April 18—Unless the fundamental contradiction manifesting itself in such conflicts as that between NATO and Russia or the killing in Gaza is addressed, a lasting peace is impossible. A small piece of “good news” may appear from day to day, and can represent a fulcrum for shifting the broader path of history, but the situation is fundamentally one of gathering danger.
While the Security Council vote on Palestinian membership in the United Nations unsurprisingly failed (due to a U.S. veto), the fact that twelve nations voted in favor of the resolution despite intense U.S. lobbying is reflective of the potential for a fundamental change in the world. Russia heralded the twelve supporting votes (the U.K. and Switzerland abstained) as representing a historic level of world support for the Palestinian people, but warned that the U.S. veto increased the risk of war. Brazil raised the issue of economic development as a necessary pillar of a lasting peace. Meanwhile, Israel shamelessly denigrated the Security Council as a “terrorist council” and thanked U.S. President Joe Biden for recognizing “truth.”
Israel continues to plan its response to Iran’s response to Israel’s bombing of Iran’s diplomatic facility in Damascus. Iran has warned that if Israel strikes at Iran nuclear facilities, Israel’s own nuclear facilities will then be directly targeted. Israel’s preferred course, escalation to avoid politically and emotionally confronting its dismal military and moral failure in its six months (and counting) war, brings the world to the brink, raising the specter of a broader regional conflict that could even see the deployment of Israel’s undeclared, but very real nuclear weapons.
You may hope it won’t come to that. But can Netanyahu be relied upon to respond sanely? Can Joe Biden (or whoever is running U.S. policy)?
A necessary step in reaching political maturity comes from realizing that, in the highest levels of leadership of the extended trans-Atlantic world, there simply are no adults in the room.
The fact that we are drowning in a morass of such “misleaders” as Joe Biden, Mike Johnson, Ursula von der Leyen, Olaf Scholz, and David Cameron comes from the failure of the citizens themselves to take responsibility for working out—and realizing—a vision of the next fifty years of life on this planet and beyond. How much mental energy has been wasted on petty and irrelevant side issues, while the economies of NATO-land have become more financialized, more green, and less productive? How have second-tier social issues been used to divide people and occupy our thoughts while the promise of the fall of the Soviet Union was lost in the efforts to maintain Anglo-American hegemony, even at the cost of nuclear war?
Against this trend toward small-minded thinking, the LaRouche movement has maintained a focus on the most necessary concepts, whether or not they were even recognized as issues of the day. Today, the World Land-Bridge concept promoted by the Schiller Institute is already becoming a reality. Today, the Oasis Plan outlook promoted by Lyndon LaRouche half a century ago shows the path forward for the Middle East. Today, the LaRouche movement’s emphasis on the modern Anglo-American financial empire as the driver of conflict, including setting the stage for interminable fighting in the Middle East, must find greater understanding in the world community. The collapsing trans-Atlantic financial system is the leading driver of conflict. Will it be reorganized, and on what basis?
Today, LaRouche candidates Diane Sare and Jose Vega are working with teams of volunteers to gather signatures to place themselves, and these ideas, on the ballot.
Will you take responsibility for the future? Will you be the adult in the room?
