May 20, 2025 (EIRNS)—In the realm of statecraft, world crises are not the starting point from which to determine the durable survival of the human race. It is the future of the human race that must determine the present. Statesmen must have a view of the Earth’s next 50 years, the next 100 years. It is the method by which the future is to be made which determines the concept of any durable policy.
The document, Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture, written by Helga Zepp-LaRouche nearly three years ago, informs the proceedings of the May 24-25 international Schiller Institute Conference, “A Beautiful Vision for Humanity in Times of Great Turbulence!” A second conference is scheduled for July for Berlin, Germany. The contribution made by these conferences will be to inject the idea, using the Ten Principles, that the future determines the present, into world deliberative processes erroneously presumed to be solely the province of governments.
In the exchanges, reported and unreported, now ongoing between the administrations of Russian President Vladimir Putin, American President Donald Trump, and implicitly, China’s President Xi Jinping, and more importantly among those leaders personally, the shaping of durable survival, not merely for the months ahead, but of the next century and more, is the actual topic.
President Putin, in personally conveying to the international press his assessment of the two-hour discussion with Donald Trump, emphasized several times how useful he had found it to be. President Trump had earlier conveyed a similar evaluation. The most important role the United States may very well be playing at the moment is preventing the interference of British and continental European forces in the negotiations. The City of London clearly desires perpetual war. It becomes clearer and clearer that the United States does not, Russia does not, China does not, and Ukraine, despite what Zelenskyy says, does not. Yet Europe, from the EU and various of its member countries, clearly opposed to the United States, calls for a war which they themselves cannot sustain. Why?
The recent statements made by U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and supported by President Trump, regarding the former FBI Director James Comey’s Mafia-like threat on the life of the President of the United States—she directly insisted for him to be arrested—should be viewed, not from inside America, but from the complex domain of the tripartite discussions involving Russia, China and the United States. Consider, from that complex domain, and not from “inside Mexico,” yesterday’s assassination of the chief secretary and an advisor to the mayor of Mexico City, at the exact moment Mexican President Sheinbaum was giving a morning press conference. In the Putin-Trump discussion, Russia discussed the 500 drones and other potentially lethal actions taken against world leaders and others attending the May 9 Victory Day celebration in Moscow. Of course, there were two well-known assassination attempts against President Trump last year. Is there an “international assassination bureau” that is, in fact, not controlled by the United States, but rather by forces that, while nominally operating through institutions largely staffed, financed, and even deployed from the United States, is actively in opposition, not only to the interests of the United States and its people, but to the very human race itself?
Consider the now-undeniable case of the ongoing mass murder in Gaza. Why does it keep going on, if so many nations and people say they oppose it? 500 to 1,000 trucks a day, carrying food, water and medical supplies, are needed, lest we may see, according to one report, over 14,000 children die in the next 48 hours. (If it were 96 hours, or 168 hours, would it be any less evil?)
The “Open Letter to Pope Leo XIV,” initiated May 17 by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Liliana Gorini, Chairwoman of Movimento Solidarietà (Movisol) based in Italy, and Ray McGovern of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), says "given the horrendous, satanic genocide going on in Gaza, and the unforgivable silence and inaction on the side of the governments in face of it, we also appeal to you to speak out on this ongoing genocide. We need a moral authority to condemn this genocide, without that, we will lose any moral compass whatsoever.
“We also fully support your rejection of the ‘Manichaean notions’ that divide people into ‘good and evil,’ because such notions deny people the chance to overcome evil through development….” This is of the utmost importance. We have seen greater and greater opposition to the mass murder from within Israel, including from former Israeli military officers. This must be supported, but in a very precise way. As Lyndon LaRouche said of Israel in 1981: "Israel has existed predominantly by functioning as a virtual ‘multiple agent’ of the principal factions of the great powers in that region, playing off the follies of one or another patron … against those of others.
“There can be no effective, proper foreign policy toward the Middle East unless this pattern of behavior by the great and lesser powers toward the Middle East is changed. Essentially, the principal powers must give credible forms of support to those political initiatives from within Israel’s leading political circles which strengthen them, by reinforcing the impulses within Israel, toward the objectives we have broadly identified above. When a Begin (read:”Netanyahu“) attempts to follow courses of action to destabilize the Middle East situation, credible and efficient deterrents must be quickly applied to the included effect of discrediting that impulse within Israel.”
LaRouche also proposed, in his 1978 document, “A Machiavellian Solution for the State of Israel”: “Contemplating the horror of Lebanon (read: Gaza), one must think like a true shepherd, and rise above the barbaric codes of retributive justice, codes which proposed to cure evil by extending its application. The test of the qualities of a shepherd is the power to look directly at the full measure of evil the Israelis have perpetrated in Lebanon, the Israelis’ willingness to plunge the world into Armageddon rather than be ‘forced’ to regard an Arab as a human being, and once seeing this in all its undiminished horror, nonetheless nod and say that the solution we propose for Israel is all the more imperative.” That solution, the LaRouche Oasis Plan, will be presented in Panel Three on Saturday evening of this weekend’s “Beautiful Vision” conference.
