On Pakistan’s “PTV World” broadcast, Faisal Rehman hosted Helga Zepp-LaRouche of the Schiller Institute and Pakistan’s Ambassador to Italy Jauhar Saleem. Rehman began by welcoming “Our guest, Ms. Helga!” with an opening question as whether the world had entered into a clash of civilizations. Zepp-LaRouche answered that she had read Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations, and, first, it must be said that he knew very little about the civilizations that he wrote about.Further, the world is not about “geopolitics but geo-economics”—employing the distinction recently made by Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan. AUKUS is not the spirit of the time. The AUKUS attempt may even provoke something like de Gaulle’s response to NATO, as in 1958. This move has destroyed trust in Biden. He had just said, in pulling troops out of Afghanistan, that this was the end of an era; the end of endless wars. Was he serious? Or was it just to concentrate forces against China? This is not good for Biden, as trust in his word is undermined. Rather, the New Silk Road is the pathway—and the Schiller Institute, by the way, has been on this pathway since 1991. So, does Australia want to be an aircraft carrier for this new military alliance? Or does it want an economic future for its own people? The situation is that there is a decaying neo-liberal system, and it has been refusing to respond to offers from China and Russia. After a question and some discussion with Ambassador Saleem, Rehman turned back to Zepp-LaRouche, and asked: How would the U.S. and China, given the present conflicting positions, move ahead? Zepp-LaRouche set out that, objectively, neither China nor Russia represents a threat. There have been many offers on demilitarization from Putin—including to Germany in 2001, when he spoke, in German, to the Bundestag. And China has lifted 850 million of their people out of poverty. The BRI is not a threat. They are offering to developing countries to conquer poverty. We need to take a step back. It is a nuclear-armed world, and there is the threat of war by accident, war by miscalculation. China’s Global Times clearly warned that China will fight and win certain conflicts, such as over Taiwan. Therefore, we must stop geopolitics. In Afghanistan, David Beasley, director of the World Food Program, made clear that 90% are hungry. Afghanistan’s Health Minister Wahid Majrooh explained that 90% have recently been denied health care. The recent move to use the Extended Troika (of China, Pakistan, Russia and the United States) involves reaching out and collaborating to develop Afghanistan. It can be integrated into the BRI—and there is the offer to Europe and the U.S. to join in. Then director of the UN Office of Drugs and Crime Pino Arlacchi, for example, was able to conclude an agreement in 2000 with the Taliban to end opium production. There are presently 2 billion people in the world without access to clean water. We need a modern health sector in every country. Not doing so simply means that there will be more mutations, new variants and the defeat of the last round of vaccines. Clearly, this crisis requires a new paradigm in our thinking. Afghanistan can be the new building block. The human species is the only one endowed with creative reason. We can find cures for a pandemic, for overcoming poverty, even colonizing Mars. You know, in February, the United Arab Emirates, China and the United States all had Mars missions at the same time. It is time to become an adult species.
March 20—Schiller Institute Founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche delivered a speech “The Eurasian Land-Bridge Concept, the Answer to the Strategic Crisis” on March 22, 2003, just as the murderous U.S. invasion of Iraq had begun. In it, she identified the growing collaboration between Russia, China, India, and other countries as a hopeful force for the future. Her keynote address opened the second day of the Schiller Institute’s March 21-23, 2003 conference in Bad Schwalbach, Germany, titled “How To Reconstruct a Bankrupt World.”
Helga Zepp-LaRouche spoke with a group of supporters and members of the Schiller Institute on Monday: Let me greet all of you. Actually, I’m a little bit distraught, because if you look at the world situation, it’s really going from bad to worse. We have a very worrisome escalation between Ukraine and Russia, which is really not just Ukraine, it’s actually really NATO, and this is a whole conflict which, if things go wrong, could really lead to war. And that is not an exaggeration. I don’t want to focus on that; I just want to identify it as one of the many problems of the world. Then, also the situation between the United States and China over Taiwan, in particular, is also heating up tremendously. But I want to focus on something else:As you know, the pandemic is not under control at all. If you start with Germany, for example, this country is in a complete turmoil, pandemonium, because obviously for more than a year, the EU and the German government made many mistakes. I think if you look at Vietnam, which is a country which has a larger population than Germany, about 98 million, they had something like between 30 and 50 deaths altogether. In Germany now, they’re talking about a possibly lockdown until the end of the year, because it’s long gone that you could do what Vietnam did in the beginning, containing it with quarantine, contact tracing; now you have a complete, out-of-control situation, and the infection rate is going up despite a lockdown. The same in France and many other European countries. Brazil: The variants in Brazil are a reason for worry for the whole world. Naturally the South African and British variants are also a big factor in the increase in the infection rate. But Brazil is for sure the most dangerous situation, because what most doctors are now concerned about is that if this is not getting under control soon, which means you have a vaccination and health measures, and modern medical treatment in every country, you could have new variants which make already-injected vaccinations not effective, obsolete. In any case, this can take a dynamic which some people have not even thought about, and the big accusation now is that the rich countries are hoarding vaccines, that they have 60% of the vaccines, while the African population has less than 1% of the people are vaccinated so far. Then you have the famine: The famine which is absolutely reaching a point where I could—and I will show you some short video, shortly—but before I do that, the thing that makes me so upset, and I’m not a political lightweight, or lily, or I don’t collapse quickly. But what gets to me is that, there is an unbelievable genocide going on against so many countries: You have a collapse in Yemen—20 million people in Yemen are in danger of dying; 90% of the population in Syria, according to the Catholic Nuncio Cardinal Mario Zenari, are living below the poverty level, have not enough medicine, have not enough to eat—and nothing is happening! You know, at the so-called Syrian donors’ conference which just took place on March 30, they collected a few billions, but it only goes to the countries around Syria which have taken some of the refugees, it goes to the NGOs, it goes to the opposition of the Syrian government, but it is not going into the reconstruction of Syria, which would be the only way to stop it. Now, this Catholic Cardinal has made a very, very urgent appeal, which has gotten very little resonance, but he said that unless there is a radical shift, there is the danger of mass death in the Syrian nation. And that is why I want to focus on that alone, because I think the Schiller Institute is one of the few organizations—I mean, there are other organizations that are doing incredible work, like Caritas Internationalis, and many others—but we need a change! We need a change in politics. For example, in the United States, there is the so-called Caesar’s Act, which had been voted up in Congress and signed by Trump in 2020, which basically says any country which does not respect to the sanctions on Syria and the Syrian government will be sanctioned themselves, and that is the biggest mechanism why actually there is nothing happening right now. As you know, we have initiated last year, the Committee for the Coincidence of Opposites, which was the idea that you need to create an organization which starts to do things to change that, you know, it’s supposed to help to bring medical supplies to the developing countries, food aid; naturally, it is clear that a little, private organization, and it is still little—hopefully it will grow—can only do a symbolic act. We can only make clear what should be done, what should be taken up by the governments, and we hope to be a catalyst to do so. But I think that we need to broaden this. So far, we are only doing things for the education of young people in the United States. This is on a good way. We are also planning to get a project for Mozambique, now that’s on a good way, too. But I think the situation is reaching a point where we absolutely have to shake up the world, much, much more, and I’m asking all of you who are participating in this discussion that you become active with us. Because I think what is happening right now is by far not enough, and I think my late husband, many years ago—I think it was in 1988 on the occasion of a meeting of the Club of Life in Munich, he warned, and this was at that time in the context of the AIDS virus, he warned that the world could collapse. And I think that if we do not change our ways, the moral indifference of mankind not being able to react to something which is happening in front of our eyes, you know, that lack of moral fiber in us, may be the reason why we cannot stop the things which bring about the destruction of civilization of a whole. So my words now are really a cry out: Are there not more people who understand that we have to absolutely, dramatically change the way how things go, that we have to change geopolitics, that only if the major countries work together and not fight each other in proxy wars, in places like Southwest Asia, because innocent people are paying a price! So, I would like to show you the little video clip, which is excerpted from a longer video, which was produced by David Beasley, the director of the World Food Program. It’s a 40-minute documentary, and I just want to show you 2 minutes of it, and I want to encourage you that tonight or later, you watch the whole documentary. It is very difficult to watch because it gets to you very much. But I think people have to confront the reality that that is what is happening. So if you could please show this clip: (A video excerpt from The Hunger Ward shows an obviously malnourished 10 year old girl receiving treatment in an Aden pediatric malnutrition ward.) Now, I don’t think any child should have such thin arms, and Dr. Beasley described that these children, or some of these children were dying in front of his eyes and he couldn’t do anything about it, because there were no materials to stop it. So I think we should really try to wake up the world and get a change in the policy, and I think we should not only put the Africa nations on our agenda, but I think—you know, people have forgotten about Syria and Yemen, and I think we have to change that. So I want to leave it at that and hear if you have anything you want to say.
The following is a translation from Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s lead article in the German weekly Neue Solidarität, #6, for Feb. 11, 2021: Relations with America will not be easy for yet some time to come. Given the various strategy papers against Russia and China as well as statements by leading military officers, President Biden’s announcement in his first foreign policy speech—“America is back”—sounds like an undisguised threat. Under his leadership, he said, the days of the United States “rolling over” when faced with Russia’s aggressive actions are over, and China’s aggressive, coercive actions will be countered. The title of his speech was “America’s Place in the World,” and according to Biden, that place is everywhere in the world. Governments as well as responsible citizens throughout the world need to begin reflecting without delay on how they will respond to the statements of political intent heard in the context of Biden’s taking office.The most shocking statements came from Adm. Charles Richard, the commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, who wrote in the February issue of the U.S. Naval Institute’s Proceedings: “There is a real possibility that a regional crisis with Russia or China could escalate quickly to a conflict involving nuclear weapons, if they perceived a conventional loss would threaten the regime or state. Consequently, the U.S. military must shift its principal assumption from ‘nuclear employment is not possible’ to ‘nuclear employment is a very real possibility’….” It should be clear that Admiral Richard is talking here about World War III, which would likely mean the annihilation of mankind. Indeed, as MIT nuclear arms expert Theodore Postol, among others, has repeatedly and convincingly argued, the crucial difference between conventional and nuclear weapons is that a nuclear war does not remain limited. But NATO’s utopian faction believes, on the contrary, that a limited nuclear war could be “won.” And what “regional conflicts” might be considered? A conflict on the Russian border because of the Aegis-based missile defense systems in Poland and Romania? Or over Eastern Ukraine, with Europe becoming the theater of war? A conflict between Israel and Iran, or an escalation of tensions around Taiwan? Admiral Richard’s outrageous remarks must be considered against the backdrop of several different strategic papers and doctrines, the most perfidious one being a document released by the Atlantic Council on Jan. 28. The document is signed “Anonymous,” who is “a former senior government official with deep expertise and experience dealing with China,” according to the description given in the Foreword by Frederick Kempe, the head of the Atlantic Council. The 85-page paper, described as one of the most important the Council has ever published, is titled “The Longer Telegram: Toward a New American China Strategy,” in explicit reference to the 1946 “Long Telegram” document, also published anonymously at the time by George Kennan, in which he called for a containment policy against the Soviet Union. This new anonymous author openly calls for a coup against President Xi Jinping and his “inner circle” in order to replace him with opposition leaders from within the Chinese Communist Party. Since overthrowing the entire Communist Party with its 91 million members has little chance of succeeding, he says, U.S. strategy must remain “laser focused” on Xi Jinping and aim to split the CCP leadership, where senior party members disagree with Xi’s policy direction and his endless demands for absolute loyalty. One should help those circles in the CCP leadership come to power who, unlike Xi Jinping, do not want to implement their own Chinese model of an international order but will submit to the U.S.-dominated world order. Xi, according to “Anonymous,” intends to project China’s authoritarian system throughout the world, and no longer poses a problem just for the U.S.-led liberal international order and U.S. primacy, but a serious problem for the entire democratic world. Now, let’s just try a mental exercise. How would the German government react if a leading Russian think tank were to publish a study calling for the overthrow of Chancellor Merkel and her inner circle with laser-like precision, in order to help take power a faction in the CDU that would be subordinate to Moscow’s interests, while at the same time the commander of strategic weapons were talking about how a nuclear war is likely? There would be an unprecedented uproar in all of Germany! It should surprise no one that the editor-in-chief of China’s Global Times, Hu Xijin, responded to Admiral Richards’ article with a call for China to build a nuclear arsenal of 1,000 nuclear weapons in order to make China’s second-strike capability credible. Both in the Atlantic Council document and in the official paper of the U.S. State Department’s Office of Policy Planning, titled “The Elements of the Chinese Challenge,” it is clear that it is the success of the Chinese economic model and the speed of its technological innovation that are considered as the threat for American domination of the world. Not only was it a miscalculation to assume that China’s integration into the world market by joining the WTO would automatically lead to its adopting the Western neo-liberal model of democracy, the State Department paper says, but China also built its own“Marxist-Leninist model” into an authoritarian state, dominated by “the party’s extreme interpretation of Chinese nationalism.” In addition, it goes on, China is determined to bring about a “national rejuvenation” culminating in the transformation of the international order. We cannot comment here, of course, on all the extremely hostile accusations contained in the two papers, that of the State Department also being 72 pages long. In summary, it can be said that virtually all the charges alleged against China’s policy are a projection of their own policies and intentions. No attempt is made to understand China from the standpoint of its 5,000-year history and culture, nor is there any acknowledgment of what an enormous civilizational achievement it was for China to lift 850 million people out of extreme poverty in recent decades. From this perspective, of course, the Silk Road Initiative is not regarded as an economic policy that allows developing countries to overcome their underdevelopment for the first time ever, but as the proof of China’s hegemonic intentions. Given the National Security Agency’s total surveillance of not only its own population, but that of the entire world since September 11, 2001, and the censorship of even the sitting President of the United States (Donald Trump) by the TV networks and the IT giants of Silicon Valley, it takes a very special kind of optics to accuse China of spying on and monitoring its citizens. The reality is that digitization in China has allowed for highly efficient contact tracing in the coronavirus pandemic, and that the social credit system has overwhelming popular support because the rewarding of positive behavior for society also benefits each individual. What both papers have in common is that their authors reinterpret absolutely everything about Chinese culture, which for thousands of years has placed the interest of the common good above that of the individual, and which flows from a deep-seated need for the harmonious development of all, and they turn it into an enemy image of the West’s order. It is not the Chinese Communist Party that is seeking world supremacy, but rather the neo-liberal establishment of the unipolar world order that fears it will lose its supremacy and has moved miles away from the universal principles on which America was founded and which it claims to represent. And what the Biden Administration thinks of respect for the sovereignty of other countries is obvious in its opposition to the Nord Stream 2 gas project. Incidentally, the hoopla surrounding Vladimir Putin’s alleged poisoning of Alexey Navalny, who is supported by Western intelligence agencies, serves the same purpose of setting into motion a color revolution, and thereby creating an opposition within Putin’s inner circle that could be used to remove him from office. All responsible and thinking people are called upon to contribute through their mobilization to preventing the governments of Europe from being drawn further into the announced campaign against China and Russia. Chancellor Merkel, in her speech to the online event of the World Economic Forum, correctly emphasized her rejection of any bloc formation between the U.S. and China, in which Europe would then have to choose sides, and stated that the hour of multilateralism had come. In light of Admiral Richard’s dangerous statements, European countries must not only explicitly distance themselves from such a policy, they must also withdraw from NATO and seek a security architecture that reflects the interests of their populations. What is at stake, is Europe’s survival.
Berlin, Febr. 8, 2023 — An article just published by the well-known U.S. investigative journalist Seymour Hersh describes (Read Here) with meticulous accuracy how U.S. President Joe Biden had the gas pipelines Nord Stream 1 and 2 blown up in the Baltic Sea.
The New Year 2023, must become the year where humanity reaches the age of adulthood. That means, we must leave behind us childish, geopolitical squabblings, where nations fight each other as if we were spoiled brats, fighting each other aiming war toys against each other in a sandbox. That sandbox can turn thermonuclear radioactive in a moment.
March 15—The introductory remarks made today by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder of the Schiller Institute and the initiator of the International Peace Coalition, to the 41st session of the IPC, provide an excellent strategic overview
The world is barreling towards a nuclear showdown between the US-NATO and Russia, with far too few voices in the West raised in protest and demanding alternatives, Helga Zepp-LaRouche warned in a policy discussion with LaRouche movement organizers on Monday afternoon. “This current crisis around Ukraine is far, far more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. It poses an existential threat to all of civilization.”
Jan. 17, 2025 (EIRNS)—In remarks addressed to the 85th weekly meeting of the International Peace Coalition, which she initiated, Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche provided a strategic evaluation of the fast-moving developments in the Israel-Hamas negotiations process.
Jan. 13—Indeed, this past week was really an absolutely dramatic week with at least two events which I would call historic game-changers insofar as the fact that they occurred in the way they did means that there is a complete new chapter in world history.
No one will be able to claim, as historians said of World War I, that we sleepwalked into World War III. The war cries today are so deafening that they threaten to awaken from the dead all of the victims of previous wars, including the First and Second World Wars.
Nov. 11—The following article by Helga Zepp-LaRouche was published in the book released at the Bandung Spirit conference titled “Bandung-Belgrade-Havana in Global History and Perspective: What Dreams, What Challenges, What Projects for a Global Future?” taking place Nov. 7-14 in Indonesia.
In her weekly dialogue, Helga Zepp-LaRouche blasted the U.K.-U.S. deal to incorporate Australia into a new strategic alliance, based on the sale of nuclear submarines to Australia. She said they claim that this "partnership" is not aimed at any country, but the Chinese know differently, and responded sharply -- as did the French, as the new deal scuttled an agreement they had to sell submarines to Australia.She provided an update on the humanitarian catastrophe developing in Afghanistan, contrasting the U.S.-NATO approach, of walking away from a catastrophe caused by their war, to that of Afghanistan's neighbors, which are mobilizing development aid. The problem in the West, she reiterated, is the kind of British geopolitics which underlie this new deal, which she described as a "No Good Deal." What is needed instead is a fundamental change in western attitudes and thinking.
In her weekly dialogue, Helga Zepp-LaRouche developed how open dialogue, rather than profiled reaction, is key to taking on the crises confronting humanity. The three major themes she addressed are: growing opposition to the Great Reset/Green New Deal; how the mistakes made in western countries in dealing with the pandemic — including denial — have led to a deepening crisis, as the "third wave" is now hitting western Europe; and how the anti-China propaganda of the unilateralist War Hawks is putting the west into a dangerous flight forward, based on false propaganda coming from the Military Industrial Complex. She urged viewers to participate in the upcoming two-day online Schiller Institute conference, which will open with a panel on reversing the decline of classical culture in the West, which has contributed to the gullibility of many to the lies coming from the war hawks and neolibs.
May 8—There are unusual periods in human history when the entire scope of life-and-death decisions facing Mankind—short-term decisions which will take us either forward towards a new renaissance, or otherwise hurl us into the bowels of hell—are as if telescoped down into a single day. That was the case of Monday, May 6, 2024.
In her weekly dialogue, Helga Zepp-LaRouche details the array of fake stories and fabricated narratives unleashed by imperial geopolitical war hawks in preparation for upcoming summits of the G7, NATO and between Presidents Putin and Biden. Among those she dissected are the Wuhan lab leak story, published May 23 in the Wall Street Journal by Michael Gordon, who wrote the original lies about Iraq's WMDs for the NY Times in 2002, and Chatham House/Brit intelligence re-writing of the history of the post-Cold War relations with Russia. She also spoke of the revival of the accurate charges against the NSA and Danish intelligence for spying on European leaders, first exposed in 2013, but never stopped; and of the scandal around the Green New Deal, with Mark Carney pushing a brutal form of new colonialism, to prevent development of Third World economies, allegedly to halt global warming! The final outrage she discussed is that of German Green leader Habeck, calling for the delivery by Germany of weapons to Ukraine. The antidote to this escalating insanity is for viewers of her weekly dialogue to study these issues, and join with the Schiller Institute to build a global anti-Malthusian movement. This is the task over the next weeks, leading to the June 26–27 Schiller Institute conference, where these outrages will be fully exposed, and the policy alternatives to them presented. Transcript The LaRouche Organization Weekly Webcast with Helga Zepp-LaRouche Wednesday, June 2, 2021 HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger and welcome to our weekly dialogue with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and President of the Schiller Institute. Today is Wednesday June 2, 2021. We’re in the midst of a very dense period of political, social and economic developments. Why don’t we start with the story that’s been hyped a lot in the Western media, the so-called Wuhan lab leak story which is coming from, not surprisingly, the same sources that were responsible for so many other false stories and fabrications. Helga, what do you make of this story? HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: It is very important to keep a historic memory. A lot of our supporters and contacts have said in the recent period that the whole strategic picture is so confusing, and it’s very difficult to differentiate what is true, what is wrong, and they’re mainly at a loss. And that has a reason: The reason is, that there is such an enormous amount of psychological warfare coming from the war party, that a normal person, a normal citizen who is not really trying to find the truth almost is lost, and that has a method. Now, the story you just referred to is the story that the COVID-19 originated in a virological lab in Wuhan and that was maybe not intentional, but in any case, the Chinese covered it up and therefore are responsible for the COVID crisis and economic damage which resulted out of it. So this is an unbelievable story: It appeared on May 23 in the Wall Street Journal and it was written by one Michael Gordon, who reiterated that story; then two days later it was picked up by the U.S. Secretary for Health Becerra, and then one day later, President Biden said that he ordered a 90-day investigation by the U.S. Intelligence Community, that they should investigate this and find out if this was coming from this Wuhan lab. Now, first of all this story was not mentioned for the first time by the Wall Street Journal but already last June, the former head of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove had come out with the same accusation, saying that if it turns out that China is responsible for this virus, they have to pay reparations. And now the story is all over, every tabloid, every newspaper is peddling this story, and therefore, it is extremely important to look at who are these journalists who wrote this story. Well, it is exactly the same people—Michael Gordon and Judith Miller—who in [September 8] 2002, in the Wall Street Journal wrote the story about the so-called “weapons of mass destruction” of Saddam Hussein, the so-called aluminum pipes which Saddam Hussein supposedly imported to build centrifuges to build a nuclear bomb. Well, if people remember that led to the Iraq War: As a result hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed and several thousand U.S. soldiers were killed—and it turned out there were no weapons of mass destruction, that the whole thing was a hoax. Now, the question arises, should not irresponsible journalists, who are obviously not journalists at all, but who are writers or instruments of that faction of the geopolitical war party, who want to have a confrontation with China, with Russia, if they would have the same, in quotes, “success” as they did with the weapons of mass destruction story in respect to Saddam Hussein, it could lead to a war between the United States and China; and there are many people who have warned in the recent period that if such a war would occur, the likelihood that it would go nuclear is very high. So the question to be asked, is, if these people, such individuals, can they get away with murder? Because the consequences of such scribblers, such liars, such manipulators is that the price is being paid by hundreds of thousands of people in the case of Iraq, and I really think there should be an investigation and possibly a criminal investigation of what is the real background behind these people writing such stories? We had recently another story, I think it was in Newsweek that there are 60,000 individuals belonging an army which has no oversight in the Congress nor anywhere else, and they’re concerned with cyberwar, many of them sitting at desks, manipulating the internet, planting false stories, doing all kinds of things, and that is obviously part of a hybrid war, but there is no declaration of war! So I really think that this is so scandalous that I would urge that there must be an immediate international investigation in the United Nations, in parliaments. In any case, this story must not go through, because if it would lead to a war between the United States and China, as the war against Iraq and the murder of Saddam Hussein occurred, the consequences could be the annihilation of civilization. And I think these people, like Michael Gordon and Judith Miller must be investigated for what they did in the case of Iraq, who told them, what were the circumstances, and, what makes Gordon try to repeat the same story now? I think this is a huge scandal! SCHLANGER: Just one correction on Gordon, the 2002 story was actually in the New York Times; he was at the Times for 30-something years before he shows up at the Wall Street Journal. The other interesting point you made is the role of Sir Richard Dearlove, who came forward with the so-called Wuhan leak story well over a year ago. He was one of the people, when he was Chief of MI6, who pushed the fake weapons of mass destruction story, so it’s absolutely the same people involved. Now, speaking of the same people, we have a recurring story which goes back to 2013, of NSA spying at the time it was reported that the NSA was wiretapping Angela Merkel’s cell phone. This just emerged again, but there are new twists to it, Helga, including the role of Denmark working with the U.S. National Security Agency. What’s the full story that you have on this? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: That is another scandal, because it reveals something about the political reality in which we live, the so-called “rules-based order.” Every time I heard that term, “rules-based order,” if it wouldn’t be so sad, you could start laughing. But you better think that one of the rules is, even if you’re caught, it doesn’t mean anything. Because this story about the NSA spying on European politicians came out for the first time in 2013; many people may remember that Chancellor Merkel said, “Oh, spying among friends, that doesn’t go at all!” Well, then, essentially nothing happened. The same scandal broke again in 2015 in Denmark, where it was revealed that the Danish secret service was collaborating with the NSA on such spy operations—nothing came out of it. And it broke out last year again—nothing happened! So apparently, there are one or more whistleblowers in the Danish secret service who got very upset for very similar reasons—I assume; I haven’t talked to them, but that’s what it looks like—like Edward Snowden, who basically these are people who are working as secret service agents and then they realize that the whole operation is being done for something quite different than the defense of the country. So that whistleblower, or these whistleblowers, again came out, but this time, he worked with a whole international network of journalists in Sweden, Norway, Germany, some other countries, and he provided them with the documents proving that such a collaboration exists. Now, this is incredible: The fact that the Danish secret service, and probably some top politicians, because these things very seldom happen without the prime minister or whoever knows about it, obviously, rather than telling the European allies—after all, these are people we are supposed to be with in a union, so rather than telling them, they didn’t! They did not inform Merkel, Steinmeier, Steinbrück at the time; so obviously, for them to be accepted in the “club” of the Five Eyes, or Seven Eyes or whatever Eyes you may count, was more important than to protect the interests of their own citizens, the Danish people, and naturally also the allies within the European Union. So rather be a slave of a master, than be thrown out of the club: That shows a completely despicable attitude. And the Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, I think he put it in the right terms because he said, this is an incredible scandal. It means there are no rules, no international law, no morality, and that is unfortunately what is being revealed by this affair. So again, I think there must be an outcry, because—the same day, and this is the other funny story—the same day this new Danish scandal broke, the German 1st Channel, ARD, had a big documentary about the Chinese surveillance state, the use of artificial intelligence and digitalization and payment in transport and all aspects of life, which is indeed true: China is much more advanced in these areas than what I have seen anywhere in the West. But the difference is, the Chinese population trusts their government; 95% are in agreement with what the government does, according to a study by Harvard; and that is why the whole thing looks very different. But with the NSA spying this has been revealed and we discussed it many times by such people as former NSA technical director Bill Binney and Ray McGovern, and other people from VIPS, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, who became whistleblowers for the very same reason as Edward Snowden. And what they reported is that what the NSA does is they collect simply everything—every phone call, every email, every electronic motion anywhere is being recorded and tapped and stored. They have gigantic storage capacities, I think it’s in Utah and elsewhere. And so they have all these data from all over the world, and whenever they want to find something later, they filter it, and they can find it for eternity. Now, that means there is absolutely no respect for privacy, no respect for all the treaties, supposedly protecting the population in terms of their personal information, that is all a complete lie. Again, when I hear “rules-based order,” then one better thinks about the NSA, because that’s part of the rules. The more you find out how this whole public debate is being orchestrated, it really is reaching a point where people should really wake up, because we’re looking at the danger of a global dictatorship. And then, if you take some of the Green stuff in addition to that, I mean, we are in looking towards a complete hell, if people don’t wake up and say “Enough is enough!” SCHLANGER: And one of the stories that’s also emerging that’s important in this, is the Chatham House now rewriting history. And Chatham House is also setting up a spy operation to monitor the carbon footprint of other countries, so once again, it comes back to the British. But this rewriting of history is really significant, especially given the importance of the upcoming NATO summit and the confrontation of the West and Russia that’s being promoted by this. What did the Chatham House report say? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: They want to dismantle the many myths about NATO and Russia, by saying there was never any discussion about not moving NATO the borders of Russia in the context of the German reunification. This was never an issue, because the Soviet Union still existed and therefore nobody thought about it, and that’s just a plain lie! Because if you go to the U.S. National Security Archives, they have published a lot of written documentation about this period, and there were clearly written and verbal promises made to Gorbachev by Secretary of State James Baker; then also U.S. Ambassador Jack Matlock, and also West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, I think Horst Teltschik, there are several witnesses from this time who have absolutely contradicted this story. And it’s one of these stories which have only one purpose: To knit a narrative suitable for a future confrontation. But this needs to be picked up and I call on historians and honest journalists, in case there are still some, to really pick up this story and set the record straight. SCHLANGER: We have coming up the NATO summit and the G7 summit, and there are meetings going on where they’re talking about the importance of being prepared to confront Russia and China. But Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov has had some very interesting and sharp comments on this. Could you comment on the two things coming together? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Foreign Minister Lavrov met with Portugal’s Foreign Minister Augusto Santos Silva—Portugal is the present President of the EU Council—and a delegation of the European Union, and he said the situation between the EU and Russia is absolutely alarming, there is a complete loss of trust. And he said it can be reversed, but it means that completely different principles have to be introduced. And the big test will be the upcoming two summits, the NATO summit, which is supposed to establish also for NATO a rules-based order, whatever that is supposed to mean; and at the upcoming G7 meeting, to which among others President Biden travel, that is supposed to present—let’s see what it will be exactly—an alternative to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. Now, there is no money yet available, and it’s also not clear where it supposed to come from, but it’s also not clear where this “alternative Belt and Road Initiative” is supposed to be built, because the Europeans want to have it in Africa, the United States wants to have it in Latin America, and Japan wants to have it in Asia. So what they will probably do is to issue some guidelines and both summits can be expected to have a lot of rhetoric against the dictatorships and authoritarian regimes of Russia and China, and some others. But I cannot see how, from these two bodies, anything can come which addresses the real problems which are many in the world. SCHLANGER: And one of those problems is the problem of hyperinflation, which we’ve been warning about for quite a while, related to the quantitative easing and the flood of liquidity, that’s not there for saving the real economy, but for bailing out the deeply indebted banks and corporations. The hyperinflation is also hitting in Europe, and I wonder if you have some thoughts on that? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes. As you say, we have been the only ones saying that this “QE” money-pumping, zero interest rates, negative interest rate, that you can do that for a very long time, but eventually it will explode into a hyperinflation: As it did in 1923, when the Germany’s Reichsbank printed money to pay both the war debt and the reparations to France, Britain and so forth. For a long time, you didn’t see anything, but then, starting in the summer of 1923, the inflation started to skyrocket, and then it went into a hyperbolic ratio, and by November, people were bringing money by the wheelbarrow to the baker because the price of bread changed by the day, and then it was ended. Now, this is not one country, like it was in Weimar Germany: This is now practically the whole world, and it’s very interesting that [China’s] Global Times had an editorial in which they warned that this excessive money creation by the Federal Reserve is now spilling over, threatening to affect the whole world with the hyperinflationary effects, and that countries should guard themselves against these effects. Now, the inflation issue and hyperinflationary issue is now out everywhere, even tabloids like Bildzeitung in Germany are warning that the savings of the pensioners will be eaten up by this inflation; the official inflation target by the ECB is 2%; in Germany, it’s already officially 2.4%, but that is obviously not the real story. Because if you go for example, in everything having to do with oil and oil-related production, then you get inflation rates of 40, or 50%. And for example, biofuels, like maize has over 100% inflation, and this is clear getting out of control. And then with that goes a crisis of a shortage in materials. So the entire construction sector in Germany, for example, and probably other European countries as well, has incredible shortages: There is a lack of wood, of other materials. Trucks cannot be repaired, because there are no spare parts. So I think it really shows that the economic situation is much more fragile, and there is normally a delay factor, between when commodity prices go up and then consumer prices. But we are now reaching the point where this is clearly becoming very visible. And it should be a reason for utmost concern. This is why, at the next Schiller Institute conference, which will be on June 26-27, and you should register and reserve the date, the issue of hyperinflation and the necessary instruments against it, namely to implement a global Glass-Steagall banking separation law, and the other three of Lyndon LaRouche’s Four Laws, that will be a major subject of that conference. And if you really are concerned how to save your money, you should listen to that conference, and not to the gold bugs, because they will try to make money out of this situation. But we will discuss at this conference the only realistic way how the livelihood and life’s work of literally billions of people can be protected. Because if there is a hyperinflation coming on internationally it will affect every economy, even those that have relative capital restrictions will be hit, because it will have a tremendous impact on the world market. So, attend this online conference, and definitely join our forces. SCHLANGER: And you can register for that at the https://schillerinstitute.nationbuilder.com/20210626-27-conference, and there’s an ad right there on Schiller Institute homepage so you can register. While we’re talking about this we have the other green scandal, which is the attempt to create a new financial bubble, a green financial bubble and at the center of that is the former governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney, who is now selling these carbon certificates to poor countries. This is completely crazy, because the policy is openly now, no development in the Global South. This is the ultimate imperial policy, isn’t it? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: It’s pretty outrageous and naked effort to reintroduce colonialism, because what Mark Carney is proposing, for Africa in particular, is that they should sign agreements to not develop their resources, to even reforest their arable land, and then basically get some money from the certificate trading whereby they sell their certificates to firms in the West, that have production and CO₂ emissions. It’s an incredible story: It’s basically is —if you look at these different aspects, an agreement for the Global South to not develop. The present Chief of MI6, Richard Moore, says MI6 will internationally police that these agreements are being fulfilled. And then you have the G7 wanting to come up with an “alternative Belt and Road Initiative” which means no large-scale infrastructure, for sure not the kind of industrial parks that China has been building. It’s an outrageous effort to reintroduce the old colonialist system with modern means, and under conditions of a pandemic and world famine, it means massive depopulation. Since the developing countries are very vulnerable, and they’re not so strong to resist these things, I think it does require an open discussion, because this is too much. SCHLANGER: And, as with almost everything we’ve discussed so far today has some outrageous element to it, we need to pick up the outrage in the political situation in Germany, where you have the Green Party pushing depopulation of the Green financial bubble, that we just discussed, and also a war policy. And this is Baerbock, and Habeck who was contesting for chancellor candidate and lost. But they’re obviously in an alliance for these crazy policies. ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Baerbock spoke recently at the Atlantic Council, and the Atlantic Council ran a headline afterwards, “Annalena Baerbock in Synch with Joe Biden.” And that is unfortunately, absolutely the case, and the Atlantic Council as such is a think tank which represents the military-industrial complex, completely. If you look at the list of people on the board, and advisory board, it’s a good representation of the military-industrial complex, and therefore, it’s not surprising that Habeck went to Ukraine, met with President Zelensky and supported the sale of lethal weapons to Ukraine, in complete violation of even the Green program, which says no weapons should be sold to areas of war, which Ukraine clearly is. And naturally, Zelensky is now saying, “I demand that Germany should sell weapons to Ukraine,” which really is an outrage. If you think about what happened 75-80 years ago, Germany should not be enticed into selling weapons into war zone! This is so outrageous that only if people are complete oblivious to history that you could even make such an outrageous proposal. But even some of the Green members now can see that this is really a complete outrage. One can only hope that in time the character of this new leadership of the Greens—I was never a friend of the Greens, but compared to these people, Petra Kelly was a sweetheart! SCHLANGER: [laughter] As you just pointed out, it’s not just that they’re selling weapons or offering to sell weapons to Ukraine, but knowing that those weapons will go to Nazi units inside Ukraine’s defense and security forces, makes the point even more extreme. Helga, is there anything else you want to cover? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: No. I think what we discussed is a lot of food for thought. And I know people now want to go on vacation and have a break from COVID, but unfortunately the subjects we touched upon are not going to go to the beach. They’re going to stay with the world and that’s why we need thinking people, people who want to take responsibility as state citizens because that what there is biggest lack of right now, but that is why we will have such a very important conference on June 26-27, and this is a forum where an alliance of anti-Malthusian people from all parts of the world will come together, and you should be one of them. SCHLANGER: And again, you can go to https://schillerinstitute.nationbuilder.com/20210626-27-conference to register, June 26 and June 27. Helga, thanks for joining us today, and we’ll see you next week. ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Till next week.
The Schiller Institute conference on May 8 offered a proof of principle that people can be mobilized by an appeal to the higher humanity which resides in all humans. Helga Zepp LaRouche reviewed the many dangers facing mankind: of war -- including a real possibility of nuclear war; famine, created by sanctions and deliberate refusal to fund development; of an out-of-control pandemic, as in India, and many other nations lacking a modern health care system; and of the devastating effects of growing inflation, which destroy people's life-work and the ability of families to survive. But she pointed to the dialogue which occurred during the two panels, which demonstrates a willingness to grapple with profound questions, and to the role of the Schiller Institute in creating a forum for building support for solutions. She also highly recommended a video of Minister Louis Farrakhan performing the Beethoven Violin Concerto, as an example of how an act of creativity can inspire the quality of agape needed to break free of the Darwinian world imposed by those oligarchs who she characterized as possessed of "dead souls." TranscriptThe LaRouche Organization Webcast with Helga Zepp-LaRouche Thursday, May 13, 2021 HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger and welcome to our weekly dialogue with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder and President of the Schiller Institute. The Schiller Institute just had an extraordinary conference last Saturday, May 8, which you can look at by going to the Schiller Institute website. What I find most interesting, Helga, is that virtually every topic, every subject we discussed, every crisis that we talked about has continued to be in the front of the news, the front of the strategic situation. They’re continuing to deepen. And the recognition is growing that a new approach is needed to solve them, which, of course, was the topic of the conference, “The Moral Collapse of the Trans-Atlantic World Cries Out for a New Paradigm.” What’s your sense of the importance of how this conference unfolded and what we were able to accomplish? HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: On the strategic level, I think there was a very important useful discussion about the immediacy of the danger of a nuclear war: I mean, a nuclear war can happen either by design, and unfortunately, there were a lot of strategic studies and proposals by different think tanks, discussion in the Atlantic Council, the RAND Corp., various other such places, but it can also occur because the overall level of tension between the United States, the British, the EU, and Russia and China on the other side is becoming so high, that any one of many hotspots could, by accident or some temper by some subordinate person, get out of control and lead to a whole chain of escalation. And we should not forget that we have right now the largest maneuver going on since the end of the Cold War, along the whole border of Russia, involving many countries in Eastern Europe, and this is very dangerous. Because if you look at the scenarios which are exercised in these maneuvers, it’s the movement of a large amount of troops to the Russian border; it has a submaneuver, denying Russia access to the sea through the Black Sea or the Baltic Sea. All of these maneuvers assume that Russia is the enemy, that we are rehearsing World War III. And if you put yourselves in the shoes of Russia, it really looks as if these people are determined to continue the color revolution. The situation around Ukraine is extremely dangerous. The demand of Ukraine to join NATO which is one of the red lines Putin has been talking about in his recent speech. So I think the overall situation is so explosive that I think if people don’t change course, you know, people were talking about “sleepwalking into World War I,” but this time it involves nuclear weapons, and there are some crazy people, including in some of these think tanks who say, “we have to prepare for a possible nuclear war,” for example, I think the RAND Corp. had a study, “War with China: Thinking the Unthinkable”, in 2016, and we talked already about it, but I think it needs to be emphasized, again. The head of the U.S. Strategic Command, Adm. Charles Richard, who keeps briefing the Congress and Senate about these matters, also said that he instructed the Pentagon to change the category of likelihood of nuclear war, from not likely to very likely. This was all discussed at the conference, and that is why, because we also have a pandemic out of control, a financial crash looming, a world hunger, that we reiterated our demand in supporting Putin in his call to conduct an urgent summit of the P-5 permanent members of the UN Security Council, because you have a platform where the most important countries talk to each other and find out solutions based on cooperation and not some confrontation. So there are little hopeful signs. There was a discussion between Lavrov and Blinken—they will meet at the end of the month on May 20 around an Arctic Summit in Iceland, and hopefully they will prepare a summit between Biden and Putin. But I think this P-5 formula is very important, because it should involve China, Russia and the United States, at a minimum; and if one could win India in some other constellation, it would also be good. So I think that summit is on agenda. And naturally, the other thing we also discussed also remains: that unilateral sanctions, which are illegal from the standpoint of international law in any case, only those sanctions which are agreed upon by the UN Security Council are legitimate, and there are presently sanctions against about 30 countries, including Syria, Yemen, Iran, Venezuela; some of these countries are suffering death as a result of many people, like in the case of Syria, where according to Cardinal Zenari, 90% and more of the Syrian population are below the extreme poverty line. And therefore, the continuation of the sanctions for sure will cause death, and therefore we call on all people who watch this program that you should help our campaign to raise the public consciousness that these sanctions should be stopped. The U.S. Congress must reverse Caesar sanctions, and we have to have a completely different approach to the situation. SCHLANGER: And Helga, is it your assessment that the use of sanctions is essentially regime change by another name? That is, the argument that sanctions are necessary because countries are not coinciding with the so-called “rules-based order,” but how can they argue that these sanctions are not as deadly, in some cases more deadly, than war? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, they’re more deadly because there are no rules in it. If People are being denied medicine and food and other important necessities—it hits the poorest part of the population, the old people, the children, the sick, and the idea behind it, is that eventually the pressure will become so great that people will rise up and get rid of the regime. But, really, it is a form of brutal war, and it should be outlawed. I think people have to get a real sense of outrage, that these things should not be—I mean, the idea that it’s better than to have a military intervention—what an argument is that? I mean, you’re targetting the weak, the children, the elderly! I think it should really stop. SCHLANGER: Then there was the G7 Foreign Ministers meeting which discussed the question of Russia and China, that these were the longest sessions. And there’s war talk going on around China at the United Nations Security Council: Where is this heading? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: This is also, you have right now an absolute low of relations between the EU and China, the U.S. and China, the U.S. and Russia, also the EU and Russia. This is terrible. So as a result of a complete campaign of lies about what is happening in Xinjiang—we had discussed this many times, but let me just briefly repeat it: The problem with Xinjiang was, starting with Brzezinski in 1975, when he developed the idea of using the “Islamic card” against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, so Western intelligence organizations trained the mujahideen in a radical form of Islam for the fight against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. When the Soviet Union was basically defeated, and eventually the defeat in Afghanistan was a contributing factor for the dissolution of the Soviet Union, these mujahideen did not stay in Afghanistan, but they spread all over the region: To Chechnya, to Pakistan, to Xinjiang, to the whole region. And they were, indeed, terrorists, and we know, subsequently, that many times it was revealed that the United States continued to work with al Qaeda, with ISIS; this is what General Flynn had made a point about, and it was revealed many times. The idea was basically to keep a destabilizing aspect on Xinjiang for China. So, China, after a series of terrorist activities more than 10 years ago, did the only reasonable thing, to defeat terrorism: They started to educate the people by giving them training possibilities, they brought in infrastructure and industrial development in one of the previously poorest areas of China, and they started to integrate people! There is no truth to the fact that they tried to reduce the population of Uighurs, because the Uighurs had much larger and higher birth rates than the Han Chinese who were also living in Xinjiang. There was an effort to blame China—I mean, is it better to bomb the terrorists as the Western countries have done many times? In any case, this story was fabricated, and no matter how many diplomats from other countries would go there, including two members of Schiller Institute, who travelled to Xinjiang on different occasions, all come back and report that this is absolutely a lie; nevertheless, just in order to keep the Cold War against China going, there was a UN Security Council meeting called for by the U.S., Britain, and I think Germany, and it has no effect other than completely ruining the relations between those countries and China. And it’s a complete outrage! The use of lies has become, unfortunately, such a normal thing in international politics today that it’s extremely worrisome. SCHLANGER: On the question of Xinjiang in China, it’s clear that the Chinese are responding diplomatically, and becoming a little more aggressive in their response. But how do you get this message across that this represents a lie? I mean, people have to understand that they’re being lied to, to prepare them for war. ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think there are a lot of documentaries being prepared by quite different people, and I think that people, rather than repeat something which clearly is a prejudice, they should study the history of the region, and also look at the result. And then, also, you can always go to Xinjiang, travel there: There has been an open invitation by China for foreigners to come and see. So I have told people, especially Americans: Already more than 12 years ago, I made a presentation, in which I said, why Americans should go there, and I made a presentation about the countries on the old Silk Road, and Xinjiang is obviously one part. So plan your next vacation to go to Xinjiang. SCHLANGER: And if you can’t afford to go to Xinjiang, watch Lyndon LaRouche’s documentary “Storm over Asia,” where it exposes exactly what you are talking about with Brzezinski and the British geopolitical plan. Now, the second panel of the conference, I want to come back to that, was on the coincidence of opposites and how to address the global crises, the COVID pandemic, the growing food shortages; and we see, of course, in India, a desperate situation. Shouldn’t this make clear to people why we need a modern world health system in every nation? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: What we discussed in the second panel, and I’m happy to report that the Committee for the Coincidence of Opposites, which is a long name, but it’s also a complicated process which we have to bring into unity: This is a notion coming from Nicholas of Cusa from 15th century. I’m very happy to report that we have made big progress, we have now concrete pilot projects under way: Medical and food supply, small but as a symbolic nature—more than a symbolic nature—but we want to send to Mozambique, this will be a shipment and we will try to expand it; also hopefully in the future to other countries. But it’s clear this is a private effort and cannot replace the action of governments. But we want to demonstrate through such a concrete action, how to bring medicine and food to a country in dire need, that everybody can do something; and the idea that “there is nothing we can do about it,” that that is a wrong concept. And therefore, I invite people to join with this Committee. Now, you mentioned India: I think all the many people who have been doubting that the pandemic is real, who think it’s just a trick, please, look at India! I have very close friends in India, and I’m in regular phone contact with them, and what they are reporting is an absolute Hell! You have right now, officially, 250,000 people who have died, but everybody knows this is probably five or ten times higher, for the simple reason that in this figure of 250,000 are only the people who have died in hospital. The people who don’t make it to a hospital, who die at home, who die in a faraway place in the countryside, they’re not counted. So what we’re looking at in India right now, is 1.5-2.5 million people who have died already! And the problem is that a new variant has developed which is very aggressive. Health experts say this is of global concern, simply because the transmission rate is much, much higher than with other strains, and obviously for a country which has, for many parts, no developed hygienic systems, right now there is there is a rate of 75% of the country has 10-20% testing positive. Now, this is out of control and the experts basically say the only way you can hope to get this under control is to lock down 75% of the country for six to eight weeks! Now, can you imagine what that would do in a country where you have a very large informal economy, which means people have no wages, they live from hand to mouth every day, and if you have a lockdown, naturally that collapses. I think this is a huge political crisis and it is already spreading to the neighboring countries, to Nepal, to Bangladesh, Thailand. The Indian strain has been founded in six Latin American countries already. This is why what we discussed again at this conference, and please watch this second panel, is, we have to fight to really get a changed attitude. It is not enough now to say, we have to produce vaccines; first of all, the vaccine production is very slow, and fortunately, the Biden administration said they want to lift the patents, but the production of these vaccines is very complicated, and you cannot in the middle of the desert you cannot just build a vaccine factory: You need the skills, you need the industrial environment to do that. In any case, even if you could vaccinate everybody very quickly, which right now we cannot, the problem is much deeper: You need a change in the attitude towards the underdevelopment of the developing countries. And what we have been saying from the beginning of this pandemic is, we need to have a modern health system in every single country: In every country, you would need to do what they did in Wuhan, to build hospitals of 1,000 beds each in a week; equip them with modern medical machinery, have highly skilled doctors and nurses, and then obviously, you need clean water, electricity, infrastructure. To use the building of such modern health systems in every country as the beginning to industrialize the world. That is at odds with the people who want to impose the Great Reset and the Green Deal, because there was already in 2019, an absolutely scandalous but very revealing article in the British medical journal The Lancet, in which some professors from Harvard basically said, one of the biggest contributors of climate pollution is modern hospitals, surgery, anesthesia, ICU, these account for 4.5% of all CO₂ emissions. And therefore, they say, blatantly openly, we cannot have the 5 billion people in the world who presently don’t have access to this kind of modern healthcare, also have the same standard as in the Western countries, because otherwise the planet would explode. Now, what they’re openly saying is—I don’t know if you want to call this “apartheid”—but it’s incredible! These people are openly advertising to keep the life expectancy in poor countries, we don’t care, let them die. I mean, this is so unbelievably brutal, it makes clear to you that these people are trying to impose a world dictatorship, an eco-fascism, whereby only the powerful elite decide who can live and who will die. Now, we have, as we’ve discussed many times in this program, we have worked out a plan for a world health system in every country, and we will make a huge effort to put this on the agenda in the upcoming Global Health Summit conference on May 21st in Rome, because we think that that meeting should not conclude without having basically agreed that what we propose is the only way. Because if you only have increased vaccinations and some nice words, this is not enough: We need an absolute, fundamental change. So if you agree with that, please join our efforts and help us in this mobilization. SCHLANGER: Helga, another area, where people are threatened is on the economy, and on the inflation front, because there are already people who as a result of the COVID lockdowns and the job losses, people facing losing their homes, losing their healthcare, losing jobs. And we’re now seeing a growing inflation, even though the government is denying it, they’re saying “well, we need a little inflation,” but it’s not a “little inflation,” it’s taking off. This, again, goes back to the program of Lyndon LaRouche for the Four Laws. But what can you say about the inflation situation? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: It’s the accumulated effect of pumping money by the trillions and trillions, basically since 2008, and again in the recent period, all the so-called “stimulus” programs which did not into really go into real economy investments, but kept the speculative bubble going for the most part. Now, various central banks are reporting commodity price inflation which will soon hit the consumer price inflation, and once you reach inflation becoming visible like that, you have to think about what happened in Weimar Germany in 1923, when the Reichsbank also started to print money. And that inflation was also not visible for a very long time, but then, when the French occupied the Rhineland, and production came to a halt, it started to explode, and it ended with a complete expropriation of the life’s work of the people. And that is what is on the horizon. And people say a “transitory hyperinflation,” was the formulation used by the Fed: Now, that’s ridiculous. “Transitory hyperinflation” is like being a “little big pregnant”: It just leads to the result that pregnancy does, and hyperinflation leads to hyperinflation. So what we need right now, more urgently than ever, is Lyndon LaRouche’s, my late husband’s program: a global Glass-Steagall, a national bank, a credit system, and a crash program to increase the productivity of the economy through investment in fusion and space cooperation. So we have a program which would be easy to implement, relatively easier, and in any case easier than the consequences if it is not being done, which is chaos and the danger of war. SCHLANGER: Now, also the previous Schiller conference in March 20-21, had a major emphasis in the first panel on culture and how we need a cultural renaissance as a key element in changing the way people think. There was an event that just took place, with a concert, showing the video of a concert with Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam performing the Beethoven Violin Concerto. And I know that you and many other people were very moved by this. What can you tell us about that? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I would urge our viewers to absolutely watch this concert! I think it’s the most important cultural intervention from the United States—not for the United States—for the world. Because not only—Mr. Farrakhan is a minister, so he’s not a professional musician—but the excellence with which he formed the violin part in this concerto is absolutely incredible, because he made the violin “sing.” He made it sing in the most beautiful, lovable way you can imagine. And I actually had tears in my eyes at a certain point, because he got the music so much to the heart, that I compared then, also with some other performances, which maybe some Menuhin and Oistrakh and so forth, they may have been technically more perfect, but I think it was absolutely on a world-class level. And what is even as important—I don’t want to say more important, because it comes as a unity—he said he did that—this was a performance from 2002—but he got it out now for his own 88th birthday, and Beethoven’s 250th birthday, but especially to give young people, and especially young black people some way to elevate themselves on the highest level. And the way he described it, he said that when he was young, as a boy, he learned the violin, but in these times there was no way to have a musical career for a black person, so he stopped for many years. But, then he took it up again when he was 60, when he first played Mendelssohn. But then, when he was 68, in one year he learned how to play this extremely difficult piece. And it was a complete surprise. And he said, this is also a method, you study intensively, 8, 10 hours a day, and once you have learned that, you can apply that in any other field. And in a certain sense, it was the absolute counter against this cancel culture, and the idiotic policy of Oxford that they want to cancel Mozart and Beethoven. It was just the most beautiful polemic, apart from the elevation. And naturally, neither the Black Lives Matter people, nor the anti-Black Lives Matter people, will discuss this beautiful Farrakhan performance because it puts them to shame. And they don’t know how to deal with beauty, because they’re dead souls, so many of them have become that. I think the example which Farrakhan gave for the young generation in the whole world, I think this was incredible, and you should really watch it, because you will have the most joyous time for a long time. SCHLANGER: It sounds as though what he did was to take to heart the idea in his discussion of it, of the coincidence of opposites, and how to challenge people who have these false profiles of various people that are used, with identity politics and so on. So Helga, thank you very much for joining us. Again, I think you’ve made the point that people should go to Schiller Institute site and watch the conference from last weekend, both panels, as well as the Farrakhan concert. And we’ll see you again next week. ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Till next week.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche made an impassioned appeal to viewers of her weekly webcast to use this Christmas period to join with us to mobilize for a New Paradigm. She compared "the commitment to brinksmanship" of Trans-Atlantic war hawks to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, describing this as"extremely worrisome," as it comes from a belief that Russia and China will back down in the face of threats from the U.S. and NATO. The Russians continue to deny an intent to invade Ukraine, and have submitted draft proposals, which they insist cover their minimum national security interests. That western leaders instead repeat their demand for Russian submission to planned NATO expansion which puts us on a course towards war. Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche then turned her attention to what she described as the "heart-breaking, upsetting" story of the refusal of western nations to address the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, which is the result of the geopolitical wars fought in that country. While the OIC has made a proposal to set up a fund and coordinate international aid, western nations are continuing sanctions and refusing to release funds, even though it is clear this threatens millions of lives. The role of the U.S. and NATO in continuing this travesty is destroying "the credibility of the West." She spoke of her commitment to Project Ibn Sina for Afghanistan, as part of a broader battle to provide a world health system for every country. She ended the dialogue with an appeal to viewers to use the next days of Christmas to reflect on the moral responsibility of citizens to act at this moment of deepening crisis. Transcript The Brinkmanship of Trans-Atlantic Cannot Be Tolerated Weekly Strategic Webcast with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Wednesday December 22, 2021 HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hello I’m Harley Schlanger. Welcome to our weekly dialogue with Schiller Institute founder and Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche. It’s Dec. 22, 2021. And Helga, as we’ve been reporting over the recent weeks, the drumbeat for war continues coming from trans-Atlantic powers. The Russians are making proposals to try and address it. They seem to be getting little or no response from the West. What’s the latest that you have on this? HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, it is extremely worrisome, because it seems there are people committed to make a brinksmanship. Obviously, they hope that Russia, and China for that matter, will back down, but I don’t think that that’s in the cards. So two weeks ago, we spoke about this unbelievable statement by Sen. Roger Wicker, that he doesn’t want to take the first use of nuclear weapons off the table. Now, in the meantime, the whole thing has escalated. There was a CNN report, with an unnamed U.S. high-ranking official, the suspicion was that it was National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who said we only have a window of four weeks left before we have to get a breakthrough, and somehow referring to a possible plan of Russia to invade Ukraine. Which Russia has denied many times, emphatically. But if you look at the chronologically of the last several weeks—it started much earlier—but let’s take the visit of the Director of the Office of National Intelligence of the United States Avril Haines to Brussels, where she briefed the NATO ambassadors about so-called hard evidence intelligence that Russia would plan and invasion of Ukraine at the beginning of 2022. As I said, it was denied by Russia. Then there are obviously troops being gathered at the Russian side of the Ukrainian border, which has been commented on many times by Russia, that it’s their good right to do on their territory whatever they want. According to Maria Zakharova, the spokeswoman of the Foreign Ministry, there are at least 10,000 troops from NATO in Ukraine, 4,000 from the U.S. and 6,000 from other countries; and in the middle of all of that—I mean, there was the discussion between Putin and Biden on Dec. 7 on videoconference—which again looked as if this would move forward. But then, immediately, the people around Biden went back to their bellicose statements, so one never knows exactly what the U.S. policy is exactly. And then Putin proposed two treaties, to the U.S. and to NATO. Now, these are not proposals for negotiations but ready-made treaties, one for the United States to sign, that they will basically not insist that Ukraine be in NATO, and the other one for NATO to sign, that NATO will not move any farther eastward. And the Russians, Putin, they said this is not negotiable; this pertains to the very national security interests of Russia, and they insist that these treaties be signed. Now the reaction from the West, from [NATO Secretary General Jens] Stoltenberg, from Lambrecht, the new German defense minister, various other people, they said, they will not let Russia dictate what to do, and so forth, but there was no serious response so far. And various Russian spokesmen, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, Grushko, Lavrov, and various other people, they all said that this is very serious. If there is no response from the West, and if there is any more move to either move weapons into Ukraine, or to expand NATO in any way more eastward, there will be a military answer coming from Russia. And the bottom line has been reached, the red line has been reached. So we are sort of in a countdown, where it’s very clear that whoever is pulling the strings in NATO in the end, and sometimes one is not quite clear if it’s Biden or not, or rather not, they’re obviously set that this policy of encirclement against Russia and China continue. And Russia has said, the red line has been reached. Now, this is very, very dangerous, because — Oh yeah, then I think it was also Sullivan, said that if there is any move from Russia in respect to Ukraine, that they will punish the economy of Russia so terribly that it—anyway, so there are all these threats in the air. And there is now a very interesting statement by Leonidas Chrysanthopoulos, a former Greek ambassador, who commented on all of that, by basically saying the West should not be so hypocritical (I’m now using my own words), but that the West should recognize that all Russia is demanding, in written, legal terms, is what was promised in 1990 to them by the United States, by NATO, in the negotiations concerning the German reunification. And this is actually a matter of record: There are now documents which everybody can look up, that on Feb. 9, 1990, Secretary of State James Baker promised Gorbachev that NATO would not move “one inch eastward,” and this was also the content of the famous speech by then German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, in his speech in Tutzing, where he basically said the same thing. Naturally, everybody knows these promises, which unfortunately were not made in written form, but just verbally, they were broken almost immediately and altogether 14 countries of the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact were integrated into NATO; and recently, and many times earlier, Russia has made the point that to have Ukraine and Georgia in NATO is unacceptable for the very simple reason that if you look at the border between Ukraine and Russia, it leaves only a few minutes, maybe as little as 5 minutes for a missile system to reach Moscow, which obviously is much too short a time to have an effective defense. So, Russia makes the point that its national security interest is absolutely threatened by these moves by NATO. So we are on a countdown. And we should just keep in mind, if it comes to any war between Russia and Ukraine, which would involve any kind of—even without Western involvement—and this would escalate, Germany would immediately be the target. And if you have such statements like that of Senator Wicker, that the first use of nuclear weapons cannot be taken off the table, people should be aware of the fact, that if it comes to this, Germany ceases to exist! So, this is one of the reasons why I have been saying NATO is no longer a security pact which is in the self-interest of Germany, because if in the case of any military conflict, Germany ceases to exist, obviously, this is not a good defense strategy. So, I think, first of all people must make themselves familiar with this danger. According to the reports, we are in a four-week countdown, and I think it is absolute, urgent necessity that NATO and the United States and European countries do agree to sign such legally binding agreements with Russia, even if Putin, in a just-conducted meeting with some of his top military people said that even a legally binding, signed document does not give full security, because the United States has now a very long record that they pull out of treaties without any problem, overnight. But there must be a recognition that we are on a terribly dangerous road, and people must voice their opposition to this policy, loud and clear, before it is too late. SCHLANGER: There have been some voices speaking out in the West, but not nearly enough, and then, instead, they’re drowned out by people like Sullivan, who said Russia must deescalate, when the escalation is coming from the West. And the U.S. has not even responded yet to this request for these treaties to be negotiated. Now, unless you have something more on that, I think we need to move on to the situation in Afghanistan, where there have been some developments with the Organization for Islamic Cooperation meeting over the weekend, a potential for possible motion on unfreezing the funds. I think 46 congress members have written a letter to Biden. What’s your sense? Is there some momentum building on this, especially given the reports of the danger to millions of people, including children, of starvation and freezing this winter? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes, this is the second, absolutely heartbreaking and extremely upsetting story. You know, the West talks about moral values, value-based order, human rights, democracy, all of these beautiful words, but the reality is quite ugly. Because the World Food Program representatives, I think, the head Beasley and Mary-Ellen McGroarty in Afghanistan, visiting Kabul and Kandahar in the last several days, and they come back and say that 98% of the Afghanistan population is in dire poverty, more than 90% are food insecure, without medical supplies: 24 million people are in danger of dying this winter, 3 million children, babies are dying already—and this is the 21st century and the whole world should know about it, but if you look at the Western media, after the Taliban took over in August, there was a short period when Afghanistan was in the news, but since several months you hardly hear anything about it. Now, there was a very important conference over Friday, Saturday, Sunday in Islamabad, Pakistan, of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC); this is with 57 states, the second largest international organization after the United Nations, and they had a meeting which was addressed by the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Imran Khan. I listened to his speech and I was—not that everything was new what he said, but he said it very distinctly. He said, when the Taliban took over and the West withdrew, everybody knew that 75% of the budget of Afghanistan came from international aid, and since that aid was immediately cut—the donor countries cut the aid right away, because the Taliban had taken over—everybody knew that the entire budget of Afghanistan was all of a sudden practically nonexistent. Then you had the freezing of the funds by the U.S. Treasury, by European banks, so there was a complete cash crisis: People could not import anything, they could not pay salaries, the whole thing broke down, and this has been going on for four months, with the result I just mentioned before. But this is not the Taliban: When you hear the Western media, if they report anything at all, they say, “Oh yeah, the economy is now terrible, because of the Taliban.” It is not because of the Taliban! Because if you have, after 20 years of NATO war, NATO leaves, and the United States forces leave in a sudden fashion, the country in which they conducted war for 20 years: They leave the country, nothing has been built, no economy, no infrastructure, nothing is functioning, and then, they cut off the international lifeline, the donor monies, which make up 75% of the Afghanistan budget, they cut this off, they freeze the central bank’s funds, and then naturally a catastrophe erupts which nobody, not the Taliban or anybody else, can handle, because you have sanctions, and have a complete freeze of everything! And the West knows that! And they don’t react! I mean, this is unbelievable! If you look at the Afghanistan situation, this is the end of any credibility of the West, and just to think that because the Western media are not reporting that, people should not think that it goes unnoticed. For example, the 57 OIC nations noticed; all the neighbors of Afghanistan noticed; all the third world noticed. So I think if this is not reversed very, very quickly, this will be of a lasting impact of a demise of the West. This is why I have said that the fate of Afghanistan and the fate of humanity are much more closely linked than most people are willing to think through. I find this absolutely horrendous. What the OIC conference decided: they will set up a fund, I don’t know exactly the amounts that will be available, but they will set up an office in Kabul, and the OIC has offered to coordinate international aid. So something is being done, for sure, but the problem is so gigantic that it really requires all the neighbors of Afghanistan to cooperate, and I think that the United States and the European countries—I mean, they were for 20 years in this country, and then they walk away. This is from the standpoint of international law, completely unacceptable. So Europe and the United States have an absolute moral obligation to reverse that and cooperate with the neighbors of Afghanistan and not only have immediate humanitarian aid, to alleviate the hunger, the lack of medical supplies, but then, participate in the economic buildup of the country, which can only occur by integrating Afghanistan into the Belt and Road Initiative projects—you know, the CPEC corridor from Pakistan to Kabul to Uzbekistan; the building of the Khyber Pass, and other well-defined projects which would immediately start building up the economy. So that is what needs to be done. There are 39 congressmen who made an appeal to Biden to unfreeze the funds which are held by the Treasury: I think this is important. Obviously, this must immediately happen because the winter is already there. SCHLANGER: And toward that end of accelerated humanitarian aid, you made the proposal which you call “Operation Ibn Sina,” that is, while specific to Afghanistan, actually reflects the need for the whole world in the midst of the COVID crisis, the economic breakdown, which is the necessity for a world health system, as the front end of a massive infrastructure investment program, which could include the Belt and Road Initiative and so on. How does that look as a prospect from your standpoint? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Operation Ibn Sina, because one has to start with Afghanistan, and Ibn Sina comes from a place nearby Bukhara which is Uzbekistan, but his father was born in Balk, which is Afghanistan, and people are very proud of him. He’s probably the greatest doctor who ever lived, so there is no better name to give this effort to build a modern health system in Afghanistan, than to call it after Ibn Sina. And there already has been great interest in this idea coming from several places in the region. But more largely, we have now a new wave of the COVID-19, the Omicron variant, and, again, there is such an unwillingness by the establishment of the Western system to recognize that we have been on the wrong track, and I said in the very beginning, when it was clear this was a pandemic, in March 2020, I said we need a world health system or else this pandemic will not go away. Since then we’ve had all these mutations, and now we have Omicron, and there is no guarantee there will not be new mutations. And it’s also clear that the idea that the rich countries are producing and hoarding vaccines, and leaving the developing countries without is not helping anybody, because if you leave entire continents without vaccinations and without modern health equipment, then this virus will mutate, as it has done so far, and it will come back and may even make the existing vaccines obsolete. So, either we go in earnest, and say that the fact that billions of people do not have modern hospitals is unacceptable, don’t have clear water, don’t have enough electricity, this is something which could be done; there is no reason why we could not immediately start to build modern infrastructure, like we have it in Germany—it may be rotting, but it’s still there because previous generations were a little bit smarter than the present crop of politicians—but there is no reason in the world why not technically, why not technologically, we could not start building hospitals: We need about 30,000 new hospitals around the world. That would be easy! We could even make these hospitals prefabricated, in the United States, in Europe, and then ship the modules to the respective countries. The Chinese proved in Wuhan that you can build a modern hospital in two weeks. It could be done this way. We could start a crash training program for medical personnel. I have called for the youth, the young people in the world to be trained to help build such an effort, like it was done by Franklin D. Roosevelt with the CCC program in the New Deal. You can train young people on the job, give them a vision and a mission in life. And I think this is really something—you know, we cannot continue this way! The idea that every time something happens, the rich countries only take care of themselves, and the developing countries are left in the dark, that has to stop and we have to start to really think in terms of a new paradigm if humanity is supposed to come out of this crisis. And given the fact that we have now the Christmas period, the holiday season, people have some days to think. And rather than just going about your business as usual—I mean, this is a breaking point of civilization: Either we really can shape up as a human species, or it may not look so great for our perspective. SCHLANGER: I think your last point, that in the spirit of Christmas, of generosity and love of mankind, peace and good will toward men, this would be the time to move ahead with the shift to the new paradigm. Helga, thanks for joining us today, and I know you wish all your viewers a merry Christmas, as do I, and we’ll see you again next week. ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes. I wish you a Merry Christmas, and the first topic we discussed, I really want you to think about, because what we face in Europe between Russia, Ukraine, and Europe and NATO, is like a reverse Cuban Missile Crisis. In the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy pointed to the fact that an island which is only 160 miles from the coast of Florida, the idea that you could deploy nuclear missiles in such a close vicinity, obviously could not be tolerated. But nuclear missiles in NATO, in the Baltic, missile defense system in Poland, in Romania, and the idea to move lethal weapons into Ukraine, from the standpoint of the Russians, this is exactly like the Cuban Missile Crisis. So, I really want you to use this Christmas period to really work with the Schiller Institute, and help us to stop something which could really be fatal for all of humanity. And at the same time, there are all the resources, there are so many beautiful contributions to civilizations, Beethoven’s music, all the great poets, the great philosophers—read these things over these days and rethink how we should go about it, because we definitely need to change course urgently.
Sergei Lavrov expressed the Russian disappointment with the written response from the U.S. to President Putin's demand for new treaties which guarantee Russia's security interests. While agreeing to further discussion of secondary issues, the Biden administration appears to have refused to meet Putin's demands. At the same time, the U.S. is escalating its plans for sanctions against Russia, and the media -- led by CNN -- is running false reports about Biden's discussion with Zelensky, to stoke tensions.Despite Blinken's claim of complete unity among NATO allies, fault lines continue to become visible. In Italy and Germany, businessmen and manufacturers want to speak with Putin, as they recognize that a war, or escalation of sanctions, would have disastrous consequences for western economies, which are already weak. The desperation in the west is also visible, in reports of a likely wave of debt defaults of highly-indebted poor nations, if interest rates are raised in the U.S. Helga took note of the positive potential which emerged from the meetings in Oslo with a Taliban delegation, and motion in support of her Operation Ibn Sina. She appealed to viewers to join with us to break out from under the war drive of the geopoliticians, and bring about her husband's perspective of a New Bretton Woods, which would uniquely address the common interests of all nations. Transcript War Danger Still Exists — A New Paradigm Is in the Common Interest of All Mankind Weekly Strategic Webcast with Helga Zepp-LaRouche Friday January 28, 2022 HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger. Welcome to our weekly dialogue with Schiller Institute founder and Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Today is Friday, January 29, 2022. While the world was kept waiting for a couple of days for the United States’ response to President Putin’s demand that there be new security guarantees extended to Russia, the response was delivered on Jan. 26. Sergey Lavrov said that while there’s ongoing discussion there was no response to the core issues. Helga, what’s your thinking on where this leaves us? HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think the war danger clearly still exists, because it’s very clear that there are elements who are not satisfied with the relationship between United States, and Russia, and China, for that matter, to go into a civilized direction. But because of the systemic collapse going on in the Western financial system, the desperation is big. And there are, despite what is officially being said, where always psywar ops, covert operations being threatened, it’s a very complex picture. To start off with what the Russian response has been, Lavrov, and the Russians in general, have said that they are very disappointed that the United States and NATO did not respond to the core issue of their demand that NATO should not further expand to the East, that no offensive weapons system should be placed along the Russian borders, and that Ukraine should definitely not be ever in NATO. These were the absolutely important issues, and they were rejected by both the United States and by NATO. And what was offered instead was all kinds of, what from the Russian standpoint are also useful discussions, but not the essential ones. So it’s like, make offers for arms control, for continuation of the dialogue—all of that is useful, naturally, but I think it is to be noted that the basic position of the West to not respond to the very legitimate security interests of Russia. And it’s very difficult to say where this will all end up, but the bullying coming from people like Blinken, in particular, is so blatant, and the obvious neglect of the United States, not only for the security interests of Russia, but also the security interests of European countries like Germany, or economic interests, is also so absolutely blatant, that this whole thing may end up in a complete backlash, in a blowback. Because if the United States insists on being the hegemon, and keep a unipolar world, and in then in the process of trying to ram that through, tramples over the interests of its so-called Allies, and creates an open hostility with the so-called adversary—, namely Russia and China—this may end up in not what the architects of the confrontation have intended, but it may reveal the absolutely uncivilized behavior of those who are pushing this confrontation. Now, Lavrov said that compared to NATO, the response of the United States was almost diplomatic decency, while the response from NATO was so ideologically blatant that it leaves almost no room for any civilized discussion. So we have to see. Now there are different voices. There is a lot of psywar and it’s sometimes very difficult to know what is true and what is not. The latest flareup is this CNN report by Matthew Chance who claims that in yesterday’s phone discussion between President Biden and President Zelenskyy, Biden supposedly would have said that once the ground is frozen, the Russia attack will come, and he would have told Zelenskyy that Kiev will be sacked, that he should prepare for a big impact—all language that is draconian and barbarian. The White House denied that this was said in this form. In any case, I think it’s very unlikely—there is not even an interest by Russia to occupy Ukraine! They have an interest to protect the Russians in east Ukraine, but for sure, not to overrun Ukraine, where the entire west is filled with Nazis and neo-Nazis and would be a complete mess to even think of occupying a terrible place like that. So, I think there is an incredible psywar going on. Zelenskyy himself said he does not think anything has changed, only the hype has increased. Papers like the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung say that they think there is a very low probability for a Russian attack. One has to differentiate between the confetti which is being thrown around, and the core question. And the core question is that a solution must come out of all of this which takes into account the basic security interest of Russia, and that is the bottom line. SCHLANGER: I think, Helga, for the sake of our American listeners, who don’t get any of this reporting, it’s worth noting that what CNN said was not only denied by the Zelenskyy spokesman who said that no one in the President’s office said such a thing in the discussion with Biden, and described it as completely false, but National Security Council spokeswoman Emily Horne said that CNN’s sources are leaking falsehoods. So that’s what you’re getting in the United States, with the psywar. And speaking of psychological warfare, there is the British intelligence report that came out this week which said that they have evidence that the Russians are about to try to install someone to run the President’s office in Ukraine, presumably as a coup, who’s favorable to Russia. The Russians denied this, the person whom they named said this is completely preposterous; but we’re seeing this kind of psychological warfare. Now, countering the psychological warfare, there’s been a continuing diplomatic offensive from Russia. Putin had an interesting discussion with the Russian-Italian Chamber of Commerce, and it appears that the German business and manufacturing grouping wants to have a similar discussion. And the EU has denounced this. This is part of what appears to be a growing split occurring within Europe, isn’t it? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think it’s deepening, and if Blinken goes around and talks about the “unity of the allies” and NATO and so forth, I think this is absolutely not true. As you say, the EU tried to pressure Italian businessmen and corporations not to go into this dialogue with Putin, and only two or three did back down, but the vast majority did have this dialogue. And in Germany, the German Committee on Eastern European Economic Relations (Ost-Ausschuss der Deutschen Wirtschaft), which is basically the core of German industry, they also came out and want to have a videoconference with Putin. And they also reminded people of the statements by former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, that the most important good is the maintenance of peace. And they also made emphatically the point that the security interests of Russia must be respected. That is important. Then you have in the Social Democracy (SPD) an appeal circulated that Germany has to remember and return to the Ostpolitik of Willy Brandt and Egon Bahr, the détente. And there are similar other appeals circulating. So I think there is a reawakening of the peace movement in several countries, and this is a reflection of the fact that people are becoming very, very upset about the possibility of war. There is one demand coming from Vladimir Yermakov, who is the Director of Arms Control and Nonproliferation in the Russian Foreign Ministry, and he demands that the modernized nuclear weapons which are in Europe, the B61 and other types, that they all be withdrawn back to the territory of the United States, and that the five non-nuclear members of NATO who are training for the case of a nuclear attack on Russia, that that must be absolutely halted. I think this will be a demand that will be picked up by peace-oriented people in Europe, because the fact that these weapons do exist on European soil makes the countries that have these weapons prime targets if it comes to any kind of a confrontation, because it is generally very clear that conventionally there is no way how the United States and NATO could win a war against Russia. The United States may have all kinds of modern equipment, and right now both the British and the United States are having continuous transport of so-called “lethal weapons” into Ukraine; and also from the Baltic states, whom the U.S. has given permission that they can transfer weapons which they got from the U.S. to Ukraine. But if you look at the map, Russia has the advantage of territorial depth—Russia is a country with 11 time zones—and any time somebody tried to conquer Russia, starting with Napoleon, and continued with Hitler, they got such bloody noses: The great Napoleonic army was decimated to a few hundred, poor lost souls who returned from that campaign. Hitler could not defeat Russia, at a tremendous loss for the Russian people, but there was no way how Hitler could have won that war; and that would be the fate of anybody who was trying to have a war that would involve Russia. So the danger, naturally, is that it would come to the question of the use of nuclear weapons. Now, we are still sitting on a powder keg, because Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has warned that there is evidence of American or British mercenaries operating already inside the territory of Ukraine. There are reports about private military companies, in part these are the “gray zone” people, former soldiers who now have private firms training people who have a crazy affection for military questions. So there is a big danger, because a provocation could be launched at any moment, and false-flag operations, as well, so this is something to be watched very carefully. Then there is the discussion that supposedly Xi Jinping would have asked Putin to wait until after the Winter Olympics are over before attacking Ukraine—which is ludicrous, but increases the danger, and I can only say that people must really step back from this whole question and get back to their senses. One has the feeling that the people who are pushing this confrontation have gone completely mad: They’re playing with the existence of civilization. And I can only tell people, this is something where we have to walk back from the brink of the potential annihilation of the human species. SCHLANGER: There is one other aspect I want to bring up, which you mentioned before, which is the bullying by Blinken. We’re seeing more signs of insanity from Congress in terms of sanctions that they’re talking about, new economic sanctions against Russia. “Preemptive sanctions,” which is being discussed by a number of different people—including some in Ukraine—saying the best thing to make sure that Russia doesn’t invade is to have “preemptive sanctions.” And then you have the threats against the diplomats, the fact that more diplomatic offices are being shut down—this is all part of what seems like a pre-war mobilization. ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I must say that this is not civilized behavior any more. First of all, the U.S. recalling its non-essential diplomats from Ukraine is an unfriendly act. There is no reason to do that. Then there is this talk about the Russian ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov, that may be forced to leave in April. Now, that would be a very, very dramatic escalation, to basically force the ouster of the most important diplomat between the United States and Russia. And then, there was a readout from the White House, from unnamed “senior administration officials” discussing what the nature of potential economic sanctions against Russia would be, in the case of a Russian attack. Now, obviously, the Russians have stated again and again, they do not intend to attack, and Lavrov has said it many times, that if it is up to Russia, there will be no war. And other officials have said the only people who are pushing a war between Russia and Ukraine is the West. Russia has no interest to attack. They just put up these troops along the border to make the point that they have a security interest, and they want to have a solution to it, but they never said they intended to attack. Now, what this White House readout says, it is quite incredible. This was a meeting which took place on Jan. 25. They discussed a whole range of “severe economic measures” starting “at the top of the escalation ladder”—in other words, not moving up slowly, getting stronger and stronger, but going full blast from the beginning. And they say want to “hit Putin’s strategic ambitions to industrialize his economy quite hard,” by denying him access to all modern advanced technologies, like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, anything having to do with defense aerospace. And they basically say the aim is to prevent Putin’s intention to “diversify” from exporting oil and gas, causing an atrophy of the Russian economy. And on and on with this language. The language of this is so brutal, it’s basically saying: Look, we managed with the shock therapy in 1990s, with Jeffrey Sachs in the Yeltsin period, to turn a former superpower into a raw materials producing, third world country, and now we will deny Russia the right to industrialize, by applying such measures. Now, that is a form of a declaration of war already! How can you deny a country to develop industrially? This is really big, and I would like people to read this, because if you read the language, how this is written, it portrays a mindset which is the mindset of a party declaring war already. And naturally, I remember, there was a report by the CIA in 1991, which had similar language, which basically said Russia has more raw materials than the United States and they have better educated scientists, and therefore, any economic development of Russia must be discouraged. And that was the beginning of the shock therapy, which reduced the industrial capacity of Russia between 1991 and 1994, to only 30% of what it had been before. And the 1990s were a decade which the Russians regard as “genocide,” because the demographic curve was absolutely reduced by 1 million people per year. Naturally, this is also not very realistic, because in the meantime, the Chinese economy is in the process of overtaking the United States, and while there may still be certain areas where such sanctions would be felt in a painful way by Russia or anybody else who is affected by it, but the idea that you can deny Russian industrial development by applying such sanctions, it’s a reflection of the same kind of arrogant mindset; because China has put a rover on the far side of the Moon, where nobody in the West has, so they could not have stolen that technology from anybody—they’re the leader. They’re also the leader in terms of fusion energy research and fast train systems and many other areas. But it shows you an intention, and that mindset is the same one as Mr. Blinken thinks he can force the Europeans to go along with these sanctions, even if it would destroy their own economies, which if you go in this direction, then Russia would cut off all oil and gas supplies which would hit Europe, not the United States. So this is really wrong, and I can only say that hopefully there will be some people inside the United States who will say this is not the true character of the United States, because you cannot build peace on the basis of doing the utmost damage to whoever you want to have a relationship with. SCHLANGER: It’s also a confirmation of what your husband, Lyndon LaRouche talked about in his 1998 “Storm Over Asia” video, in which he said the attempt to deny economic development to Russia and China is part of the traditional British geopolitical doctrine, which is dictated from the City of London. And the idea, obviously, that they’re trying to stop any Eurasian integration with Europe is really one of the key, underlying features. Now, on that, there are some developments around Afghanistan: There is a Taliban delegation in Norway this week. There’s continued discussion of your proposal for Operation Ibn Sina. Why don’t you let us know what you have on developments around Afghanistan? ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think it’s good there was this conference in Norway, where a delegation of the Taliban met with representatives from the U.S., Germany, I think France, Italy—and I don’t know the full extent of what measures came out of that. But the fact that this took place, and there are now more organizations working with the Taliban and that there is a recognition that the only way to save the 25 million people who are in acute life danger is to work with the Taliban—this is definitely a breakthrough. I think the German head of UNICEF gave a report from Kabul, where he said 1 million children are in acute danger and are actually dying; 7 million children are in acute danger. And he said this is as many children altogether as there are in Germany. I haven’t checked this figure, but it makes sense, and it shows you the incredible dimension of the need to change the thinking. And as we have mentioned on this show several times, I launched the Operation Ibn Sina, which refers to the great physician from 1,000 years ago from this region. And I’m very happy that there are now more people picking up on it and really think this is a very good idea, to use Afghanistan as a model to create a modern healthcare system for every country in the world. And the speech I gave about it, which is the cover story in the January 28 issue of EIR, which you can download and circulate it. We can also put the link underneath this show afterwards. The video of the speech I made is also available. And these are being tweeted by several influential people, and they are sending it through their social media. So I hope this will lead to a really broad discussion and becomes the basis for actually implementing a modern health system for Afghanistan and every other country on the planet! Because the pandemic is still here, and despite what people hope, new variants are still a possibility. And in any case, the conditions of many, many countries in the developing sector, they must have a development perspective, because it cannot go on that billions of people are on the verge of famine, and losing their livelihoods, and in danger of dying. So Operation Ibn Sina must be the beginning of a new paradigm. And this becomes all the more urgent, because we’re sitting on a powder keg: The reason for all the war danger is the fact that the financial system is about to blow up. There are many reports that the so-called “emerging markets” which is a synonym for the developing countries, that they may have a huge debt crisis if there is the slightest “tapering” of interest rates by the Federal Reserve. So the urgency to go with LaRouche’s Four Laws, and really go in a completely different direction, rebuilding the world economy by having actual development, starting with a world health system is of the greatest urgency. SCHLANGER: Among those issuing a warning was Guardian columnist, Larry Elliott, who pointed out that almost 50% of the debt which could be lost in a wave of defaults from poorer countries that are heavily indebted, is owed to financial institutions and investments. That means, people’s personal retirement funds are invested in this debt. David Malpass, the president of the World Bank, also warned that we could be seeing a trigger of debt defaults from the developing sector: So, in that sense, the interconnection between the war danger, the spread of disease and collapse of healthcare, and the overall economic system, really comes back to the importance of Lyndon LaRouche’s proposal for a New Bretton Woods. And I think that would be a good place to wrap this up. ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes. I think there are many countries in the world that clearly are preparing for the eventuality of a sudden collapse. You see it in many details: Gold buying is up again, which always happens when the population starts to get hysterical, then you have large buyers of gold. You have more and more a tendency to go out of the dollar. So, even if Russia would be cut off from the SWIFT system, I don’t think it will have that devastating an affect on Russia, but it could be a “nuclear bomb” for the Western capital markets—at least, that’s what Friedrich Merz, the new head of the German Christian Democracy has been saying, and I tend to agree with him on that point. So, I think we have to have a discussion about a new paradigm: We must completely change the orientation of colonialism, the idea to keep the developing countries suppressed. We have to replace that with a new just world economic order, along the lines with what China is doing with the Belt and Road Initiative, and we must get the Europeans and the United States, hopefully, to cooperate with the Belt and Road Initiative, in the development of Southwest Asia, of Africa, of Latin America. And you know, if we join hands, no problem could not be solved! So I think, in the same way as the relationship between Russia and China has been named by former Russian Prime Minister Medvedev, he said that that relationship has become a model of what relationships among nations should be: In other words, that each furthers the best interests of the other, respects its sovereignty, doesn’t meddle in its internal affairs. And China has offered that many years ago, already, as the model for a great power relationship between the United States and China. So, we have to have a new thinking, and the common interest of mankind must be put first. If we cannot mobilize the thinking of the population to that level, we may not make it as a species, so there is right now the urgent need to have such a debate. And if you want to help this effort then join the Schiller Institute, and we will soon have a big new conference on all of these issues, probably in the week of February 7-11, so stay tuned: Become a member, help our mobilization, and hopefully we’ll see you next week. SCHLANGER: And I would urge people, as you mentioned before, but your presentation from last Saturday’s Manhattan Project meeting of the Schiller Institute—“Can War with Russia Still Be Averted?”—was very effective at identifying what this new paradigm would be and how we would get there. So, I would urge people, go to the Schiller Institute YouTube channel and it’s the presentation from January 22, 2022. So Helga, thanks for joining us. It’s always good to get a note of optimism, but it’s also important that people face the fact, as you say, that we’re still sitting on a powder keg, and it’s a little hard to be totally optimistic when you have a powder keg underneath your rear end: So, join us now, and let’s see what we can do about it. So, Helga, we’ll see you next week! ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I hope so—next week.
The all-out mobilization underway this week to consolidate the forces of Global NATO, to continue the war against Russia in Ukraine, and to target China, was the subject of this week's conversation with Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
Nov. 10—Schiller Institute founder and chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche made the following remarks to open the Friday, Nov. 10, 2023 meeting of the International Peace Coalition.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche addresses an audience of young people from around the world on the method of thinking discovered by Nicholas of Cusa. “[Nicholas of Cusa] developed a method of thinking, of thinking something completely new… It was the idea that human reason has the capability to define a solution on a completely different and higher level, than those on which all the conflicts and contradictions arose. It addresses the capacity to think a One, which is of a higher magnitude and power, than the Many. And once you train your mind to think that way [according to the coincidence of opposites], you have the inerrant key to creativity, and one can apply this way of thinking to virtually all realms of thought.” —Helga Zepp-LaRouche Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and chairman of the Schiller Institute, and one of the world’s leading Cusa experts, insists that to get out of the onrushing New Dark Age, mankind must learn from the father of the 15th Century Golden Renaissance, Nicholas of Cusa. We must start with the underlying crisis: that in the method of thinking.
In her weekly dialogue today, Helga Zepp-LaRouche contrasted the exciting horizons opened by three near-simultaneous space flights arriving at Mars, with the polarizing circus underway in the U.S. Senate trial of former President Trump. The Mars' missions, she said "show where mankind should be going....We have so much to discover." She pointed to the successful development of COVID vaccines by Russian and Chinese scientists, and their willingness to share them, as another example of the kind of cooperation required at a moment of crisis like this.