the surplus in the markets. The total amount of subsidy is now running into more than 10 per cent of the value of its food production and exceeding the limit under WTO. Since the value of the food production has to be calculated at 1986 prices, India has rejected signing the TFA, in view of the high rate of food inflation in India today.


Natalia Vitrenko: A Constructive Alternative to the Existing World Order, and Stability in Ukraine – Pathway to Saving Mankind

Natalia Vitrenko

Doctor of Economics / Chairman of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine

Audio (Russian/русский)


All the slides in PDF format: Download


Ladies and gentlemen, dear Helga Zepp-LaRouche,

This conference is a unique informational platform for scientists and specialists, from various countries and continents, to exchange ideas in this very difficult, pre-war situation. We have an opportunity to chart a pathway to saving the world, and to reorganize the world in order to ensure sovereignty and political stability, economic growth, and a better quality of life for the people of all countries.

For us, as citizens of Ukraine, these questions are especially acute. Ukraine today is permeated with blood, from a civil war. Ukraine is experiencing colossal human and economic losses, and is in the clutches of a neo-Nazi dictatorship, which is being used in attempts to detonate a (nuclear!) World War Three.

Our country is endowed with an excellent climate, 20 percent of the planet’s black earth soil areas, a unique strategic location, and a highly skilled and educated labor force. For 22 years, Ukraine has obediently and scrupulously fulfilled the conditionalities, attached to IMF and World Bank reforms, and for eight years has been abiding by the trade rules of the World Trade Organization. This year, Ukraine signed an Association Agreement with the European Union. And now our country is careening into an abyss, toward disintegration and self-destruction.

As of 2013, the GDP of Ukraine stood at only 65 percent of its 1990 level. During 2014, the decline has continued: in the 1st quarter, it fell by 1 percent; in the 2nd quarter by 4.7 percent. The projected year-end decline in GDP is 10 percent. Ukraine’s gross foreign debt is increasing rapidly. For 2014 as a whole, it will have risen by 102.2 percent. In the first eight months of 2014, industrial production fell by 7.8 percent. Ukraine’s national currency, the hryvnia, was devalued by more than 60 percent, with 90 percent inflation in that period. The civil war has compounded the economic crisis. Military spending is devouring the lion’s share of budgeted government spending. Wages, pensions, and entitlements remain frozen, while prices and utilities rates have risen by 40 percent so far this year. The standard of living has fallen by 30 percent. Seventy-eight percent of the population of Ukraine is living below the poverty level.

Instead of what was promised, namely European values, the rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom to demonstrate peacefully, the right to life, security, and dignity, and the right of the people to express their will through voting, a neo-Nazi dictatorship is being consolidated in Ukraine. School textbooks, media broadcasts, and the behavior of our institutions of government, all make heroes out of the collaborators of Hitler, from the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Corruption has been reconfigured in a new, “European” format.

Unfortunately, what is happening in Ukraine is not an anomaly, a accident which has occurred in a thriving world community. Rather, it is the lawful, planned result of the current world order, established by the USA after the defeat of Nazi Germany.

The USA laid the basis for this new world system back in 1944 at the Bretton Woods conference, by establishing the U.S. dollar as the world currency (still backed by gold at the time). The dollarization of the world economy has brought enormous profit to the American oligarchy. Since August 1971, the United States, having built up its post-war economy many times more than the recovery of the USSR, Europe or other continents), brazenly cancelled the dollar’s backing by gold. Who could object to them? By then, the USA had already set up such institutions of globalization as the IMF, NATO, the World Bank and the WTO (or the GATT, at that time), to protect its own interests. Mercilessly looting the whole world, destroying national economies, and condemning billions of people to a half-starved existence, or to death, from hunger, drugs, epidemics, and armed conflicts, the United States looked after its own welfare. The populations of Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria have been victims of this policy of pursuing U.S. national interests.

The existing world system is met with a steady and universal growth of dissatisfaction in various countries, which view this current world order as unjust and unacceptable — this order, prescribed by the IMF and the WTO, under conditions of total dollarization, economic sanctions, instigated-to-order coups d’état, color revolutions, and armed conflicts for ensuring U.S. hegemony. New global leaders are emerging. New integration associations of countries, like the BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Customs Union, and the Eurasian Union, are asserting their economic and political interests.

On October 8 of this year, the Financial Times published an emerging markets analysis that showed world economic prospects as threatening to U.S. leadership. Looking at GDP adjusted for purchasing power parity, the old Group of Seven leading nations, headed by the USA, is being eclipsed by a new seven: Brazil, Russia, India, China, Mexico, Indonesia, and Turkey, with a combined GDP of $37.8 trillion, as against $34.5 trillion for the G7. China itself has already surpassed the United States. Its GDP based on purchasing power parity is $17.6 trillion, as against $17.4 trillion for the USA.

For the United States, the loss of its world leadership position and the destruction of the worldwide dollar pyramid is a real threat. And it threatens not only their continued world dominance, but even the very existence of the United States as a nation. The USA has an astronomical foreign debt of $17 trillion and a yawning budget deficit of $1.7 trillion. For the United States, the radical pathway to salvation is World War III. And this is supposed to happen on the European continent. They are counting on Ukraine, for purposes of igniting this war.

Ever since the destruction of the Soviet Union, the USA has been heavily cultivating Ukraine. It was clearly in their interests, that neo-Nazi parties and movement experienced a boom in our country, beginning in the 1990s. The following neo-Nazi organizations came on the scene: the Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian People’s Self-Defense (UNA-UNSO), in 1990s; the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine (SNPU), in 1991, which was renamed in 2004 as the Svoboda All-Ukraine Association. Svoboda has held seats in the local legislatures in Halychyna (western Ukraine) since 2010 and in the national Parliament since 2012. Then there’s the Stepan Bandera Trident organization, founded in 1993, which in December 2013 was the basis for the creation of Right Sector. There are many others. Throughout their existence, they have received generous financing and informational support from the West.

In violation of the Charter and Judgment of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal, which required national courts to put collaborators of Hitler’s Nazis on trial;

contrary to the resolutions of the United Nations, which condemn racism and Nazism, and which oblige the state to ban any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred and to make such advocacy a punishable criminal act. Such prohibitions, emphasizes a UN Resolution of Nov. 26, 2012, in no way violate the right to freedom of opinion and expression;

contrary to the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which all forbid any discrimination whatsoever, based on gender, race, skin color, language, religion, political or other beliefs, national or social origin, status as a property-owner or not, or any other basis;

and contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine, Article 37 of which forbids the creation and activity of political parties and public organizations, whose programmatic goals or actions are aimed at inciting interethnic, racial, or religious enmity, or infringement of human rights and freedoms, —

those in power in Ukraine (already under President Yushchenko and President Yanukovych, and even more so today), have used laws and regulations to turn a Nazi ideology into the ideology of Ukraine today. The latest instance is the President Poroshenko’s decree, dated October 14, 2014, which established October 14 as a holiday, Defender of the Fatherland Day. On October 14, 1942, the so-called Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) was founded, which went on to collaborate with Hitler and which had blood on its hands: suffice it to recall the Volhynia massacres of Summer 1943, when they butchered 120,000 ethnic Poles in Volhynia. The birthday of the organization that did that has now become a national holiday in Ukraine.

Neo-Nazis formed the ideological core of the Euromaidan. During their Nazi marches, they blatantly displayed Nazi symbols (the swastika, the numbers 14 and 88, the Celtic cross, and certain flags), as well as portraits of their ideological idols — the collaborationists and agents of the Abwehr — Konovalets, Bandera, and Shukhevych. At the Euromaidan in Kiev, they constantly chanted “Muscovites onto the knives!” (meaning, “Stab the Russians”), “Hang the Communists,” “Ukraine for Ukrainians,” “Glory to the Nation – Death to the Enemies” (and they consider not only Russians to be their enemies, but everyone who fails to profess their ideology), “Glory to Ukraine – to the Heroes Glory,” and “Ukraine above All.” Here in German, I think, people remember what “Deutschland ueber alles” meant. We have published a book titled International Law against the Rehabilitation of Ukrainian Collaborationists, which includes photographs of [last winter’s] Euromaidan demonstrations in Kiev. I showed these pictures at my press conference at the European Parliament, on February 26, 2014. I am truly grateful (and I think that all anti-fascists in Ukraine are grateful) to the Schiller Institute, and to our true friends in France, Germany, and Italy, who at that time, in February-March 2014, organized our trip through several European countries, meetings with members of national parliaments and regional parliaments, and of the European Parliament. We showed all these things at that time. But Brussels, Washington, and London chose not to see this. They saw only a “peaceful Euromaidan.”

It was peaceful, however, only for one week: from November 23-30, 2014. The Euromaidan in Kiev ceased to be peaceful, already on December 1, 2013. That is when the Berkut special forces were forbidden to use any weapons, while the guerrillas from the Maidan made ample use of clubs, cobblestones from the street, flares, Molotov cocktails, ice-axes, and chains. After they pillaged police weapons depots and military bases in Halychyna, they also had automatic weapons. They seized 19 government buildings in the center of the capital city.

Washington and Brussels, however, though they saw the neo-Nazi guerrillas rampaging in Kiev, stubbornly forbid the authorities to use force.

How does this posture of the West square with the events of August 9, 2014, when the police in Ferguson, Missouri, in the USA, shot an unarmed 18-year-old African-American named Michael Brown, touching off peaceful demonstrations by his indignant fellow citizens, which the police met first with tear gas and then with rubber bullets? After that, the National Guard was sent in and they imposed a state of emergency and a curfew.

A segment of the population of Ukraine supported the Euromaidan, but millions, tens of millions of people rejected it. Those who rejected did not Ukraine to be turned into an enemy of Russia. They opposed signing the Association Agreement with the EU, which would deliberately break and strong economic, cultural, informational, scientific, and even simply family ties with the Russians. A poll done in February 2014 by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation clearly showed that only 16.8 percent of Ukrainians completely supported the actions of the demonstrators. The participants in the Maidan were largely from Halychyna: 55 percent of the protesters had come from small towns and villages in western Ukraine. And after that, people have the gall to say that the Maidan in Kiev showed the choice our people had made!

On February 20, 2014 the neo-Nazi guerrillas already had firearms. On February 21, three foreign ministers (from Germany, France, and Poland) forced Yanukovych in effect to recognize the coup d’état and to agree to the Maidan’s terms. The memorandum involved obligations for each of the sides. But the Maidan representatives had not the least intention of fulfilling their obligations, nor did anyone make them do so. The illegal armed units were neither disarmed nor disbanded.

The neo-Nazi ideology became the ideology of the new state. This is an ideology under which one ethnic group dictates to all others. It is an ideology of reprisals against Russians (and any partisans of Russia): an ideology of reprisals against dissidents. The new authorities proclaimed, “One nation – one language – one church – one state.”

Under these conditions, representatives of the Russian world (and that means not only citizens of the Russian Federation and not only ethnic Russians, but also those Ukrainians, the so-called “Little Russians,” who identify with the Russian world and Eastern Slav civilization), definitely sounded the alarm. Crimea exploded, and the March 16 referendum was practically unanimous in favor of returning to Russia. The Donbas rose up. This region is inhabited by 6.5 million people, most of them of a Russian cultural orientation, and closely tied to Russia. The May 11 referendum showed that 75 percent of the population of the Donetsk and Lugansk Regions did not want to be in a neo-Nazi, anti-Russian Ukraine.

But the Kiev regime decided to punish the Donbas, trampling on the values, the will, and the interests of its population.

Before April 2014, we did not imagine that the government would use, against civilians and the insurgents, such sophisticated methods of annihilation as Grad and Uragan rocket-launchers, cluster bombs, phosphorous bombs, Tochka-U (also called SS-21) tactical missiles, and other types of selective-effect heavy offensive weaponry. As a result of combat involving the Ukrainian Army and various volunteer battalions, even the seriously understated UN estimates are that 3600 people had been killed and 8700 wounded in the Donbas by the beginning of this month, October 2014. By comparison, 3360 soldiers and officers from Ukraine were killed over the 10-year duration of the Soviet War in Afghanistan! And now, 3600 during half a year of the Kiev regime’s war against the Donbass. But this figure does not reflect reality. Military experts estimate the casualties to be over 40,000 dead on all sides – Ukrainian military and law enforcement, the insurgents, and civilians. The fratricidal war in the Donbas also set the stage for a stream of refugees, around 1 million of whom have taken refuge in Russia, and around 300 thousand in other regions of Ukraine.

But Ukraine’s problems today are not limited to the Donbas. Broadcasting by all Russian TV channels has been turned off, and an ever increasing number of films and TV series from Russia are being banned. The phenomenon called “garbage lustration” is growing rapidly: this refers to street actions, in which, without any investigation or trial, elected representatives and other officials are beaten up and then thrown into garbage dumpsters. Slanders are spread against people the regime doesn’t like. People are disappearing. I’ll give you two examples:

1) In July 2014 in the city of Melitopol (not in the Donbas, but in Zaporozhye Region), six people broke into the home of Sergei Dolgov, editor-in-chief of a newspaper called I Want to Go to the USSR!, and carried him off. And he disappeared. In the months since then, nobody has been able to find him;

2) Also in July 2014, our colleague Yelena Mazur, who was a Member of Parliament when we were, decided to organize a picket line of women against the war, outside the Supreme Rada (Parliament). The demonstration was broken up and the women were beater. The police seized the female activists, including People’s Deputy of Ukraine Yelena Mazur, and beat her so badly that she landed in the hospital with a concussion.

Slanders and persecution affect not only members of political parties or public activists and bloggers, but also people who are merely active in online social networking. Militant toughs beat up peaceful demonstrators, and then law enforcement arrests them — the demonstrators. This happened in August in Kherson, and in September in Odessa and Kharkov.

Against this backdrop, the public consciousness is getting saturated with increased militarism, bestial Russophobia, and hatred of any dissident views. These tendencies typify the rhetoric of Parliamentary candidates in the elections taking place on October 26, 2014.Iryna Farion of the Svoboda Party, for example, in a Sept. 30 speech to fighters of the Sich Battalion, declared that Ukraine should become “the cutting edge of World War Three,” emphasizing that this cutting edge must be victorious. Lyndon LaRouche was right, when he warned that the Nazis in Ukraine were being readied for use as the detonator of World War III.

Under these conditions of civil war, rampaging militants, intimidation and blackmail, strict censorship, and militaristic, anti-Russian psychosis, there is little doubt about the outcome of the October 26 elections. This will be a war parliament, which on U.S. orders or if faced with the threat of mass social uprisings in Ukraine, may very well impose martial law and declare war on Russia.

Considering Europe’s role as a passive player in the aggressive policy of the USA, there is no doubt that a declaration of war by Ukraine against Russia would pull the NATO countries, led by the United States, into the maelstrom. It is without question, that mankind would suffer hideous losses from nuclear attacks.

Human reason is obligated to put forward an alternative to this diabolical scenario. That alternative should be a fundamentally new, scientifically organized, inspired, and viable world order. Of course this involves an array of difficult problems, from creating just supranational financial and credit organizations to replace the IMF and World Bank, and new trade organizations instead of the WTO, to disbanding NATO, eliminating the monopoly of the dollar, and radical reform of how the UN and its Security Council function.

These global issues cannot be addressed, without growth of the economic, energy, and financial clout of the developing sector. That, in turn, requires implementing major international investment projects. The Chinese New Silk Road project is of special interest. Creating the New Silk Road is a strategy for the radical transformation of the Eurasian continent. This project can be a powerful impetus to scientific research, the development and implementation of innovative technologies for building high-speed railways, the creation of related modern infrastructure, expanded cooperation in trade, tourism, and culture, and fruitful coordination among Eurasian countries on ensuring public safety. Without question, implementation of this project will strengthen the world’s new leading countries and move toward a fundamental change of world monetary policy, through dedollarization and a transition to using national currencies in trade among them.

The New Silk Road project is also extremely promising for Ukraine. The ancient state of Kievan Rus controlled the route “from the Varangians to the Greeks,” which connected the northern Russian lands, through Kiev, with Tsargrad (Constantinople). Likewise today, Kiev ought to be interested in developing its transport arteries, which would enable Ukraine to make effective use of its geopolitical advantages, becoming a European transit country.

Participation in the Chinese project ought to prod Ukraine in the direction of developing science-intensive, high-technology manufactures, which would shape a different, highly developed Ukrainian economy of the future. This could put a stop to any further deterioration of our country’s scientific, technological, and intellectual strengths, and become an effective way to combat mass unemployment, poverty, and the degradation and flight of the work force.

It would be a shame to miss this chance for Ukraine. It will be a shame, if Ukraine becomes an obstacle for the entire world to move ahead with constructive, new projects to save the world, and if the forces of war, evil, and the oligarchy’s insatiable greed prevail over the forces of good, reason, and creativity.

This chance for the salvation of Ukraine will be available only if the public consciousness is protected against Nazi ideology and propaganda, and the political life of our country cleansed of neo-Nazi parties and movements. This cannot be done by Ukraine alone. It is not an internal matter, just for Ukraine. This can only be accomplished through the joint efforts of Russia and Europe. The norms and principles of international law not only allow that to be done; they demand that it be done, invoking the memory of the 50 million dead of the Second World War.

The only thing needed, is the political will.

In conclusion, I would like to show you photos and video documentation. This is what happened in Ukraine five days ago, on October 14, 2014:

Video clips: Clip 1, Clip 2

All the slides in PDF format: Download


To Top

 


Ali Rastbeen: A Vision of the Future of Eurasia

Ali Rastbeen

Founder and President of Paris Academy of Geopolitics, Paris, France.



Zepp-LaRouche – Resolution: “Let us grow up into the Adult Age of Mankind!”

Zepp-LaRouche

founder of the Schiller Institute, reads the resolution “Let us grow up into the Adult Age of Mankind!” during the Schiller Institute conference.


 


Prof. Dr. Dieter Ameling: The Role of Steel in the New Silk Road

Prof. Dr. Dieter Ameling

President of the German Steel Federation (until 2008), Essen, Germany. 


 


Panos Kammenos: Greece and the Silk Road Economic Belt

Panos Kammenos

Chairman of the Independent Greeks, Member of the Hellenich Parliament, Athens, Greece

Audio (French)


It is a great pleasure for me to be with you today, and I thank the organizers warmly for their invitation.

The subject of my speech is Greece and its role in the new Silk Road.

As you all know, what became manifest over the last five years, is what was being prepared since the 1970s: the domination of financial capitalism over countries’ economies and in particular over their national policies.

The economic crisis of 2008 became a humanitarian crisis which mainly hit the economies of most UE countries and the United States. My country, Greece, was already in a vulnerable economic situation.

My country became a member of the European Union on Jan. 1st 1981. The creation of that Union was — and I insist on the past tense of the verb “to be “ — one of the greatest political and economic achievements of post-war Europe, because it focussed on the social state. The Second World War had had devastating effects on the populations of Europe, and reconstruction required creating a haven of peace under a capitalism that would favor the development of an egalitarian structure of society. That initial project should have reached a high point with the creation of a common currency, the euro, which was supposed to be the one factor that would advance the integration process in the EU.

However, the worldwide credit crisis of 2008 showed, most demonstrably, that the Eurozone had no line of defense and was not ready, politically, economically, and monetarily, to manage the crisis and the ensuing recession. The credit crisis turned into the debt crisis of the Eurozone. In other words, the Eurozone failed because the Treaty not only did not provide for, but in fact prohibited a member state from being rescued by its partners.

Of course, I am not the only one who has admitted that. The IMF itself stated in December 2013 that the Eurozone was in worse shape than in 2008, whereas the United States, where the crisis began, had overcome their problems in the meantime and begun an economic recovery.

The figures, Dear Friends, speak for themselves:

The unemployment rate in the Eurozone is over 12%, with the highest rates in Greece (27%), Spain, Portugal and Cyprus. More than half of the unemployed are under 25 years old. And most of them are long-term unemployed. In other words, we have an economy which is not producing extra jobs and which cannot, a fortiori, integrate the young people, with their skills and knowledge, into the structures of production.

The vision that European citizens had of a Union of citizens collapsed brutally in 2008. That is a sad observation, but is nonetheless frank. The European Union today is nothing but an autocracy which aims to sell off the economies of others member states to the banking system and to dismantle national sovereignty. In the European Union today, the bankers take political and economic decisions for the governments and the peoples.

Moreover, the unilateral management of the crisis in Europe by Germany “awakens the ghosts of history”, and its “hegemonic role threatens to lead to catastrophe.” Those are not my words, Dear Friends, but those of one of the greatest political thinkers, the German Jürgen Habermas, which he recently said in a speech at Université de Louvain in Belgium, while launching a call for greater “solidarity” and “more Europe”.

On this backdrop, the Independent Greeks support the following positions:

1. Respect for the sovereignty of Member States of the European Union. Instituting a European Union of equality, autonomy and solidarity, with full legal status of the institutions and activities of the national Member States;

2. Immediate abolition of the loan protocols and contracts;

3. Repositioning the European Parliament in the decision-making process,

4. Drawing up a European development project based on social justice;

5. Systematic fight against corruption;

6. Systematic fight against “tax havens”;

7. Definitive treatment of the debt crisis in the Eurozone, under a European agreement similar to that of London in 1953, which finally settled the German debt;

8.Immediate adoption and issuance of the Eurobond by the European Central Bank;

9. Immediate establishment of a European rating agency to assess the solvency of the Member States;

10. The introduction of the tax on financial transactions;

11.The separation of commercial banking from investment activities;

12 The systematic fight against unemployment, in particular among young people;

13 The restoration of the welfare state;

14. The fight against neo-nazis;

15. The repositioning of the problem of immigration by immediately changing the terms of the Dublin II Treaty.

My country represents a kernel of stability, energy security and peace in the greater region of Souther Europe and can be a bridge of communication and understanding between East and West.

Our membership in NATO and the EU does not prevent us from maintaining close political, economic and cultural relations with other countries, especially those with which we have historical ties such as Russia and China. We should develop those relations in the overall strategic interests of West and East.

The question which arises is the following: is it possible that the maritime and land silk roads will contribute to the economic recovery of the European continent, and of South-East Europe and North Africa?

Ancient Greece played an historical role in the economic, cultural and political development of the then known world. It was the centre of world trade routes and of economic development from the Balkan peninsula to the Baltic Sea in the North, to Russia and the Indian sub-continent to the East, and the Mediterranean countries and the African continent to the South.

Today, we are witnessing the resurrection of the Silk Road, both on land and on sea. Implementation of this majestic plan presents Greece with the opportunity to once again assume its historical role in the region and to consolidate quasi-permanently, its geopolitical position as a pillar of economic development in respect to the above-mentioned regions.

The development of these new trade routes would spur a boom of different means of transport, because of the increased amount of goods to transport. That means the almost certain development of Greek infrastructure, for railways, roads and ports.

The future of Greece would be better if a strategic orientation were taken to establish links with some of the most dynamic economies of the world, and to find thereby new sources of economic support. One of these countries, besides Russia, is China.

Those who know China and its needs know that Greece plays a preponderant role in the region for this gigantic country. Not only for historical and cultural reasons, but also economically, because Greece is the most economical conduit for Chinese exports shipped to the rest of Europe, the Arab peninsula and North Africa.

Dear Friends,

At this point, I would like to inform you that China is already in Greece.

When I was state secretary for the Merchant Marines, I signed, in November 2008, an agreement between the Piraeus Port Authority and the Chinese COSCO Group, for a 30 year concession of part of the container station in the port of Piraeus.

This port has become a link for East-West trade and allowed Greece to consolidate its role as an economic center of south-east Europe, and in particular of the Mediterranean, during a particularly precarious period for Middle Eastern and North African countries. Moreover, the port is taking on a strategic role in cargo transport from China to Europe and vice-versa.

A few months ago, in July 2014, a new agreement was signed with the COSCO group, which will invest 230 million euros in the port. With that investment, the port of Piraeus will effectively become the largest in the Mediterranean and will be able to increase its capacities from 3.7 million containers to 6,2 million per year.

Meanwhile, a recent study shows that the turnover of companies headquartered in Piraeus will reach 1.5 billion euros per year, while the guaranteed income of the port is 3.4 billion euros. Finally, 800 jobs will be created thanks to that investment.

In that perspective, linking the port with the railway infrastructure, which was done last year, ensures that goods arriving in Piraeus will be routed quickly to the markets of Central Europe. Similarly, goods from factories in Europe can go faster and at lower cost to all other destinations worldwide.

I would, at this point, add that China’s commercial interest focuses on the expansion plans of Cosco for the port of Piraeus and the development of the rail network. However, that does not exclude the possibility of future investment in similar infrastructure elsewhere in Greece (eg. Patras).

Piraeus was thus established as a gateway for East/West trade and its role as economic center of the Mediterranean and South East Europe has been strengthened by it.

But Greece is more than Piraeus. There are other Greek ports that can benefit from the Silk Road. A prime example is the port of Igoumenitsa, on the Adriatic, one of the most important ports in the region with a passenger transit of about 200,000, and 120,000 trucks per year. Thanks to its easy access to the Egnatia Odos highway linking Greece to the Balkans, the port of Igoumenitsa gives Chinese goods access to these countries.

Moreover, should the Chinese study to link the Danube port of Thessaloniki via Belgrade materialize, then we will have direct access from Thessaloniki to the heart of Europe, and then by taking the Rhine, to the ports of Antwerp, Rotterdam and Hamburg.

Another strategic positioning could be the link of the Euxine Sea (Black Sea) across the Caspian Sea, and then to Central Asia and Siberia on the one side, and to Iraq, Iran and the Indian subcontinent on the other.

Finally, in the near future, when the Strait of Suez is enlarged and together with the Chinese plan for the Danube, Greece will be the transit hub for Chinese products, while reducing costs and travel time .

Dear Friends,

The party that I have the honor to lead, the Independent Greeks, has already developed a national reconstruction and development plan which calls, among other things, for:

– Upgrading the Greek Railway Authority so that all of Greece is covered by modern infrastructure to allow cheaper, faster and above all safer transport. The Patras-Athens–Thessaloniki-Promachonas is outdated and needs to be urgently modernized.

  • Immediate aid for commercial trade by opening up new markets and a attracting of investor interest through realistic and achievable economic incentives.

  • The establishment of a stable and investment-friendly environment, thanks to a stable fiscal framework (with a constitutional term of ten years), the fight against bureaucracy and corruption, the reduction of tax ratios and the reduction of the time needed to implement investments.

  • The creation of a free zone for the merchant marine, safeguarded in the constitution, and the establishment in that free zone of a Merchant Marine center.

  • Concession of inactive industrial areas to investors outside the EU, based on low tax ratios, provided the investors propose a 20-year plan for employment of the unemployed.

I would also like to draw attention to the fact that, besides the economic and trade relations that will develop around the Silk Road, cultural and political relations will also be enhanced. We will finally be able to speak of a new world based on mutual respect, dating back to ancient times and which is being revived in this first half of the 21st century.

“Silk Diplomacy” is only a question of time and all the things I just mentioned will just be the symbol of this expanded cooperation, which will contribute its share toward global stability and the promotion of peace.

Thank you for your attention.


Professor Enzo Siviero: Mediterranean Bridging

Professor Enzo Siviero

member of the Italian National Council of Universities, Venice, Italy – Mediterranean Bridging


 

 


Page 12 of 33First...111213...Last