Askary beretter til Syrian Times, at krigsmagere fra det britiske imperium
søger at stoppe den Nye Silkevej i Sydvestasien

Den 9. januar (EIRNS) – Syria Times, det officielle engelske online magasin, interviewede den 7. januar EIR’s Hussein Askary og offentliggjorde hele afskriften af samtalen, der blev gennemført med Haifa Mafalani, under overskriften “Hussein Askary: Ved at dræbe General Soleimani i Irak, har Trump-administrationen sendt Verden ud i ukendt farvand.”

Blandt mange punkter som Askary fremsatte, understregede han, at der er en større sammenhæng for det britiske imperiums geopolitiske intention om ”endeløs krigsførelse” i kontrast til udsigten om fred gennem udvikling.

Askary sagde om det amerikanske attentat på Irans general Qasem Soleimani: ”Det er meget sandsynligt, at Trump blev trukket ind i denne hensynsløse operation af neokonservative kredse og pro-zionistiske krigeriske individer og grupperinger. Disse kræfter er blevet ophidsede over de sejrrige udfald i Syrien og Irak med udrensning af de amerikanske og britisk-støttede terrorgrupper, og med endelig at bane vejen for integrationen af regionen i Bælte og Vejinitiativet/Nye Silkevej fra Kina gennem Centralasien og Iran til Irak, og derefter Syrien og Middelhavet.

Præsident Bashar Al-Assad erklærede for blot to uger siden, at Bælte- og Vejinitiativet er Syriens måde at genopbygge, og afslørede at Syrien har seks strategiske megaprojekter i denne henseende. Den irakiske premierminister Adil Abdel-Mahdi var i Kina i slutningen af september og underskrev mange væsentlige aftaler om udveksling af olie til genopbygning af infrastruktur. Dette var en revolutionerende udvikling. Men så snart han var tilbage i Bagdad, startede oprøret mod regeringen, og landet har befundet sig i en ny spiral af vold og usikkerhed lige siden.”

Askary afsluttede sit interview med at bemærke, at ”den iranske ledelse har udøvet en hel del ro og fornuft i vurderingen af dens reaktioner på amerikanske tvangsforanstaltninger i de seneste to år. Selvfølgelig ville en mere tilbageholdende reaktion være nyttig. Men det kræver garantier for, at sådanne kriminelle handlinger ophører, og at den nuværende amerikanske politik over for Iran ændres.

”Derfor opfordrede formanden for det Internationale Schiller Institut, fru Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Rusland og Kina til at gribe ind diplomatisk for at sikre at USA indser, at det ville være den rigtige måde at lette spændingen og sætte hele regionen på kurs mod fred og sikkerhed. At bringe regionerne ind i Bælte- og Vejinitiativet er nøglen til at få succes med denne indsats.”

Syria Times identificerede Askary i detaljer. ”Hussein Askary er en irakisk-født svensk statsborger. Han er Sydvestasien-koordinator for det Internationale Schiller Institut. Askary har arbejdet som økonomisk og strategisk analytiker i Sydvestasien og Nord- og Østafrika for det Washington-baserede ugentlige magasin Executive Intelligence Review siden 1996. Han er medforfatter til flere bøger om den Nye Silkevejs-strategi og dens indflydelse på verdensøkonomien.”

I begyndelsen af september 2019 gennemgik Mafalani Schiller Instituttets video fra 2016, “Projekt Phoenix — Aleppo: The Eternal City”, som blev produceret og vist første gang på Schiller Instituttets konference den 25.-26. juni 2016 i Berlin om “Menneskehedens fælles fremtid og en renæssance af de klassiske kulturer.”

 




NYHEDSORIENTERING NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2019:
For en ny era for menneskeheden
med LaRouches løsninger

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Berlinmurens fald, anden chance for en gunstig mulighed
Schiller Instituttets konference, 9. november 2019
1989 – Berlinmurens fald og en mistet mulighed
2019 – En anden chance for en stor mulighed

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Vi fejrer i dag et tredobbelt jubilæum: 30-årsdagen for Berlinmurens fald; Friedrich Schiller, den store tyske frihedsdigters 260-års fødselsdag; og 35-årsdagen for grundlæggelsen af Schiller Instituttet. Og når sådanne tre jubilæer falder sammen, er det faktisk værd at se tilbage på, hvordan de hænger sammen.

Nu om dage kan mange mennesker ikke engang huske murens fald, fordi de enten ikke var født endnu, eller fordi de var for unge til at følge med i det. Men det er virkelig vigtigt at lære lektien om hvad der skete dengang, og hvad der gik galt, i forhold til den situation som vi har i dag.

Jeg kan huske mange af begivenhederne, som om det var i går, fordi vi ikke bare stod på sidelinjen og så på, men vi befandt os midt i disse begivenheder og prøvede på at forme dem med vores ideer.

Der gives næsten ikke eksempler på en større forskel mellem den officielle fortælling om, hvad der skete i forbindelse med den tyske genforening og murens fald, [og hvad der egentligt skete]: Den officielle fortælling er en ting, og hvad der virkelig skete er noget ganske andet. For hvis man lytter til den officielle fortælling, så var dette demokratiets sejr over kommunismen, friheden over diktaturet, og Fukuyama, historikeren, sagde to år senere, da Sovjetunionen faldt sammen, at dette var slutningen på [verdens-]historien. Og opfattelsen var generelt, at hele verden ville tage den vestlige model for “demokrati” til sig, herunder menneskerettigheder og det parlamentariske system, og at det simpelthen bare ville gå den vej.

Imidlertid advarede jeg i mange taler i 1990 om, at hvis man agtede at presse en ligeså falleret vestlig liberal model ned over det sammenbrudte kommunistiske økonomiske system, vil man over en vis periode kunne opleve et opsving, men at det til sidst ville føre til et meget, meget større sammenbrud af systemet. Og jeg tror, at det er præcist der hvor vi er i dag.

Hvis man betragter verden rundt om på hele kloden, har man et system i fuldstændig uorden: Se på massedemonstrationerne i Chile, i Irak, i Libanon, se på de ‘gule veste’ i Frankrig; se på hvad der foregår med Brexit; de tyske landmænd er i totalt oprør. Efter min mening er det faktisk første gang i historien, at det sker samtidigt i alle hjørner af verden. Og jeg tror virkelig, at det i dag er sandt hvad Leibniz sagde i slutningen af 1600-tallet: Han sagde, at hvis hele verden på et tidspunkt bliver domineret af utilitarisme, vil det komme til en verdensrevolution.

Det vestlige etablissements intentioner i ’89 – og især efter Sovjetunionens sammenbrud i ’91 – om at påtvinge verden en unipolær orden, hvilket var denne idé om “demokrati-som-det-eneste”, har åbenlyst givet tilbageslag. De prøvede at påtvinge denne unipolære verdensorden med regimeskifte-operationer, med farverevolutioner, med interventionskrige; og ideen om at historien op til dette punkt, i det væsentlige, kun drejer sig om den atlantiske sektor. Men tilbageslaget mod denne indsats for at påtvinge en unipolær verden har ført til fremgangen for en hel række forskellige nationer, Rusland, Kina, Indien, og andre asiatiske nationer. Det har ført til en helt anden selvforståelse i Afrika. Det har øget kløften mellem de rige og de fattige på en sådan måde, at det ikke længere er bæredygtigt. Middelklassen forsvinder.

Så hvis man tager dette i betragtning, og spørger sig selv hvordan vi er nået til den såkaldte ”enden på historien”, demokrati overalt, og så de gigantiske omvæltninger, som finder sted lige nu?  Nuvel, ’89 var det man på tysk med rette kunne kalde en “Sternstunde der Menschheit”, hvilket betyder en enestående chance [for forandringer] i historien, en “stjernestund for menneskeheden.” Og det var et af disse store øjeblikke, hvor man faktisk kunne forme historien, fordi kommunismen var forsvundet, og man kunne have indført en fredelig verdensorden i det 21. århundrede. Og den vision havde vi:

Allerede i ’84, da Sovjetunionen afviste hans tilbud om SDI (Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ –red.), efter at præsident Reagan havde gjort det (SDI) til den officielle amerikanske politik, forudsagde Lyndon LaRouche, at hvis Sovjetunionen ville fastholde deres daværende politik, hvilket var en indsats for militær dominans, og ‘primitiv akkumulation’ imod deres egen økonomi, ville Sovjetunionen kollapse i løbet af fem år. Og det skete: Lyndon LaRouche, der også iagttog de økonomiske vanskeligheder i Comecon-landene, forudsagde i 1988 den snarlige tyske genforening, samt at det [gen-]forenede Tyskland skulle udvikle Polen med vestlig teknologi som en model for at omdanne hele Comecon.

Da muren faldt – i grunden efter de tiltagende mandagsdemonstrationer – var vi faktisk de eneste, der havde en forestilling [om det]. Husk tilbage på den utrolige glæde – folk dansede på Berlinmuren, da den blev åbnet, og det var et utroligt øjeblik med en potentiel forandring i historien. De officielle dokumenter fra den tyske regering, der blev offentliggjort et par år senere, viser, at til trods for at tysk genforening var det primære mål for tysk politik, havde man ingen beredskabsplan! De troede i virkeligheden ikke, at det nogensinde ville ske! Ingen troede for alvor på, at Sovjetunionen ville forsvinde. Men vi havde en idé om det, og hr. LaRouche foreslog første gang i 1988, at det genforenede Tyskland skulle udvikle Polen, og jeg skrev en løbeseddel, der blev offentliggjort i midten af november 1989, “Kære Tyskland, gå videre med selvtillid,” og jeg foreslog nøjagtigt dette, at vi med vestlig teknologi skulle udvikle Polen og de andre Comecon-lande.

Dette var naturligvis endnu ikke blevet til politik, men Helmut Kohl, Tysklands kansler på det tidspunkt, tog et første ‘baby-skridt’ i retning af suverænitet, ved den 28. november, et par dage efter min løbeseddel, at offentliggøre et 10-punkts program, som endnu ikke var ideen om genforening, men en konføderation af de to tyske stater.

To dage derefter, den 30. november, blev Alfred Herrhausen, lederen af Deutsche Bank på det tidspunkt, myrdet af en meget tvivlsom – sandsynligvis ikke eksisterede – ”tredje generation” af terrororganisationen Røde Armé Fraktion. Det er i det mindste et spørgsmål, der stadig skal undersøges af historikere. Men det var et budskab til Kohl, “vov ikke på at gå i retning af tysk suverænitet.”

På det tidspunkt kom der en voldsom reaktion: [Den daværende britiske premierminister] Margaret Thatcher igangsatte denne kampagne for “Det fjerde Rige”; den franske præsident Mitterrand krævede, at Tyskland skulle opgive D-marken og indføre Euroen; Bush Sr. krævede selvbegrænsning af Tyskland gennem yderligere integration i NATO og EU, accept af Maastricht-traktaten, og dermed det regime med nedskæringer der nu fører til sprængningen af EU, spændingerne mellem øst og vest, nord og syd.

Vi foreslog den produktive ‘Paris-Berlin-Wien-trekant’, som var ideen om at bruge vestlig teknologi til at transformere landene i Østeuropa, og dybest set bruge deres produktive potentialer til at modernisere og integrere med Europa. Det første sådant forslag offentliggjorde vi i januar 1990, og da Sovjetunionen kollapsede i ’91 udvidede vi straks idéen om den produktive trekant til hele Eurasien for at forbinde de produktive befolkningscentre i Europa med dem i Asien gennem udviklingskorridorer, og vi kaldte det for ‘Den eurasiske Landbro’, Den nye Silkevej. Dette skulle også [danne basis for] den fredelige verdensorden i det 21. århundrede.

Naturligvis brød de neo-konservative, som ønskede at påtvinge deres unipolære verdensorden, løfterne de havde givet til Gorbatjov, om, at NATO aldrig ville blive udvidet til Sovjetunionens grænser. I ’91 offentliggjorde CIA ifølge en tysk avis en rapport om, at Rusland havde en bedre uddannet arbejdsstyrke og flere naturressourcer end USA, og at landet derfor ville blive en konkurrent på verdensmarkedet, hvis man tillod økonomisk udvikling. Derfor skulle den økonomiske udvikling afværges.

Hvad der trådte i kraft var chokterapien fra Jeffrey Sachs, den samme Jeffrey Sachs, der nu befinder sig midt i den grønne klima-finansieringssvindel.
George Soros var involveret i en enorm hjerneflugt fra Rusland og de øvrige tidligere sovjet-lande, og i Tyskland forsøgte de virkeligt at sprænge potentialet for et godt forhold til Rusland på det tidspunkt. Den 8. marts 1990 var den sidste samling i DDR’s ‘Volkskammer’ [parlamentet i Østtyskland]. De skabte ‘Treuhand Anstalt’, som senere skulle blive til den største industrielle bedrift i verden. Og de skulle angiveligt beskytte DDR’s statsejede ejendom, men et ‘koldt kup’ blev udført: Allerede den 26. juni 1990 offentliggjorde De Maizière-regeringen vedtægter, der alene handlede om “privatisering” og “omorganisering” af de statsejede industrier.

I august 1990 blev Detlev Karsten Rohwedder, som var en meget god og effektiv industrialist, udpeget til at foretage en omlægning af førnævnte ‘Treuhand’, og han havde en fremragende forståelse af kravene til realøkonomien, så han satte genopretning før privatisering med det primære formål at beskytte arbejdspladserne fra de tidligere statsejede virksomheder. Straks kom han under ondskabsfulde angreb fra de britiske og amerikanske investeringsbanker, der beskyldte ham for at blokere for udenlandske investeringer. Den 1. april 1991 blev han skudt af den samme tvivlsomme, sandsynligvis ikke eksisterende, “tredje generation” af ‘Rote Armé Fraktionen’ af den terroristiske Baader-Meinhof-gruppe. Han blev erstattet af Birgit Breuel, en datter af Alvin Münchmeyer, hvis bank har en meget dyster historie, idet den var med til at finansiere NSDAP [nazist-partiet] i 30’erne sammen med Harriman i USA og Montagu Norman, bankdirektør for Bank of England.

Hvad der skete, var en gigantisk ekspropriation af den østtyske befolknings ejendom. Pludselig betød alle disse menneskers livsværk intet; det blev erklæret værdiløst; og dette er et chok, som disse mennesker i det tidligere Østtyskland ikke er kommet sig over den dag i dag. Og jeg vil sige, at denne ekspropriation har spillet meget ind på det faktum, at vi nu har fået fremkomsten af Alternativet for Tyskland (AfD), en populistisk organisation som imidlertid har en masse af alle de onde elementer, højreekstremisme, hvis ikke værre – fascistiske elementer – i sig.

Se, etablissementet udnyttede grundlæggende det faktum, at kommunismen var forsvundet, og der skete noget nyt. Da Sovjetunionen stadig eksisterede, så oligarkiet i Vesten stadig et vist behov for videnskabelig og teknologisk fremgang, for dybest set at holde trit med våbenkapløbet i Den kolde Krig, af årsager, der allerede var blevet formuleret af Machiavelli: At man altid skal forblive på samme teknologiniveau som ens modstander, eller være foran.

Men med Sovjetunionens sammenbrud gik det britiske imperium ind i en absolut ubændig deregulering af de finansielle markeder, og de gik tilbage til den gamle oligarkiske tankegang om befolkningsreduktion, og at holde befolkningen i tilbageståenhed, og især efter at det lykkedes at eliminere Glass/Steagall-loven i USA i 1999, fik vi en fuldstændig, uhæmmet deregulering af de finansielle markeder på bekostning af industrien og velfærden, til fordel for spekulanternes profitmaksimering.

I juli 2007, da den anden ejendomsmarkedskrise brød ud – faktisk en uge før – optog Lyndon LaRouche en verdensberømt video, hvor han sagde, at ”Dette system er absolut færdigt, og alt hvad vi vil se nu er, hvordan de forskellige aspekter kommer til at manifestere sig”. Og som et resultat af det faktum, at folk ikke lyttede til ham, fik vi så det store systemiske nedbrud i 2008. Intet blev gjort af centralbanker for at eliminere de grundlæggende årsager til dette nedbrud, og derfor står vi nu, ca. 11-12 år senere, overfor en endnu værre krise, fordi det eneste man lavede var kvantitative lempelser, nulrenter, negative renter, og i dag ser man et sammenbrud af hele systemet, i meget, meget værre grad end i 2008.

Men i mellemtiden udviklede sig også en anden tendens: I forbindelse med vores forslag til den ‘Eurasiske Landbro’, arrangerede vi konferencer og seminarer på fem kontinenter. I ’96 var der en stor konference i Beijing, hvor jeg forelagde vores forslag om at bruge den Eurasiske Landbro som hjørnesten for en ny verdensøkonomisk orden, og på det tidspunkt erklærede Kina, at den Eurasiske Landbro skulle være det strategiske mål inden år 2010. Men så kom naturligvis krisen i Asien i ’97. I ’98 kom den russiske statsbankerot, og disse lande – de asiatiske lande – blev tvunget til at udvikle et alternativ for at forsvare sig selv. Og siden da har der udviklet sig en hel række organisationer: BRICS, Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Global South; og Schiller Instituttet fortsatte med at afholde konferencer med forslag om, at den Eurasiske Landbro skulle blive til en ‘Verdenslandbro’, der forbinder alle fem kontinenter.

I 2013 i Kasakhstan annoncerede præsident Xi Jinping så den Nye Silkevej. Og i de forløbne seks år siden da, er dette blevet det største infrastrukturprojekt nogensinde i historien. Det har allerede fået tilslutning fra 157 nationer og 30 store internationale organisationer. De har skabt et nyt paradigme, der er baseret på respekten for national suverænitet og ikke-indblanding i de andres landes sociale system. Det er en model for samarbejde, som ifølge præsident Xi Jinping er åben for samarbejde med enhver nation på planeten.

Når man ser rundt omkring på kloden er der demonstrationer i mange lande, mange af dem er større end ‘mandags-demonstrationerne’ i DDR. i ’89, og nogle af dem er ikke så fredelige som de var. Vi konfronteres også med eksistentielle farer: Det udgår især fra narkokartellerne, hvis man betragter situationen i Mexico, eller hvis man ser på de overvejende Soros-sponsorerede farverevolutioner, såsom i Hongkong og andre destabiliseringer rundt om i verden. Det er i realiteten de samme kræfter, der står bag kuppet mod præsident Donald Trump, siden 2016. Men der er også en modbevægelse. Den kriminelle efterforskning af kupmagerne mod Trump ledes af justitsminister William Barr.

Så 30 år efter murens fald er vi præcist på det punkt, som jeg har påpeget i mange taler, at hvis man påtvinger det liberale system, så vil man få et langt større sammenbrud, og det er præcis, hvad vi ser i dag. Men vi har også den nye konstellation med Bælte- og Vejinitiativet og præsident Trump, som mange gange har sagt, og bevist gennem sine handlinger, at han ønsker at forbedre forholdet til Rusland og Kina. Så faktisk oplever vi lige nu den store chance igen i 2019, men hvad der [nu] må ske, for at tage ved lære af hvad der gik galt for 30 år siden, er, at de fire [stor-]magter – USA, Rusland, Kina og Indien – skal gennemføre Lyndon LaRouches recept:

– Vi skal have en global Glass-Steagall, adskillelse af bankerne. Kasinoøkonomien må slutte, og dette bør ske inden sammenbruddet for alvor kaster verden ud i kaos.
– Derefter har vi i brug for en nationalbank efter Alexander Hamiltons principper i ethvert land.
– Der er brug for en ny Bretton Woods-aftale, et nyt kreditsystem til at finansiere internationale projekter under Bælte- og Vejinitiativet.
– Og vi er nødt til at have en forøgelse af produktiviteten i økonomierne gennem et fælles lynprogram til realisering af fusionskraft, samt internationalt samarbejde om rumfart og -forskning.

Nu må disse lande – de fire stormagter – gå sammen med andre lande om den økonomiske genopbygning af Sydvestasien, som er blevet ødelagt af disse interventionskrige; og vi har brug for industrialiseringen af Afrika, fordi dette er den store udfordring for hele menneskeheden. Vi må få bugt med geopolitik, og vi må samtykke i hvad præsident Xi Jinping har foreslået igennem mange år: Et fællesskab for hele menneskehedens fremtid.

Dette skal dog kombineres med en renæssance af klassisk kultur, og det er derfor at Schiller Instituttets rolle og ideerne fra Friedrich Schiller er så absolut uundværlige. Det var principielt for Schiller Instituttet, da det blev grundlagt i 1984, at en ny økonomisk verdensorden i virkeligheden kun kan lykkes, hvis den kombineres med en klassisk renæssance. Vi har brug for en dialog mellem de bedste traditioner indenfor alle kulturer, og for europæisk civilisation betyder det, at det smukke menneskebillede, som det blev udtrykt af Friedrich Schiller, og som det blev fejret af Beethoven i ‘Ode til Glæden’ i den niende symfoni, må blive grundlaget for vores uddannelsessystem og vores sociale liv. Fordi hvert menneske, ifølge Schiller, har potentialet til at blive en smuk sjæl, og hans definition af dette er, at ethvert menneske potentielt kan blive et geni. Han har en idé om, at ethvert menneske har en ubegrænset evne til selvforbedring, intellektuelt og moralsk.

Så hvis man ser på det, har den liberale model ikke bare fejlet økonomisk, men også kulturelt. Hvis man ser på narkotikaepidemien, for eksempel i USA, grimheden i ungdomskulturerne, volden i den såkaldte ”underholdning”, skoleskyderier og lignende ting, er det meget, meget tydeligt, at hvis Vesten ønsker at overleve, er der brug for en æstetisk uddannelse. Præsident Xi Jinping har sagt ved mange lejligheder, hvor vigtig han betragter den æstetiske uddannelse, fordi den fører til et smukt sind og en smuk sjæl, og det er kilden til skabelsen af store kunstværker.

Så, I USA og Europa må vi til at genskabe de bedste traditioner for humanisme og klassisk kunst; i traditionen fra den italienske renæssance, de tyske klassikere, musikken fra Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Verdi og andre. Dette er ikke en mulighed: Det er en nødvendighed. Civilisationer er forsvundet, og hvis man går til museerne, er de fulde af eksempler på nationer, kulturer og civilisationer, som moralsk var for anløbne til at klare sig. Europa og USA kunne muligvis helt forsvinde! Og dette siger jeg ikke som en pessimistisk prognose, men som et incitament for os til at ændre vores vaner og antagelser. Vi er nødt til at genskabe vores civilisation baseret på de høje idealer fra de store digtere, som Schiller, hvis 260 års fødselsdag vi fejrer i dag.




Video og afskrift: Fejring af Berlin murens fald og Friedrich Schillers fødselsdag.
Konference i NYC med Helga Zepp-LaRouche som hovedtaler den 11. november 2019 (på engelsk)

A Three-Fold Anniversary
Address by Helga Zepp-LaRouche (Se afskriftet nedenunder)

Excerpt from video: “The Lost Chance of 1989”
Schubert/Schiller: Die Hoffnung
Michelle Erin, soprano – Margaret Greenspan, piano – Elliot Greenspan, speaker

Schubert/Schiller: An Emma
John Sigerson, tenor – Margaret Greenspan, piano

Shakespeare: Luciana’s Monologue from Comedy of Errors, Act 3, Scene 2
Leah DeGruchy

Max Caspar on Kepler as a Philosophical Mind
John Sigerson

Schiller: “Die Teilung der Erde”
Frank Mathis

Schubert/Schober: “An die Musik”
Lisa Bryce, soprano – Richard Cordova, piano

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Alt imens psykotiske ’regimeskiftere’ går amok, breder der sig
en verdensomspændende revolutionær ånd

Den 6. oktober (EIRNS) – Idet hun skelnede skarpt mellem handlinger begået af de skøre centralbankfolk, og så de økofascister og regimeskiftere, som de har finansieret og sluppet løs, talte Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag under Schiller Instituttets webcast om ånden i den revolutionære optimisme, der fejer over kloden. Bestræbelserne på at vælte Trump, sagde hun, kan meget vel give bagslag, da justitsminister Barr og rigsadvokat Durham fortsætter efterforskningen af kuppet med møder i Storbritannien og Italien for at afdække den reelle udenlandske indblanding i det amerikanske valg i 2016 – hvilket Rusland ikke stod bag!

Samtidig vil forsøget på at anvende de terroristiske voldsomheder fra “et virulent og højtråbende mindretal” i Hong Kong til at udløse et regimeskifte i Kina ikke lykkes, da langt de fleste kinesere er optimistiske med hensyn til deres fremtid, hævdede hun. Indgriben fra den britiske guvernør i Hong Kong, Chris Patten, der opfordrer ”folket” til at danne en alternativ regering i Hong Kong, gør det klart, hvilken rolle det britiske imperium spiller i forbindelse med kupforsøget. Kineserne, foreslog hun, skulle kræve en fuld undersøgelse af Londons kriminelle rolle i at støtte den voldelige ‘Jacobiner-pøbel’, der forsøger at ødelægge Hong Kong og Kina.

I kontrast hertil talte Zepp-LaRouche om Schiller Instituttets konference i New York den 5. oktober, der fandt sted som en del af fejringen af den internationale ‘Måne-Observation’, hvor hun og andre talere talte om det nye fremkommende paradigme, med temaet “Menneskeheden som en galaktisk art: Det nødvendige alternativ til krig.” Hun opfordrede tilhørerne til at lade sig smitte med den “sunde sygdom, månefeberen”. “Stil jer ikke ud på sidelinjen,” sagde hun. Den optimisme, der er nødvendig for at vinde, kommer af at bevæge sig ind i ”de nye grænseegne for viden.”

Talerrækken inkluderede en Andrea Jones, international direktør for NASAs ‘International Observe the Moon Night’ den 5. oktober; Dr. Xing Jijun, den videnskabelig rådgiver ved Kinas mission i New York; et bevægende tilsagn om støtte fra den russiske ambassadør i U.S.A. Anatoly Antonov, med historien om det amerikansk-russiske samarbejde i rummet; Medlemmer af Schiller Instituttets videnskabelige team Ben Deniston og Jason Ross; NASA-stipendiat Aaron Olson, der forsker i helium-3 minedrift på Månen; og Joseph Foster, en signalspecialist om emnet: ”Fra Diana-projektet til Projekt Artemis.” Den fulde konferencevideo er lagt ud på Schiller Instituttets website.

Læsere af nærværende ‘EIR Daily Alert’ bør ikke gå glip af at se den dejlige ”Jonathan Swift-agtige” – intervention af en repræsentant fra LaRouchePAC på et [såkaldt] ‘town hall meeting’ med Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, den dumme, førende “Green New Deal” -proponent i Repræsentanternes hus. Det har bogstaveligt talt haft millioner af seere over hele verden. Kvinden fra LaRouchePAC optrådte lige nøjagtigt som en forstyrret øko-fascist, og sagde, at det ikke var nok at stoppe kulbrinter, at der ganske enkelt var for mange mennesker, og at selv bombning af Rusland ikke ville være tilstrækkeligt, fordi alle udsender CO2 – så vi må spise babyer for at stoppe klima-katastrofen! AOC’s respons er uvurderlig.

Link til https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4820884/eat-babies




Schiller-konference i New York: ‘Menneskeheden som en galaktisk art:
Det nødvendige alternativ til krig’

Den 5. oktober (EIRNS) – Dagens konference i Schiller Instituttet på Manhattan med ovennævnte titel, bød på seks udvalgte talere – enten via livestreaming eller personligt i salen – overbragte hilsner fra den russiske ambassadør i USA, Anatoly Antonov, en videohilsen fra Andrea Jones, direktør for NASAs internationale månenats observation (5. oktober), samt et stærkt videosegment fra en webcast med Lyndon LaRouche fra den 3. december 2009: “Lad os industrialisere Månen nu som basis for fremtidig udforskning af rummet”. De begivenheder, der blev streamet live, var både dybt informative indenfor adskillige aspekter af videnskab og teknologi, og på samme tid en inspiration i forhold til at aktivere en tilstand hos menneskeheden, “hvor fantasiens styrke bliver nationernes politik”, som moderator Dennis Speed udtrykte det, idet han citerede Lyndon LaRouche

Forinden livestreamingen begyndte kl. 13 EDT, startede konferencen med “Sangen til Månen” fra operaen Rusalka af Antonin Dvorak.
Efter Speeds bemærkninger (se transkription,) Jones’ hilsener og LaRouches video, blev hovedtalen dernæst afholdt af Schiller Instituttets præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche (se transkription). Hun startede med at udtrykke, at det er en “fuldkommen glædelig dag i dag” og at erklære, at “Månefeber er en sund sygdom.”

Den næste taler var Dr. Xing Jijun, som er videnskabs- og teknologirådgiver ved Kinas Generalkonsulat i New York. Han uddybede, hvad han betegnede som de to nøgleord, innovation og samarbejde.
Benjamin Deniston fra LaRouches videnskabelige gruppe, “The Basement Team” -, talte derefter – via videoforbindelse – over emnet “Menneskehedens fremtid ligger ude blandt stjernerne”, der beskæftigede sig med implikationer af videnskabelige resultater fra Månen med henblik på at forstå Universet.

Dr. Aaron Olson, tidligere NASA-forskningspartner, talte efterfølgende om “Udvinding af Helium-3 på Månen” og fremviste udstyr og koncepter, der er involveret for at få dette til at ske. Jason Ross’ præsentation havde titlen “CO2-reduktionspolitik – dyrt, dødbringende og unødvendigt.” Han førte tilhørerne gennem emnet med nådesløs ironi.

Joseph Foster, en signalspecialist fra New Jersey, holdt derefter en præsentation med titlen “Fra Projekt Diana til Projekt Artemis”, hvor han gav en livlig historisk gennemgang af den teknologiske udvikling, begyndende i 1946 med de første radarsignaler, der blev reflekteret fra Månen under Projekt Diana, og op til nutiden og hvad der er planlagt for Artemis-projektet. Konferencen blev afsluttet med spørgsmål- og svar og afsluttende bemærkninger fra Helga Zepp-LaRouche, som forblev online under hele konferencen på trods af en tidsforskel på seks timer.




Zepp-LaRouche I Milano: ’Hvad Italien gør lige nu er af den største historiske betydning’

Den 14. marts (EIRNS) – Idet hun talte ved en konference i Milano i går om “Italien og den nye silkevej”, fremlagde Schiller Instituttets grundlægger, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, et strategisk perspektiv for en hurtig forening af det nuværende smuldrende Europa omkring dets deltagelse i udviklingen af det eurasiske kontinent og det store Bælte- og Vejinitiativ, et skridt, som hun antydede kunne blive den udslagsgivende faktor til at flytte verden væk fra den truende fare for udryddelse med kernevåben.

Potentialet for dette skifte “vokser hurtigere, end man tror”, fortalte hun seminaret.” Min prognose [er, at] perspektivet for at forene Europa – ikke nødvendigvis under EU-bureaukratiet, men som i de Gaulles opfattelse mere som et “Fædrelandenes Europa”, der forener sig med Kina, med Rusland, med Bælte- og Vejinitiativet, den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union og de europæiske lande, for fuldt ud at samarbejde i dette nye paradigme – at dette perspektiv absolut er til stede.”

“Det er også den eneste måde, hvorpå Europa kan påvirke den strategiske situation,” tilføjede Zepp-LaRouche. Hun uddybede:

“Fordi hvis man havde et forenet ‘Fædrelandenes Europa’, der samarbejder med Bælte- og Vejinitiativet, herunder Tyskland og Frankrig, ville det være den bedste måde at få USA til også at opgive sin modstand – hvilket, som jeg sagde, ikke er præsident Donald Trump selv, men disse andre kræfter – og få USA til at deltage i det nye paradigme. Og jeg tror, at det er det eneste håb vi har for at undgå en katastrofe, hvor vi vil ende med Tredje Verdenskrig med atomvåben, hvilket betyder udslettelsen af civilisationen.

“Så i den forstand er det, som Italien gør lige nu, af den største historiske betydning; fordi Italien, med hvad Italien gør, med dets aftale-memorandum [for Bæltet og Vejen], men også dets ‘joint ventures’ med Kina i Afrika, kan blive rollemodellen for alle de andre europæiske lande.”

Det Britiske Imperium og dets neo-konservative håndlangere vil blive drevet til vanvid, både af hvad Zepp-LaRouche foreslår, og af hvor og hvornår hun foreslog det. Hun er jo, når alt kommer til alt, en tysk politisk leder, samt lederen af det Internationale Schiller Institut, og ved hvad hun taler om, når det gælder Tyskland.

Dette initiativ kommer netop som Hendes Majestæts regering i Storbritannien – med premierministerens mislykkede Brexit-afstemninger i Parlamentet – har demonstreret for hele verden, at det er dysfunktionelt og ved at falde fra hinanden.

Mens de fumler rundt derhjemme, dukker Helga Zepp-LaRouche – hvis nyligt afdøde mand, Lyndon LaRouche, det britiske monarki stadig hader og frygter som dets førende modstander gennem det sidste halve århundrede – dernæst op i Italien og taler ved en konference, som den LaRouche-associerede organisation MoviSol i Italien har været med til at sponsorere sammen med den lovgivende myndighed i Lombardiet. Desuden var den første taler ved konferencen den italienske undersekretær for ‘Ministeriet for Økonomisk Udvikling’ og medformand for regeringens ‘Task Force China’, Michele Geraci, på hvem Londons presseimperium netop har fokuseret deres skældsord, som den angivelige arkitekt bag Italiens tiltrædelse til ‘Bæltet og Vejen’.

Og dette finder sted en uge før den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping besøger Italien fra 22.-24. Marts, hvor han forventes at underskrive et aftale-memorandum om Italiens deltagelse i Bælte- og Vejinitiativet.

London og de vilde neo-konservative i Washington, D.C. har truet den italienske regering med ruin og udelukkelse fra “deres klub”, hvis det skulle fortsætte dette MoU (Memorandum of Understanding), men Italien har hidtil holdt fast på sit – en holdning, som vil opildne resten af Europa også.

De sydlige og østlige nationer i Europa holder fast i at se det nye paradigme, der dukker op i Asien, som deres store håb; grækerne påpeger, at EU og de vestlige finansinstitutter, der raser imod de europæiske forbindelser med Kina, ikke selv tilbyder nogen investeringer; Portugal inviterer et medlem af det ‘rådgivende udvalg for Kinas statsråd til bekæmpelse af fattigdom’ til at holde fire konferencer på tre dage i denne uge i Portugal, om hvordan Kina eliminerer fattigdom.

Nu banker Bæltet og Vejen på dørene til Frankrig og Tyskland.

 




Hvorfor Vesten er ved at tabe i konkurrencen med Kina

Af Alexander Hartmann, den 10. marts 2019

Under den afsluttende diskussion på Schillerinstituttets seminar i Berlin den 27. februar fremhævede Helga Zepp-LaRouche Vestens kulturelle forfald og Kinas helt modsatrettede kulturpolitik som én af hovedårsagerne til Kinas overlegenhed over for Vesten i den meget diskuterede konkurrence mellem de to systemer.

Anledningen til hendes redegørelse var det spørgsmål, om Vesten rent faktisk indtager en konfrontatorisk holdning over for Kina, eller om det ikke snarere er Kina, der konfronterer Vesten. I sit svar beskrev hun først udviklingen inden for de sidste år. Kina har siden Deng Xiaopings tid fulgt reglen om at ”holde bolden flad og ikke fremhæve sin egen rolle, men først og fremmest tage sig af sin egen udvikling.” Men det har ændret sig, først og fremmest med Xi Jinping. ”Xi Jinping har sagt, at vi må ændre vor rolle som verdensmagt til gavn for hele menneskeheden.” Så har Kina også sat sit program ”Made in China 2025” meget stærkt i forgrunden om at ”blive globalt førende på verdensmarkedet inden for ti nøgleteknologier – computere, robotter, kunstig intelligens, el-biler og forskellige andre områder”.

Selv om det nye silkevejsinitiativ er det største infrastrukturprogram i menneskehedens historie, så har Vesten i hele fire år næsten intet fortalt om Den nye Silkevej. ”Fire års tavshed, så har man endelig bemærket noget: Lige et øjeblik! Det går for hurtigt, det der; og alle de lande, der tilslutter sig!” Og så begyndte Vestens angreb. ”Det var virkeligt internationalt koordineret, pludseligt kom disse angreb fra CSIS 1) og fra europæiske tænketanke.”

Det har udløst visse diskussioner i Kina, om det har været klogt at fremhæve 2025-programmets rolle så kraftigt og derved provokere og udsætte sig for alle disse angreb. ”Så vidt jeg ved, har Kina trukket det en smule tilbage. Men på den anden side: kendsgerningerne taler for sig selv. Med landingen på Månens bagside er Kina i færd med at Kina overtaget føringen inden for udforskningen af Verdensrummet. Og her er der ikke længere nogle, der kan sige, at ”Kina har stjålet teknologien i Vesten”, for her er Kina blevet den førende. Og det samme gælder for kernefusion: reaktoren EAST-projektet, har opnået den højeste temperatur over det længste tidsrum.”

Hun tilbageviste forsøgene på at ”sværte Kina til” som for eksempel med påstanden om, at Kina forsøger at lokke alle de lande, det samarbejder med, i en gældsfælde. ”Det stemmer ikke! I Afrika er der for eksempel mange lande, der har modtaget foræringer, altså ikke blot kreditter, men hvor Kina simpelthen har finansieret tingene, for eksempel i Ætiopien og andre lande.” Naturligvis har Kina indflydelse. ”Men det er min dybeste overbevisning, at Kina mener alt det, det siger, altså at der ikke er nogle hemmelige bagtanker, men at det er den konfucianske tankegang, der påvirker politikken. En harmonisk udvikling af alle stater, retten til at bibeholde sit eget system, ikke-indblanding, alt det er principper, som Kina følger.”

FORLADT DE BEDSTE TRADITIONER

Først og fremmest er Vesten konfronteret med, at vi har vendt os fra vore egne bedste traditioner, tænk på (Friedrich) List, på Humboldt, Schiller, vor klassiske periode, hvor vore humanistiske tænkere spillede en større rolle; disse værdier har vi forladt. Og vi har erstattet dem med liberale eller neoliberale værdier – alt er tilladt, der er ingen faste principper mere. Næsten hver dag opstår der et nyt ”køn”, der er mænd og kvinder og indimellem er der efterhånden utallige underafdelinger. Det er muligt, men hvorfor fremhæver man det så voldsomt? Ungdomskulturen har jeg allerede været inde på.”

Kina har i modsætning hertil forbudt hip-hop-musik med det argument, at ”hip-hop har et degenereret kvindesyn, at det forkynder voldsanvendelse, at det promoverer ting, der er skadelige for ånden.” Det samme gør sig gældende for banale underholdningsudsendelser som for eksempel de quiz-shows, der er så udbredte i Vesten.

Over for denne underholdningskultur i Vesten fremhævede hun Friedrich Schillers idé om den æstetiske opdragelse. Den æstetiske opdragelse skal forædle mennesket. ”Schiller spørger: ’Hvor skal forandringen komme fra, når staten er korrupt og masserne svækkede?’ Dette gælder jo også i høj grad for os. Man kan ikke vente, at forandringen skal komme fra staten, og heller ikke fra masserne, for de er sløve, degenererede, slappe. Det er jo egentligt et spejlbillede af vort eget nuværende samfund, med andre ydre omstændigheder, men grundliggende det samme.”

Schiller kommer så med det svar, at forandringen kun kan komme fra den store klassiske kunst, fordi den forædler mennesket. ”Skønheden henvender sig ikke kun til fornuften, men også til sanserne. For skønheden taler til sanserne; men da skønheden hos Schiller er et fornuftbegreb, løfter den mennesket op på et højere plan gennem leg. Og Schiller siger, sådan som Cai Yunpei 2) i øvrigt også gør det, at det kommer an på at forædle mennesket i dets fritid.”

Når mennesket arbejder og er nødt til at tjene til livets opretholdelse, har det ikke tid til overs, for så er det beskæftiget med nødvendige ting og har ikke tid til at give sig af med skønne ting. ”Men hvis det i fritiden – i stedet for at spilde den og ødsle den bort – giver sig af med skønne kunstværker såsom musik, maleri og digtning og fordyber sig i dem, så føler det sig ædelt i samme øjeblik og forbedres så at sige af skønheden.”

Schiller har forsvaret denne idé om, at menneskets forædling finder sted gennem den æstetiske opdragelse ”og det er netop også en grundliggende tanke i Kina”. Xi Jinping har fremhævet vigtigheden af den æstetiske opdragelse ”for alle samfundets lag, og jeg tror, at det er dette, der mangler her i Vesten. Her er der ingen, der taler om, at menneskene skal forbedre sig, tværtimod, alt er tilladt, og medierne beretter kun om de tåbeligste begivenheder, de største perversioner og de voldeligste hændelser.”

I Fjernsynet er der ingen rigtige film længere, men kun ”krimier, og krimierne er alle fyldt med meningsløs vold, med perversioner og pornografi. Der er en undersøgelse, der viser, at børn allerede fra seks- syvårsalderen er i stand til at finde frem til alt pornografisk indhold på internettet og det i den mest kvalmende form. Det har en uhyggeligt uheldig indvirkning på udviklingen af intelligensen, fordi det forrår mennesket … Samfundet her i Vesten gør ikke noget for at forhindre det.”

FØLGERNE AF DET KULTURELLE FORFALD

Hun kom derefter ind på følgerne af dette kulturelle forfald. Industrien beklager sig over, at 25 % af alle de 15-årige er uegnede til at bestride et arbejde, ”fordi de er umotiverede, fordi de ikke gider noget, fordi de er på stoffer eller af andre grunde. Amerika har som industrination nu haft to år med faldende levealder. Tænk lige over det engang! Hvis der er nogen målestok for et samfunds økonomiske succes, så er det gennemsnitslevealderen.” Og den er faldende i Amerika ”på grund af alkohol og stofmisbrug; man har en opiat-plage af receptpligtige medikamenter, der har gjort folk afhængige. Og så går de ud på gaden, fordi opiatet eller medikamenterne er billigere der. Altså med andre ord: Vi har et kæmpeproblem her i Vesten.”

Hun kom så ind på et nyligt fremsat program fra BDI (Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie) om konkurrencen mellem Kinas og Vestens systemer. ”Det er min overbevisning, at hvis vi ikke ændrer os her i Vesten, så behøver vi overhovedet ikke at hidse os op over Kina. For Kina vil udvikle sig videre, og Vesten vil frembringe den ene generation efter den anden, der er fuldstændigt ødelagt og fordærvet. Vesten er en døende civilisation.”

De, der ikke kan se det, lever åbenbart ”i en puppe…. Når de nu og da har noget med børn og unge at gøre, så bliver de skræmte! De er aggressive, selv pigerne. Ja, unge piger er det virkeligt – hvis De ser, hvordan de unge omgås indbyrdes ved stranden om sommeren, så kan man kun sige: Det løber mig koldt ned ad ryggen! Og jeg mener virkeligt, at Vesten absolut må slå ind på et andet spor.”

Hun mindede derefter om, at Tyskland tidligere havde et helt andet uddannelsessystem. ”Jeg var så heldig stadig at have haft adskillige lærere, der repræsenterede Humboldts tanker, tysklærere, men også andre. Og det var en helt anden fremgangsmåde. Den moralske opdragelse stod i centrum.” Men så kom OECD’s uddannelsesreform i 1970, der smed Humboldt og ”de sidste 2500 års dannelse” ud af pensummet, ”altså Platon, Homer, Schiller, alt det forsvandt, og i stedet for det kom der praktiske ting – hvordan analyserer man annoncer i medierne og andet af den slags”.

Kina gør derimod meget for at genoprette sin 5000 år gamle kultur. ”De nævnte Dunhuang. Jeg har været så heldig at have været i Dunhuang og har set grotterne. Alt dette bliver ikke blot restaureret, men også fotograferet elektronisk, så at flest mulige mennesker kan studere dem. Alle andre kulturskatte restaureres med kærlig hånd og gøres tilgængelige for befolkningen. Og i grunden kan man sige, at Kina egentlig gør alt for at bringe sin befolkning ind på et godt spor.”

Hun sagde til sidst: ”Jeg tror virkeligt, at Vesten er nødt til at vende tilbage til sin egen højkultur, til den italienske renæssance i Italien, til den tyske klassik i Tyskland, til École Polytechnique i Frankrig. Enhver nation bør virkeligt forbinde sig med højdepunkterne i sin egen historie, og det må vi så bruge til at udvikle os videre ud fra. Og der bør finde en udveksling sted mellem alle kulturer, så at vi kan lære af hinanden og bringe os alle videre.

Enten gør vi sådan, eller også bliver Vesten trængt ud på historiens overdrev.

1.CSIS: Amerikansk udenrigspolitisk tænketank.

2.Den store kinesiske pædagog Cai Yuanpei (1868-1940) var undervisningsminister under Sun Yatsen i Kinas provisoriske republik.

 

 

 




POLITISK ORIENTERING den 21. februar 2019:
Lyndon LaRouche er død, men hans ånd og ideer lever videre
i det nye paradigme vi skaber.
Se også 2. del her.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

  1. del:

2. del:

Lyd:




Invitation til Schiller Instituttets Internationale konference i USA
Lad os skabe en ny og mere human epoke for menneskeheden

Schiller Instituttets konference, den 16. februar 2019 i USA

Sjældent, om nogensinde før, er verden blevet grebet af en sådan tummel, som nu. Med Brexit-afstemningen i Storbritannien, Trumps valgsejr mod det neoliberale etablissement i USA, valget af en anti-EU-regering i Italien, De gule Vestes oprør i Frankrig – alt sammen udtryk for et globalt oprør mod den neoliberale økonomiske politik i det transatlantiske system, et system, der står overfor at opleve et nyt økonomisk krak, som er meget værre end i 2008. Samtidigt har initiativet fra Kina med Den Nye Silkevej, det største perspektiv for infrastrukturudvikling i menneskets historie, skabt en hidtil uset dynamik for økonomisk vækst og optimisme. Et nyt sæt af internationale relationer udvikler sig, hvilket skaber et potentiale for at overvinde det gamle paradigme med geopolitik og krig.

Da præsident Nixon forlod Bretton Woods-systemet i august 1971, var det Lyndon LaRouche, som profetisk og offentligt advarede om, at en fortsættelse af den monetaristiske politik, der erstattede det, uundgåeligt ville føre verden til faren for en ny depression og en gentagelse af fascismen, medmindre der blev oprettet en ny, retfærdig økonomisk verdensorden.

I dag manifesterer faren for en ny fascisme sig tydeligt gennem bestræbelserne fra det gamle paradigmes kræfter på at opretholde en unipolær verden gennem løbende geopolitiske konfrontationer, selv med risiko for at kaste verden ud i en ny verdenskrig, som denne gang indebærer faren for udslettelsen af den menneskelige art med atomvåben. På den anden side er en ny, meget mere retfærdig økonomiske verdensorden hurtigt på vej frem, en verdensorden, som for første gang giver udviklingslandene mulighed for at overvinde underudvikling og fattigdom. Det bedste eksempel på dette er Kinas fantastiske præstation med at løfte 800 millioner mennesker ud af fattigdom i løbet af de sidste 40 år, et ubestrideligt bevis på et princip for hele verden. Hvis Kina kan gøre dette, hvorfor kan vi så ikke? Hvis Vesten forsøger at undertrykke fremkomsten af dette nye system, står Verden i fare for at falde i ”Thukydids fælde”, nemlig faren for at den nuværende dominerende magt forsøger på at forhindre den nye magt i at opstå ved krig: en apokalypse – i en tidsalder med atomvåben.

Lyndon LaRouche udviklede en unik videnskabelig teori om fysisk økonomi, hvilket etablerede ham som verdens fremmeste økonom, hvis analytiske tilgang og kreative kraft i formulering af løsninger er mere presserende end nogensinde før. Han har krævet etableringen af et nyt Bretton Woods-system, i samme ånd som Franklin D. Roosevelt havde til hensigt: nemlig at erstatte det nuværende spekulative system gennem konkursbehandling og omorganisering, og oprette et nyt internationalt kreditsystem, hvis hovedformål er at skabe en videnskabelig drivkraft for verdensøkonomien, som det presserende grundlag for at muliggøre teknologioverførsel til udviklingslande for at overvinde resterne af kolonialisme for altid. Den næste økonomiske platform, som defineret af LaRouche, skal være en fusionsbaseret økonomi med internationalt samarbejde inden for rumforskning og rumrejser, der er rettet imod etablering af landsbyer på månen. Dette bliver den nødvendige næste fase i udvidelsen af infrastrukturen i Den Nye Silkevej – som bliver til Verdens-landbroen – ud i det nærliggende rum.

I 2005 udviklede LaRouche en smuk vision for planetens næste 50 år, en vision om samarbejde på grundlag af et nyt sæt af internationale relationer, inspireret af ideerne og forståelsen af universets lovmæssighed fra sådanne tænkere som Nicholas af Cusa, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Vladimir Vernadsky og Albert Einstein.

LaRouche har også specificeret, at fire nationer, nemlig USA, Kina, Rusland og Indien, er unikt positioneret til at indlede et nyt system, hvor alle suveræne nationer kan deltage som ligestillede. Det Britiske Imperium er yderst opmærksom på denne fare for dets eksistens, hvilket for en stor del forklarer, hvorfor de har gjort alt for at vælte Trumps præsidentskab i USA, og for at forhindre udviklingen af et gavnligt forhold mellem USA og især Rusland og Kina.

Det har været en integreret del af LaRouches filosofi, at der ikke er nogen skelnen mellem naturvidenskab og stor klassisk kunst, da det er de samme kreative evner i det menneskelige sind, der skaber gyldige opdagelser både indenfor videnskab og kunst, opdagelser, som tjener som drivkraft for al økonomisk udvikling. I dag oplever vi i Vesten en dyb moralsk og kulturel krise, hvilket ikke alene truer vort samfunds moralske fibre, men fører til ødelæggelsen af det kreative potentiale i nutiden og fremtidige generationer.

Det er derfor et eksistentielt spørgsmål for civilisationen at skabe en ny renæssance af klassisk kultur i samme tradition som Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann og Brahms. Samtidig må og skal menneskets højeste idealer, som udtrykt af de største digtere og filosoffer, genoplives. Den kulturelle krise kan kun overvindes gennem æstetisk uddannelse af mennesket med det udtrykkelige sigte at skabe smukke sind og sjæle.

Det er formålet med den kommende konference med Schiller Instituttet i USA at samle tænkere fra USA og andre lande, der er motiveret af det presserende behov for at præsentere ideer i den hensigt at forme det nye paradigme – den nye epoke af menneskeheden – på en sådan måde, at den langsigtede overlevelse af den menneskelige art garanteres.

Panel 1: En ny verdensorden, baseret på naturlov: Kan menneskeheden regere sig selv for at sikre vores eksistens som en art? Lyndon LaRouches koncept om en Fire-Magts-aftale: De næste 50 års menneskelige udvikling.

Panel 2: Principperne for fysisk økonomi: Leibniz, Hamilton, List, Carey, LaRouche. Systemet med amerikansk økonomi og den kinesiske model. Afrika som det nye Kina, med afrikanske egenskaber.

Panel 3: Det fantastiske perspektiv med en international renæssance af klassisk kultur. Den æstetiske uddannelse af mennesket for sindets og sjælens skønhed.

Panel 4: Videnskabens grænser: Hvordan vil menneskeheden se ud om 100 år? Den videnskabelige metode, der ligger til grund for LaRouches økonomiske principper. Hvad adskiller mennesket fra dyrene?

Klassisk musikkoncert om aftenen.

 

Deltag den 16. februar 2019!

 

For mere information, kontakt:

Schiller Instituttet

Sankt Knuds Vej 11, kld. t.v.

1903 Frederiksberg C

E-mail: si@schillerinstitut.dk

Tlf.nr.: fastnet: 35 43 00 33, mobil: 53 57 00 51

Kontaktpersoner

Michelle Rasmussen ●  53 57 00 51

Feride Istogu Gillesberg ● 25 12 50 33

 




»Den Nye Silkevej er en ny model
for internationale relationer«
Hovedtale af Helga Zepp-LaRouche
på Schiller Institut konference,
25.-26. nov., 2017, Frankfurt, Tyskland:
»At opfylde menneskehedens drøm«

»Jeg mener, at den Nye Silkevej er et typisk eksempel på en idé, hvis tid er kommet; og når en idé på denne måde først er ved at blive en materialistisk virkelighed, bliver den til en fysisk kraft i universet. Jeg har personligt haft mulighed for at se udviklingen af denne idé, der på mange måder reelt set begyndte med dette store menneske – min ægtemand, Lyndon LaRouche; der, for mange årtier siden – for næsten et halvt århundrede siden – fik ideen om en ny, retfærdig, økonomisk verdensorden. Dette blev dernæst mere manifest i 1970’erne, ’80erne og især i 1991, da Sovjetunionen opløstes, og hvor denne idé om at skabe en ny, retfærdig, økonomisk verdensorden blev meget fremtrædende.«

Download (PDF, Unknown)




»Den Nye Silkevej er en ny
model for internationale
relationer«
Hovedtale af Helga Zepp-
LaRouche på Schiller Institut
konference, 25.-26. nov.,
2017, Frankfurt, Tyskland:
»At opfylde menneskehedens drøm«

Jeg mener, at den Nye Silkevej er et typisk eksempel på en idé, hvis tid er kommet; og når en idé på denne måde først er ved at blive en materialistisk virkelighed, bliver den til en fysisk kraft i universet. Jeg har personligt haft mulighed for at se udviklingen af denne idé, der på mange måder reelt set begyndte med dette store menneske – min ægtemand, Lyndon LaRouche; der, for mange årtier siden – for næsten et halvt århundrede siden – fik ideen om en ny, retfærdig, økonomisk verdensorden. Dette blev dernæst mere manifest i 1970’erne, ’80erne og især i 1991, da Sovjetunionen opløstes, og hvor denne idé om at skabe en ny, retfærdig, økonomisk verdensorden blev meget fremtrædende.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Væsentlige klip fra Schiller Instituttets 2-dages konference i New York – 35 min.




Tom Gillesbergs åbningstale ved koncerten,
»En musikalsk dialog mellem kulturer«,
København, 17. feb., 2017

Vi mener, at dette er en tid, hvor alle må tænke på, hvordan de kan bidrage til at opbygge disse globale alliancer, til at opbygge denne politik for menneskehedens fælles skæbne, og formålet med denne koncert er således at gøre dette inden for et meget vigtigt område, der undertiden overlades lidt til sidelinjen; og det er det kulturelle område. For, ingen stor opdagelse, ingen stor videnskab, ingen udvikling kan finde sted, hvis der ikke er uddannede mennesker, der i sig har et billede af mennesket, der fortæller dem, at menneskeheden kan blive til noget langt bedre, end den i øjeblikket er. De har gennem kultur uddannet deres intellekt, deres humane følelser, så de har kunnet blive forskere, kunnet erobre rummet, som vi netop nu ser det; kunnet konfrontere de store udfordringer, menneskeheden står overfor.

Deres excellencer, medlemmer af diplomatiet; mine Damer og Herrer: Jeg er Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark, og jeg er, sammen med Jelena Nielsen fra Russisk-Dansk Dialog, vært for i aften.

Koncerten er arrangeret af Schiller Instituttet; Russisk-Dansk Dialog; Det Russiske Hus og Det Kinesiske Kulturcenter. Vi vil gerne takke medsponsorerne og Det Russiske Center for Videnskab og Kultur for velvilligst at stille deres hus til rådighed for aftenens koncert, samt de mange kunstnere, der frivilligt har stillet deres indsats til rådighed for at gøre denne aften til en rig dialog mellem kulturer.

To praktiske meddelelser: efter det første nummer kommer der ekstra stole, nogle af jer kan sidde på; det andet er, at jeg gerne vil have, at alle slukker for deres mobiltelefoner.

Vi lever i øjeblikket i virkeligt interessante tider; Schiller Instituttets stifter og internationale præsident, hustru til Lyndon LaRouche, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, sagde for nylig, at det globale, strategiske billede er meget dynamisk, flydende, lovende og farligt, alt sammen på én gang. På den ene side har vi stadig denne uhæmmede konfrontation, med deployering af tropper mod de russiske grænser og andre konfrontationspolitikker, der stadig finder sted og stadig ikke har forandret sig. Vi har ligeledes et globalt finanssystem, der, hvornår, det skal være, vil bryde sammen i den næste, store krise, der sandsynligvis vil blive langt større end det, vi så i 2008. Men samtidig har vi fået en ny præsident i USA, Donald Trump, der både i sin kampagne og i det, vi hidtil har set, har annonceret, at der vil komme forandring i USA’s politik, og at, med ham som præsident, ønsker USA at genoprette normale bånd til Rusland, til Kina og til andre nationer i verden, baseret på en politik for genopbygning af USA, men at dette ikke står i modsætning til en genopbygning af hele verden.

Samtidig har vi et momentum, der er blevet opbygget i en rum tid, med især den kinesiske drivkraft med Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet, og som i øjeblikket er engageret i mindst 70 nationer i hele verden, i en politik, som vi for årtier siden lancerede under navnet ’Fred gennem udvikling’. At, samtidig med, at man har økonomisk udvikling, så har man også grundlaget for samarbejde og varig fred.

Vi befinder os altså i en tid, hvor alt kan ske. En masse mennesker er flippet ud over dette; de ved ikke, hvad dagen i morgen vil bringe. Men vi ser dette som en stor mulighed for forandring, og vi kunne meget vel stå ved et punkt, hvor vi kan få USA til at tilslutte sig indsatsen fra så mange andre nationer, som Kina, som Rusland, som Indien og mange andre nationer med dem, der samarbejder om hele menneskehedens fælles skæbne; og hvis USA tilslutter sig denne indsats – samt naturligvis også Danmark og de europæiske nationer tilligemed – så står vi pludselig i noget, der uden enhver tvivl vil blive den største epoke i menneskehedens historie. For vi vil pludselig blive i stand til at få en verdensomspændende renæssance, der omfatter hele planeten på samme tid – noget, der aldrig tidligere har fundet sted i menneskehedens historie.

Vi mener, at dette er en tid, hvor alle må tænke på, hvordan de kan bidrage til at opbygge disse globale alliancer, til at opbygge denne politik for menneskehedens fælles skæbne, og formålet med denne koncert er således at gøre dette inden for et meget vigtigt område, der undertiden overlades lidt til sidelinjen; og det er det kulturelle område. For, ingen stor opdagelse, ingen stor videnskab, ingen udvikling kan finde sted, hvis der ikke er uddannede mennesker, der i sig har et billede af mennesket, der fortæller dem, at menneskeheden kan blive til noget langt bedre, end den i øjeblikket er. De har gennem kultur uddannet deres intellekt, deres humane følelser, så de har kunnet blive forskere, kunnet erobre rummet, som vi netop nu ser det; kunnet konfrontere de store udfordringer, menneskeheden står overfor.

Vi mener således, at det er yderst passende, at vi har en dialog mellem kulturer; at vi, i stedet for at se andre kulturer, andre nationer og andre folkeslag som en trussel, ser det som en utrolig berigelse. Og at alle nationer fremdrager den bedste kultur, de bedste højdepunkter, de bedste bidrag, som de har at skænke menneskeheden, og gør dette tilgængeligt for verdens øvrige nationer samtidig med, at de modtager de bedste af alle disse kulturers skabelser retur. Og når det sker, så, som mange af jer ved, var dette i vid udstrækning, hvad den Gamle Silkevej drejede sig om; jo, der var handel, men der var også kulturel og videnskabelig interaktion, som i realiteten fik langt større konsekvenser end selve handelen. Det er præcist, hvad der nu må ske med dette store projekt, Kinas Bælt-og-Vej-initiativ, som resten af verden nu er ved at tilslutte sig.

Jeg håber således, at I vil nyde aftenens koncert, og jeg håber, at I vil se det som et bidrag til at få denne dialog mellem kulturer i gang, og at det er noget, vi vil komme til at se meget mere af på alle niveauer.

Se videoen her.




Schiller Instituttets Koncert:
En musikalsk dialog mellem
kulturer, Kbh., 17. feb. 2017

Dialogen mellem kulturer, mellem selve sponsorerne, førte til den store succes – Schiller Instituttet, organisationen Russisk-Dansk Dialog, det Russiske Hus i København og det Kinesiske Kulturcenter. Koncerten afholdtes i det Russiske Center for Videnskab og Kultur, som repræsenterer den Russiske Føderations myndighed for forbindelse til Fællesskabet af Uafhængige Stater (fra det tidligere Sovjetunionen), russere i udlændighed og det internationale humanistiske samarbejde (Rossotrudnichestvo).

Følgende musikalske indslag er ikke vist i videoen: The following parts of the program are not shown in the video:

Gitta-Maria Sjöberg, sopran, Sverige/Danmark. Sweden/Denmark. Hun sang Rusalkas »Sangen til Månen« af Dvořák.

She sang Rusalka’s Song to the Moon by Dvořák accompanied by Christine Raft, pianist from Denmark.

Idil Alpsoy, sopran, Sverige/Danmark, Sweden, Denmark: sang sange fra Sibelius’ Op. 37 og 88.

She sang songs from Sibelius’ Op.37 and 88, accompanied by Christine Raft.

Programmet/Program:

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Vidunderlig koncert, »En Dialog mellem Kulturer«, et gennembrud i København

Video med danske undertekster:

Video with English subtitles:

 

Dansk: Klik her for en video, hvor sopran Gitta-Maria Sjöberg synger Rusalkas sang til Månen i en anden koncert (med en anden pianist)

English: Click here for a video where soprano Gitta-Maria Sjöberg sings Rusalka's Song to the Moon during another concert (with another pianist).

17. februar, 2017 – De kom fra hele verden. De bragte gaver. Ikke gaver, man kunne røre med hænderne. Men gaver, der rørte sjælen. Gaver, i form af skøn musik og skøn dans.

Og folk kom for at høre dem. De blev ved med at komme, indtil der ikke var flere af de 120 pladser tilbage. Og da der ikke var plads til ekstra stole, stod de i gangene, og de stod i forhallen, og de sad bag gardinerne. De var danskere, og de var diplomater, og de var andre mennesker fra mange nationer, måske 180-200 i alt. Værtinden sagde, at der aldrig før havde været så mange i salen.

Dialogen mellem kulturer, mellem selve sponsorerne, førte til den store succes – Schiller Instituttet, organisationen Russisk-Dansk Dialog, det Russiske Hus i København og det Kinesiske Kulturcenter (som står for snarlig åbning, og som også leverede mad i pausen). Koncerten afholdtes i det Russiske Center for Videnskab og Kultur, som repræsenterer den Russiske Føderations myndighed for forbindelse til Fællesskabet af Uafhængige Stater (fra det tidligere Sovjetunionen), russere i udlændighed og det internationale humanistiske samarbejde (Rossotrudnichestvo).

Aftenens første punkt var Schiller Instituttets danske formand, Tom Gillesberg, der fortalte, at vi står ved et historisk øjeblik i verdenshistorien, hvor muligheden er til stede for, at USA tilslutter sig det nye paradigme med økonomisk udvikling, som nu fejer hen over verden.

Dernæst fortalte talskvinde for Russisk-Dansk Dialog, Jelena Nielsen, at en dialog mellem kulturer kan føre til fred i verden. Tom og Jelena skiftedes til at annoncere kunstnerne aftenen igennem.

Og som det tredje punkt i indledningen til aftenen bød direktør for det Russiske Center for Videnskab og Kultur, Artem Alexandrovich Markaryan (ses i billedet ovenover), velkommen til publikum.

Dernæst begyndte processionen af gave-giverne.

Fra Rusland kom børn, der spillede russiske folkemelodier på balalajkaer, ensemblet »Svetit Mesjac« (Den skinnende Måne) fra Det russiske Hus, med Igor Panich som dirigent, og som inkluderede ’Katjusha’ med barytonsolist Valerij Likhachev, der har optrådt på 200 scener. Senere fremførte han også Leperellos »Listearie« fra operaen »Don Juan« af Mozart, og Mefistofeles’ couplet fra Gounods opera »Faust« sammen med sin pianist, Semjon Bolshem.

Fra Kinas Indre Mongolia region kom en meget musikalsk ung videnskabsstuderende, Kai Guo, som spillede på mange fløjter, og Kai Guo og Feride Istogu Gillesberg fra Schiller Instituttet sang i charmerende duet, den kinesiske kærlighedssang »Kangding«.

Fra Indonesien kom en traditionel danser, Sarah Noor Komarudin, der fyldte rummet med sin yndefulde Jaipong-dans.

Fra Ghana kom to unge mænd, Isaac Kwaku og Fred Kwaku, der sang og spillede en religiøs sang og en sang, der handlede om, at, når vi arbejder sammen, er vi stærkere, end når vi står alene.

Og fra Danmark og Sverige kom tre fantastiske, kvindelige operasangere, hvis toner og dramatiske intensitet bevægede publikum dybt. Deres gaver var sange og arier af Schubert, Verdi, Dvořák og Sibelius. Gitta-Maria Sjöberg, en international, lysende sopranstjerne, der for nylig trak sig tilbage fra den Kongelige Danske Opera, sang Rusalkas »Sangen til Månen« af Dvořák. Idil Alpsoy, en fremragende mezzosopran med rødder i Ungarn og Tyrkiet, og som også er medlem af Mellemøstligt Fredsorkester, sang sange fra Sibelius’ Op. 37 og 88. Og en sopran, som vi i årenes løb har hørt blomstre og blive en virkelig brillant kunstner, Leena Malkki, sang Schuberts »Gretchen am Spinnrade« (Gretchen ved spinderokken), samt Desdemones bøn »Ave Maria«, fra Verdis opera »Othello«. De to første blev akkompagneret af Christine Raft, en særdeles talentfuld, ung dansk pianistinde, og sidstnævnte akkompagneredes af Schiller Instituttets egen Benjamin Telmányi Lylloff. Han spillede sammen med sin mor Anika en gribende Romance for violin og piano af Beethoven, og fortsatte således det eftermæle, som de har fået i arv fra deres forfader fra Ungarn, violinsolisten Emil Telmányi Lylloff.

I aftenens finale sang alle sangerne (for nær én), og med yderligere deltagelse af fire medlemmer af Schiller Instituttets fremtidige kor, det hebraiske slavekors sang »Va pensiero«, hvor slaverne længes efter frihed, fra Verdis opera »Nabucco«.

(Se program nedenfor eller på:  www.schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=17637)

Og folk blev opløftet dels af den enkelte fremførelse, og dels af de successive musikstykker og danseoptrædener, det ene efter det andet, det ene land efter det andet, med traditionel musik i dialog med klassisk musik, der vævede en gobelin af lyd, syn og fryd, der ikke (kun) nåede sanserne, men sjælen.

Folk blev bedt om at holde kontakt med os og overveje at gå med i Schiller Instituttets kor, og nogle af dem skrev, at det ville de gerne.

Da de gik, gav de alle udtryk for den mest sublime glæde og taknemmelighed for at have fået det privilegium at modtage alle disse kostelige gaver, som de tog med sig hjem som et minde i deres sind, og som de kan åbne igen og igen.

Et musikalsk vidnesbyrd om det paradoksale mellem menneskehedens enhed og flerhed, udtrykt gennem menneskelig kreativitet, og et magtfuldt udtryk for dialogen mellem kulturer, blev proklameret.

Vi vil fortsætte med denne proklamation i form af professionelle video- og audiooptagelser, så dens ringe kan spredes i hele verden. 

Kontakt venligst Schiller Instituttet, hvis du overvejer at gå med i vores kor i København. Michelle tel.: 53 57 00 51; Feride tel.: 25 12 50 33

Koncertprogram:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

English:

The following article was published in Executive Intelligence Review, Vol. 44, No. 8, on February 24, 2017. 

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

(Corrections to the above article:

The China Culture Center in Denmark is independent of the Chinese Embassy.

Picture caption and text: Chinese musician Kai Guo is from China's Inner Mongolia region.

The correct name for Anika and Benjamin's ancestor is Emil Telmányi.

The picture of Leena Malkki is a video grab.)

 

Wonderful Musical Dialogue of Culture Concert Breakthrough in Copenhagen

by Michelle Rasmussen

COPENHAGEN, Feb. 17, 2017 (EIRNS) — They came from around the world. They came bearing gifts. Not gifts you could touch with your hands. But gifts that touched your soul. Gifts of beautiful music, and beautiful dance.

And the people came to hear them. And they kept coming, and they kept coming till none of the 120 seats were left. And after there was no more room for extra chairs, they stood in the aisles, and they stood in the lobby, and they sat behind the curtains. They were Danes, and they were diplomats, and other people, from many nations, maybe 180-200 in total. The hostess said that there had never been so many there before.

The dialogue of cultures between the sponsors of the concert, itself, led to the great success – The Schiller Institute, The Russian-Danish Dialogue organization, The Russian House in Copenhagen, and the China Culture Center of the Chinese Embassy (about to open, which also provided intermission food). And the concert was held in The Russian Center for Science and Culture, representing the Russian Federal agency for the Commonwealth of the Independent states (of the former Soviet Union), compatriots living abroad, and the international humanistic cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo).

Firstly, the people were told by Schiller Institute chairman Tom Gillesberg that we have a unique moment in world history, where the potential is there for the U.S. to join the new paradigm of economic development sweeping the world. Secondly, they were told by the spokeswoman for Russian-Danish Dialogue, Jelena Nielsen, that a dialogue of culture can lead to peace in the world. They were also the interchanging hosts for the evening. Thirdly, the director of The Russian Center for Science and Culture, Artem Alexandrovich Markaryan, welcomed the people.

Then the procession of gift-givers began.

From Russia came children playing Russian folk songs on balalaikas, (the “Svetit Mesjac” (The Moon is Shining) ensemble from The Russian House, conducted by Igor Panich), including Katjusha, with soloist Valerij Likhachev, baritone, who has sung on 200 stages. He also later performed Leperello’s list aria, from the opera Don Giovanni by Mozart, and Mephistopheles’ couplets, from Gounod’s opera Faust, together with his pianist Semjon Bolshem.

From China’s Inner Mongolia region came a very musical young science student, Kai Guo, who played many flutes, and he and Feride Istogu Gillesberg from The Schiller Institute charmingly sang the Kangding Chinese love song, as a duet.

From Indonesia came a traditional dancer, Sarah Noor Komarudin, who filled the room with her graceful Jaipong dance.

From Ghana came two young men, Isaac Kwaku and Fred Kwaku, who sang and played a religious song, and a song about when we work together, we are stronger than when we stand alone.

And from Denmark and Sweden came three outstanding female opera singers, whose tones, and dramatic intensity, moved the audience profoundly. Their offerings were songs and arias from Schubert, Verdi, Dvořák and Sibelius. Gitta-Maria Sjöberg, an international bright star of a soprano, who recently retired from The Royal Danish Opera, sang Rusalka’s Song to the Moon by Dvořák. Idil Alpsoy, a fantastic mezzo soprano with roots in Hungary and Turkey, who is also a member of the Middle East Peace Orchestra, sang songs from Sibelius’ Op.37 and 88. And a soprano, Leena Malkki, we have heard for many years blossoming into a truly magnificent artist, sang Schubert’s Gretchen am Spinnrade (spinning wheel), and Desdemona’s prayer Ave Maria, from Verdi’s opera Othello. The first two were accompanied by Christine Raft, an extremely talented young Danish pianist, and the later by The Schiller Institute’s own Benjamin Telmányi Lylloff.

He, and his mother Anika, poignantly played Beethoven’s Romance for violin and piano, continuing the legacy bequeathed by their ancestor from Hungary, the violin soloist Emil Telmányi.

For the finale, all the singers (but one), sang Verdi’s chorus of the Hebrew slaves longing for freedom, Va, pensiero, with the addition of four members of The Schiller Institute’s future chorus. See the program at: www.schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=17965

And the people were uplifted, with each presentation by itself, and with the succession of one piece of music, or dance, after the other, one country after another, traditional music in dialogue with classical music, weaving a tapestry of sound, sight and delight, not reaching their senses, but their soul.

And the people were asked to be in contact with us, and to consider joining The Schiller Institute’s chorus, some of whom wrote that they would.

As they left, they all expressed the most sublime joy and thankfulness for having had the privilege to have received all of these precious gifts, which they took home in the memory of their minds, to be opened again, and again.

A musical testament to the paradox of the unity and diversity of mankind, expressed by human creativity, and a powerful statement of the dialogue of cultures was declaimed.

We will go forth with this statement, in the form of professional video and audio recordings, to spread its ripples throughout the world.

(Hopefully ready this week.)




Helga Zepp-LaRouche foreslår en stor,
international konference til udbredelse af
gensidig, vestlig-kinesisk kulturforståelse.
Fra Schiller Instituttets konference i
Manhattan, New York, 4. februar, 2017

Denne tradition i europæisk filosofi, som vi kalder humanisme, er fuldstædig i opposition til liberalisme, og den er langt, langt mere i overensstemmelse med konfucianisme, end det generelt antages.

Problemet med vestlige bøger og vestlig universitetsuddannelse er, at det i meget lang tid har været optaget af de mennesker, der vandt krigene, af oligarkiet; af de mennesker, der forsøger at undertrykke denne kreativitet i befolkningen. Jeg mener, vi ville gøre den Anden Renæssance en meget stor tjeneste ved at arrangere et symposium, der skulle udarbejde disse paralleller i langt højere grad. Jeg mener, at dette faktisk er afgørende for forståelsen af folk fra de forskellige kulturer.

(Her følger først en opsummering af dr. Patrick Hos præsentation på konferencen, som efterfølges af Helga Zepp-LaRouches respons, inkl. et spændende forslag.)

Patrick Ho er leder af China Energy Fund, der er anerkendt i FN, og han har været en fremtrædende person i at bringe Bælt-og-Vej-politikken til FN, men også til den amerikanske befolkning. Dette er anden gang, han taler for Schiller Instituttets i løbet af den seneste to en halv måned. Første gang pointerede han, at han var glad for at tale for et publikum med forskellige slags amerikanere. Denne gang fokuserede han mere på de kulturelle aspekter; han sagde, at han ønskede at kommunikere, hvad det vil sige at være kineser … »kinesisk-hed« …; dens mere end 5000 år gamle historie. Han mente, at det, der definerede landet, var folkets kulturelle sammenhæng; fælles sprog; civilisationens kontinuitet. Han dækkede en meget lang periode, men fokuserede især på de tre ’bank på døren’; da Kina bankede på Vestens dør, og de reaktioner, de fik, gode og knap så gode; de tre perioder med Silkevejen – den ene i det andet århundrede f. Kr., da Zhang Qian rejste til Vesten; dernæst foretog admiral Zheng He rejser, hvor han nåede østkysten af Afrika og den arabiske verden i det 14. århundrede og bragte aspekter af vestlig kultur med tilbage (inkl. giraffer, som gjorde et stort indtryk!). Dette blev lukket ned. Dernæst, efter Det britiske Imperiums angreb i det 19. århundrede med to opiumkrige, besluttede kineserne at gå i gang med en vis modernisering, så de kunne bevare en nation. Han gennemgik hurtigt Sun Yat-sen; revolutionen i 1911; Nixons møde med Mao i 1972; Deng Xiopings »Socialisme med kinesisk karakter« i 1979; og Xi Jinpings Ét Bælte, én vej-initiativ.

I en anden del diskuterede han især relationen til Vesten gennem nogle jesuitermissionærers forsøg på at bringe kristendommen til Kina; igen gik det godt på et bestemt tidspunkt, men brød så sammen. Disse missionærer var i kontakt med Leibniz. I Ching havde en stor virkning på Leibniz: det binære system, som er basis for computersystemerne i moderne tid, og også DNA-koden.

Han satte kinesiske værdier i disse perioder op i kontrast til vestlige synspunkter. For eksempel: vægt på det individuelle i Vesten som vigtige værdier, men som gav diverse problemer. Hvorimod vægten i Kina ligger på familie, sociale relationer, kultur.

Der var en hel del mere, det ikke giver mening at forsøge at opsummere, men det var del af en dialog mellem dr. Ho og Helga Zepp-LaRouche og publikum.

(Efter dr. Hos powerpoint-præsentation gav fr. Zepp-LaRouche et svar, der omfattede et vigtigt forslag.)

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Dette er et meget spændende perspektiv, men jeg vil faktisk foreslå, Patrick, at vi arrangerer en stor begivenhed, måske en international konference, for jeg mener, at kendskab til kinesisk kultur, men også til vestlig kultur, faktisk ikke er tilstrækkelig kendt af den anden part.

Jeg var f.eks. en gang i Kina, og jeg søgte efter lærde (akademikere), der kendte Nicolaus Cusanus (Nikolaus von Kues), som er den vigtigste lærde person og store tænker fra det 15. århundredes Europa.[1] Jeg fandt en enkelt professor, der var bekendt med Nicolaus Cusanus. Dette er typisk, for det, du sagde om forskellen mellem vestlige værdier og kinesiske værdier, for jeg mener, at, på grund af den britiske indflydelse i universiteterne – i hele verden, men, mener jeg, også i Kina på et tidspunkt – så, mange gange, tager folk fejl af humanisme og liberalisme. Og det er virkelig ikke sandt.

Vi taler ikke om Aristoteles-traditionen. Vi taler ikke om visse traditioner i Europa, som dernæst førte til visse former for Oplysningstiden, den franske oplysningstid, den engelske oplysningstid, der, som du rigtigt sagde, er stærkt centreret om individets rolle og liberalisme og så fremdeles.

Men det er netop den tradition, der blev afvist af det, vi anser for at være den positive, præ-sokratiske tradition; Platon; Augustin; Cusanus; Kepler; Leibniz; Schiller; og inden for videnskab, Riemann; Einstein og ligesindede tænkere. Så der har foregået en langt større kamp i den europæiske traditions civilisation, end de fleste mennesker faktisk ved. Hele fremskridtet inden for videnskab, kultur og klassisk kultur kommer som følge af afvisningen af den liberalistiske tradition. Oligarkiet har benyttet sig af en bevidst krigsførelse i forsøg på at få folk væk fra ideen om menneskelig kreativitet.

Jeg og også nogle andre i Schiller Instituttet sammenlignede ideerne hos Konfucius og Mencius med visse ideer og filosoffer i vesten, og dér finder man langt større enhed. For eksempel har denne Nicolaus Cusanus, som jeg nævnte, ideer, der absolut stemmer overens med Li og ideen om Ren hos Confucius[2]; såsom, han har denne idé – hvis Li er »at gøre det rette på rette tid og rette sted [som dr. Ho tidligere havde nævnt], så har Nicolaus Cusanus denne idé om, at hvert mikrokosmiske element, hvert menneske, kun fuldt ud kan udvikles, hvis man bidrager til harmonien i det makrokosmiske element gennem at udvikle alle de andre mikrokosmiske elementer, og vice versa. Dette er præcis [ideen om] »win-win-samarbejde« blandt mennesker. Det er ideen, der lå til grund for den Westfalske Fred: denne fred er kun mulig, hvis man respekterer den andens interesse.

Og Leibniz var jo så lydhør over for kinesisk filosofi, fordi han selv var fortsættelsen af denne Nicolaus Cusanus, og Leibniz havde denne idé om, at hvert menneske er en monade (enhed); hvert menneske indeholder sit eget, skabende intellekt i universets helhed, og overensstemmelse er kun mulig, hvis der er en harmonisk udvikling af alle disse evner; og dette førte til [USA’s] Uafhængighedserklæringen og ’stræben efter lykke’, som ikke er »lykke« i betydningen held, men som netop er opfyldelsen, udviklingen, af alle potentialer, der er indlejret i det menneskelige væsen. Så dette er altså indlejret i mennesket.[3]

Denne tradition i europæisk filosofi, som vi kalder humanisme, er fuldstædig i opposition til liberalisme, og den er langt, langt mere i overensstemmelse med konfucianisme, end det generelt antages.

Problemet med vestlige bøger og vestlig universitetsuddannelse er, at det i meget lang tid har været optaget af de mennesker, der vandt krigene, af oligarkiet; af de mennesker, der forsøger at undertrykke denne kreativitet i befolkningen. Jeg mener, vi ville gøre den Anden Renæssance en meget stor tjeneste ved at arrangere et symposium, der skulle udarbejde disse paralleller i langt højere grad. Jeg mener, at dette faktisk er afgørende for forståelsen af folk fra de forskellige kulturer.

Nicolaus Cusanus sagde, at, den eneste grund til, at folk fra forskellige kulturer kan forstå hinanden, er, at de hver frembringer videnskabsfolk og kunstnere, der udvikler universelle principper, som man kan videreformidle. Det er grunden til, at musikere fra forskellige nationer kan være i samme orkester; eller grunden til, at videnskabsfolk kommer til de samme konklusioner i en videnskabelig opdagelse, præcis, som man udviklede det binære system. Jeg mener, at der er langt flere skatte at finde både for Vesten ved at lære fra Kina, så vel som også, at det kinesiske folk forstår, ikke den liberale undervisning af historie og idéfilosofi, men ved virkelig at gå til de originale kilder, som de var, og som de var drivkraften bag Vestens fokus. Så dette er meget spændende, og jeg håber, vi kan arrangere noget langs disse retningslinjer. [applaus]

(Video og engelsk udskrift af Helgas hovedtale vil snarest blive udlagt her på hjemmesiden).

Foto: Helga Zepp-LaRouche på Kinas kyst, »Den Eurasiske Landbros Terminal Øst«, 1996. 




Koncert: En musikalsk dialog mellem kulturer

I en tid, hvor der er alt for meget politisk splid i verden, og verdens lande i stedet burde arbejde sammen om menneskehedens fælles mål, er det ekstra vigtigt, at vi på alle måder bygger bro mellem verdens nationer og de mange forskelligartede kulturer. Når vi oplever det skønne i andre kulturer, skaber det gensidig forståelse og et grundlag for samarbejde og fred. Klassisk kunst er derfor en vigtig nøgle til en sådan dialog mellem kulturer, og det er grunden til, at vi afholder denne koncert!

Fredag den 17. februar, 2017, kl.19.

Gratis adgang.

Sted: Russisk Center for Videnskab og Kultur, Vester Voldgade 11, København.

Kinesiske forfriskninger i pausen.

Invitér også din familie, venner og kollegaer, og hæng gerne plakaten op forskellige steder.

Information: 25 12 50 33 

Program

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




I Hamiltons fodspor:
»LaRouches Fire Love for global,
økonomisk genrejsning
og civilisationens vækst«
Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche;
Tale til Schiller Instituttets
konference den 29. okt.
i Manhattan, New York

Men det andet område må komme fra en bevidst beslutning om, at verden behøver et nyt paradigme; at, hvis vi forbliver inden for rammerne af det nuværende paradigmes aksiomer, med geopolitik og globalisering, så mener jeg ikke, at vi kan løse det. Det, vi må gøre, er at skabe en renæssance, en kulturel renæssance, der udgår fra den idé, at mennesket ikke er et dyr, og at, selv om mange mennesker i øjeblikket opfører sig på en dyrisk måde, så er mennesket den eneste skabning, eller den eneste art, der er i stand til at overvinde enhver begrænsning af sit eget intellekt og af teknologiske vanskeligheder. Hvad som helst, menneskeheden ønsker at takle, kan den gøre.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Den Nye Silkevej og Irans rolle:
Afskrift af Hr. Abbas Rasoulis tale til
Schiller Instituttets of EIR’s seminar på Frederiksberg den 18. april 2016

Kommer senere på dansk.

Abbas Rasouli, the First Secretary at the Embassy of the Islamic
Republic of Iran in Denmark: Address to {EIR}-Schiller Institute
Seminar “Extend the New Silk Road to the Middle East and Africa”
April 18, 2016

THE SILK ROAD AND THE IRAN FACTOR

ABBAS RASOULI: In 2013 China proposed to build an “economic belt
along the Silk Road,” a trans-Eurasian project spanning from the
Pacific Ocean to the Central Asian countries all the way to
Europe.
The New Silk Road already have momentum. In early 2015 China
announced $62 billion of its foreign exchange reserves will be
made available to the three state-owned policy banks that will
finance the expansion of the new Silk Road.
Beyond Central Asia the economic belt along the Silk Road
can also provide the vehicle for China’s expansion of its trade
relations with both the Middle East and Europe. And here is when
the Iran link comes into the equation.
In February 2016 a freight train from Yiwu in China’s
eastern Zhejiang province arrived in Tehran. The China-Iran “Silk
Road train” is a part of the overland component of China’s One
Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative.
The train used the existing rail links from China through
Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan before entering Iran. It took the
train just 14 days to cover the roughly 10,399 km long journey to
Tehran whereas ferrying cargo via the sea from Shanghai, which
lies 300 km north of Yiwu, to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas
takes 45 days in comparison.
It is expected that construction of new high-speed rail
links through Central Asia will enable trains carrying goods to
run further on to European markets. Besides facilitating
Sino-Iran trade, these railway lines will contribute to Iran’s
emergence as an important Eurasian trade hub. Iran will thus be
integrated more into the economies of East and Central Asia as
well as Europe.
Bilateral trade between Iran and China grew from $4 billion
in 2003 to $53 billion in 2013. In January 2016, during the visit
of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Iran, the two sides agreed to
increase trade to $600 billion over the coming decade. So the
operation of this railway link will prove an important factor in
the development of trade between Iran and the countries along
this economic belt.
The important thing about the Iran corridor is that existing
road and rail links between China, Central Asia and Iran only
needs to be modernized whereas some parts or all of the other
corridors have to be constructed from scratch, each with their
own security and geographical challenges.
The Yiwu-Tehran railway is just one of the many projects
that enhance regional connectivity, bringing together China,
Central Asia, the Persian Gulf and West Asia.
India, has also been eyeing overland access via Iran to
Central Asian and European markets too. In this connection the
North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC), a multi-modal trade
transport network that includes sea and rail transport from India
via Iranian ports on the Persian Gulf to as far as the Baltic Sea
via Russia, was initiated by Russia, India and Iran in September
2000 to establish transportation networks among the member states
and to enhance connectivity with the land-locked region of
Central Asia. Among the few routes in this corridor the
Mumbai-Chahbahar or Bandar Abbas (Persian Gulf)-Anzali-Astara
(Iran Caspian Sea)-Astara (Azerbaijan)-Baku-Russia-Kazakhstan is
receiving much attention. With the completion of this route Iran
will emerge as another important transit hub in the Asia-Europe
trade giving India overland access to Europe as well.
Of the 1500 km Bandar Abbas-Bandar-Anzali railway link only
50 km remains to be completed, but the 164 km Anzali-Astara link
is still at negotiation stage. A working group made up of India,
Iran, Azerbaijan and Russia has been formed to look into raising
finance to construct the Anzali-Astara (Iran)-Astara (Azerbaijan)
railway connection. All parties appreciate the urgency of moving
this project forward and as recently as last week, Russia,
Azerbaijan and Iran agreed to speed up the project.
The North-South corridor, when completed, is expected to
significantly reduce the time of cargo transport from India to
Central Asia and Russia. At present, it takes about 40 days to
ship goods from Mumbai in India to Moscow. The new route will be
able to cut this time to 14 days.
The primary objective of the NSTC project is to reduce costs
in terms of time and money over the traditional route currently
being used between Russia, Central Asia, Iran and India. With
improved transport connectivity their respective bilateral trade
volumes are most likely to increase tremendously. According to
various studies the route, once fully operational, will be at
least 30% cheaper and 40% shorter than the current traditional
route.
Though every country is important in any transport chain,
Iran, neighbor with 15 countries, is not only a hub for
distribution to the neighboring countries of about 400 million
but has the added advantage of being a strong economy between
giants at each end of these corridors namely China, India, Russia
and Europe.
Some of the economic advantages of Iran are:
* The 18th largest economy in the world by purchasing power
parity (ppp);
* A diversified economy with a broad industrial base;
* Resource-rich economy;
* Labor-rich economy;
* Young and educated population;
* Large domestic market;
* An increasingly sophisticated infrastructure and human
capital base providing the foundation for an emerging
knowledge-based economy.
* A market of 80 million with easy access to another market
of 400 million.
In a global world where international trade is taking on
greater significance, transport costs and delivery time are two
of the most important factors in the choice of the mode and route
of transporting goods.
The completion and modernization of the North-South and
East-West Transport corridors will cut transport costs and
delivery time thereby enhancing trade between East Asia, South
Asia, Central Asia, Middle East and Europe.




Et nyt paradigme for menneskeheden:
Afskrift af Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale
til seminaret på Frederiksberg den 18. april 2016

Kommer senere på dansk.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche Addresses Seminar in Copenhagen,
April 18, 2016 [unproofed draft]

We Need a New Paradigm for Humanity

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, thank you very much for this
kind introduction.
Dear Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen: I would like to
start my presentation with showing you a point of view which may
be unusual to discuss the strategic situation, but I think it is
quite adequate.
This is a time-lapse video where you can actually have a view
from space. This is the kind of view normally only astronauts,
cosmonauts, taikonauts have. They all come back from their space
travel with the idea that there is only one humanity, and that
our planet, which is very beautiful and blue; however, it is very
small in a very large solar system and an even larger galaxy, not
to mention the billion galaxies out there in our universe.
With that view comes, naturally, the question of the future.
Where should mankind be in 100 years from now, in a 1000 years,
in 10,000 years? Well, you have to exercise your power of
imagination. In 10,000 years, we probably are well beyond having
colonized the Moon, we have completed very successful Mars
missions, we will have a much, much better understanding about
our solar system, our galaxy, and we will have gotten a much
deeper understanding about the principle of our universe.
Just think, that it took 100 years before modern science
could confirm that Einstein's conception about gravitational
waves was correct. Ten thousand years of the past human history
has brought tremendous progress. But just think that this growth
can go on, exponentially. And since there is no limit to the
creativity and perfectibility of the human species, in 10,000
years we can have a wonderful world.
So, let's look from that view, into the future, to the
present, to have the right perspective.
Yesterday, the {New York Times}, in the Sunday edition, had
an article saying "The Race Escalates for the Latest Class of
Nuclear Arms," portraying in detail that the United States, and
Russia, and China are developing new generations of smaller and
less destructive nuclear weapons, which would make them more
useable. They quote in the article James Clapper, the Director of
the National Intelligence of the United States, that the world
has now entered a new Cold War spiral, where, basically, totally
different laws and rules govern, than it used to be the case with
Mutual Assured Destruction.
The previous NATO doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction
proceeded from the assumption that the destructive power of
nuclear weapons is so horrible, because it will lead to the
annihilation of the human race, that nobody in their right mind
would ever use it. And therefore, it was a deterrence that these
weapons would never be used.
This is now no longer valid. What they are now discussing,
openly, on the front page of the {New York Times}, is that what
we, for a very long time, only we and a few of military experts,
have said, namely, that these modernized tactical nuclear
weapons, like the B12-61, in combination with stealth bombers,
with hypersonic missiles, can actually lead to the winning of a
nuclear war.
Ted Postol and Hans Kristensen, very respected military
analysts, have detailed at great lengths, why the idea of a
limited nuclear war is completely ludicrous, and it is the nature
of the difference between thermonuclear weapons and conventional
weapons, that once you enter a nuclear exchange, that it is the
logic of such a war that all weapons will be used, and that will
be the end of mankind. We are closer to that possibility than
most people dare to even consider, because if they would, they
would not remain so passive as they are now.
This is why I want to make emphatically the point–and this
is the purpose of conducting meetings like this seminar and many
other conferences we are engaged in–that we have reached a point
in human history where geopolitics must be superseded with a
completely new paradigm. And that is why I started with the view
from space. We need a new paradigm, basically saying goodbye to
the very idea of geopolitics, which has caused two world wars in
the 20th century. That new paradigm must be completely different
than that which is governing the world today.
We have, right now, rising tensions in the South China Sea.
Policymakers and the neighboring countries are extremely worried
about what will happen in the period between now and the trial in
The Hague. You have the largest maneuver around North and South
Korea right now, where people in the region are extremely worried
that the slightest provocation could lead to an exchange of
nuclear weapons.
You have the NATO expansion up to the Russian border.
Countries like Poland and Lithuania are asking to have these
modernized nuclear weapons located on their territory, even that
makes them prime targets.
The United States is continuing to build the anti-ballistic
missile system which, supposedly, was against Iranian missiles,
but after the P5+1 agreement has been reached, it is obvious this
was always a pretext and the aim was always to take out the
second strike capability of Russia.
Then you have the entire region of Southwest Asia, still
being a terrible destruction and consequence of failed wars.
North Africa is exploding. You have new incidents between NATO
and Russia, all of a sudden in the Baltic Sea, which was, up to
now, a calm region where there are no conflicts, or, there have
been no conflicts.
In the Middle East briefing, discussing President Obama's
trip to Riyadh on the 21st of this month, they say that this trip
will open up a new page of NATO in the relationship to the Middle
East, that what Obama will try to establish is a new relationship
between NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.
So, we have a situation where the {New York Times}, also
yesterday, and I'm quoting these papers to say that these are not
some opinions of us, but this is now the public discussion, that
what is really at stake in the South China Sea is not so much the
fight around some uninhabited reefs and cliffs, or some tiny
islands, but it is the American effort to halt China's rise. And
not only China's rise, but that of Asia. China, Asia arising; the
trans-Atlantic region is in decline.
Just now, we are heading towards a new financial crisis, and
all signs are, that we are going into the same kind of crash like
2008. Already since the beginning of this year, $50 billion
corporate defaults were taking place, which is on the same level
like what happened in 2009.
What the United States is trying to assert under this
conditions, where the trans-Atlantic world is in decline or
marching towards collapse, to insist that nevertheless a unipolar
world must be maintained. The problem is, that unipolar world,
effectively, no longer exists. But still, what carries American
policy to the present day, is the Project for the New American
Century, the so-called Wolfowitz Doctrine, which is a neocon idea
which says that no country and no group of countries should ever
be allowed to challenge the power position of the United States.
In the age of thermonuclear weapons, the insistence to maintain a
non-tenable world order could very quickly lead to the
annihilation of civilization.
It is a fact: China has made an economic miracle in the last
30 years which is absolutely breathtaking. And it is continuing,
despite all the media rumors about China's economic collapse.
India has by now the largest growth rate in the world; it's above
7%. Many other Asian countries have explicitly formulated the
goal for themselves to be developed countries in a few years. The
Chinese economy right now is rebounding. They just announced that
in the next five years China is going to import $10 trillion
worth of imports. They will invest $600 billion worth of
investments abroad. Every day 10,000 new firms are being created
in China.
So, if you look at the development, especially since
President Xi Jinping announced in September, 2013 in Kazakhstan,
that the New Silk Road, the One Belt One Road, is put on the
agenda. In the Two and a half years since that time, more than
sixty nations have joined with China in this development. They
have created the New Silk Road, the Maritime Silk Road; these
nations have created a whole set of alternative
economic-financial institutions, such as the AIIB, which, despite
massive pressure from the United States not to do so, immediately
was joined by sixty founding members. The New Development Bank
also started just now its functioning. The New Silk Road Fund,
the Maritime Silk Road Fund, the Shanghai Cooperation Bank, and
many more. All of these were created because the IMF and the
World Bank had not invested in the urgently required
infrastructure.
These banks are now engaged in very, very impressive, large
projects. For example: China invested $46 billion in the
China-Pakistan corridor. When President Xi Jinping recently went
to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran, consequently Iran,
fool-heartedly, declared that they are now part of the One Belt
One Road, New Silk Road development. Greece is now talking about
that after China is investing in the Port of Piraeus, that Greece
will be the bridge between China and Europe. The 16+1, that is
the East and Central European countries, just declared that they
absolutely want to participate in China helping to build a fast
train system in these countries. Those projects which the EU has
not bid, China is now building. Part of it is, for example, the
Elbe-Oder-Danube Canal, which will connect the waterways of these
countries. When President Xi recently was in the Czech Republic,
President Zeman announced that the "Golden City" of Prague will
be the gateway between the Silk Road and Europe. Also, Austria
and Switzerland are now fully on board and see the benefits of
their country's joining with the New Silk Road.
When President Xi Jinping at the APEC meeting in October
2014 offered to President Obama to cooperate in all of these
projects in a "win-win" perspective, he not only proposed
economic cooperation, but he put on the agenda a completely new
model of international relations exactly designed to overcome
geopolitics. The new model is supposed to be based on the respect
for sovereignty, non-interference into the internal affairs of
the other country, respect for the different social system the
other country chooses to adopt. It would really be, in a certain
sense, a fulfillment of the principles which are laid out in the
UN Charter anyway.
How was the Western response?  Very, very ambiguous.  The
United States in spite of this, never really responded to
President Xi's offer.  They keep insisting on an unipolar world.
For example, in the TPP, like in the TTIP for Europe, it is said
very, very clearly, the U.S. sets the rules of trade for Asia and
not China.  Recently, the American Defense Secretary Ash Carter,
and also NATO commander General Breedlove, declared the enemies
#1 of the United States are, first, Russia, second, China, third,
Iran, fourth North Korea, and only fifth terrorism.
Now that is in spite of the fact that many other statesmen,
such as United States Secretary of State John Kerry and Foreign
Minister Steinmeier, and many others, have recently also stated,
that all crucial problems of the world cannot be solved without
the cooperation of Russia, and China.  For example, the P5+1
agreement with Iran, would never have come into being without a
constructive role of {both} Russia and China . Without Putin's
very intelligent intervention in the military situation in Syria,
this situation could not have come to the potential of a
political solution.
Also, apart from the military pressure, there is massive
pressure on the new institutions such as the AIIB and the New
Development Bank, to {not}  be outside of the casino economy but
to follow the "international standards."
Now, in these times of the Panama Papers, of the various
LIBOR scandals, of the money laundering of many of these banks,
it is a sort of laughable thing, what should be these
"international standards" of the Western financial system.
Now, let's be realistic.  At the IMF/ World Bank meeting
which just concluded in Washington over the weekend,  behind the
scenes there was complete panic, but nobody dared to speak about
it openly,  behind the scenes people were talking, what former
IMF boss Strauss-Kahn has said repeatedly, publicly, that we are
heading towards the "perfect political storm."  That if one of
the too-big-to-fail banks collapses, it will lead to a crisis
much, much worse than 2008.
At the recent Davos Economic Forum, the former chief
economist of the BIS William White said that the world system is
so utterly overindebted, that there are two roads only possible:
Either you have an orderly writeoff of the debt, like in the
religious Jubilee, so that you just say "these debts are not
payable," and you write them off, or it will come to a disorderly
collapse.
Now, the situation is all the more urgent, because unlike
2008 when everyone was talking about the "tools" of the central
bank, like interest rate reduction, rescue packages, bailouts,
all of these tools don't function any more. As a matter of fact,
when the competition for more zero interest rate, or even
negative interest rate, when into high gear in the last month,
when, for example, the Bank of Japan or the central bank of
Norway, or the ECB declared a zero interest rate policy, or even
a negative interest rate policy, it boomeranged!  It had the
opposite effect:   Rather than leading to more investment, in the
real economy, it led to a deflationary escalation of the
collapse.
When Mario Draghi, the chief of the ECB, recently announced,
"yeah, yeah, we have a discussion about helicopter money."  And
Ben Bernanke echoed it and said, "yes, now we need helicopter
money," meaning electronic printing of {endless} amounts of
worthless money, virtual money, they de facto announced that the
trans-Atlantic financial system is absolutely in the last phase.
Because after helicopter money comes only evaporation.
But this is only the most obvious of the crises.  Another
one, which is in a different domain, but equally systemic is the
refugee crisis in Europe.  Now,  I supported Chancellor Merkel
when she initially said, we can manage that,  we can give refuge
to these people, and for the first time, I was  saying "this
woman is doing the right thing."  I know there was a lot of
international criticism, but she acted on the basis of the Geneva
Convention on refugees, but it was the right thing to do.  But
the reactions from the other European countries, revealed an
underlying, basic flaw of the EU, a flaw which was not caused by
the refugees, but it was revealed by the first serious challenge,
that in the EU, as it has been conceptualized in the Maastricht
Treaty going up to the Lisbon Treaty, there is no unity, there is
no solidarity; and with the collapse of the Schengen agreement
which allows free travel within the internal borders of the EU,
the closing of the so-called Balkan routes, to prevent refugees
from coming, the basis for the European common currency is also
gone, because without the Schengen agreement, the possibility to
have the euro last is extremely dubious.
Now, with the recent response by the EU to basically have a
deal with Turkey, I mean, this is beyond the bankruptcy of the
whole EU  policy if you can top it.  At a point when the Russian
UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, presented the UN Security Council
with evidence that the Turkish government, is continuing up to
the present day to supply ISIS with weapons and other logistical
means, to then say, we pay Turkey EU6 billion, for what?  To have
them receive refugees; and Amnesty International has already
said, there is no guarantee that these people will be protected,
but rather that Turkey is sending them back to the war zones,
like Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.
So, if you look at the pictures of Idomeni, where the
Macedonian police are using tear gas against refugees who are
absolutely desperate; if you look at the fact that Greece is now,
rather than having refugee camps which would somehow process
these unfortunate human beings, they have, on pressure of the EU,
been turned into detention centers.  Pope Francis was just in
Lesvos, together with the Greek Patriarch Bartholomew, and this
Patriarch said, the present EU policy on the refugee crisis, is
the completely bankruptcy of Europe.  The Doctors Without Borders
left their job in Greece, because they said they cannot be
accomplices to the murderous policy of detention, where the
police decide who is a patient and not doctors.  Instead of
protecting the people running away from wars and persecution,
they are now being treated as criminals.
Immediately, days after this disgusting EU-Turkey deal, it
turned out that it's a complete failure, the so-called "European
values," human rights, humanism, well–they're all in the
trashcan, because now the refugees, obviously still fleeing for
their lives, go to Libya trying to get into small boats to Italy.
And just yesterday the news came that another 400 people drowned
in the Mediterranean.  And this will keep going on.  And it will
haunt the people who are refusing to change their ways.
Now, there is a new element in the situation which may cause
sudden surprises, and that is a program which was presented by
CBS, a week ago Sunday, in the so-called "60 Minutes" program
portraying the coverup, of the U.S. governments from Bush to
Obama, of the famous 28 pages omitted in the publication of the
official Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 by the U.S.
Congress; and as many people have said, and was said in this
program, this pertains to the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11.
Yesterday, {all} the U.S. talk shows, and all the U.S. media,
pointed their finger to the coverup of the Bush administration
and even to the present day of the present government, that there
is a coverup of criminal activity.
Now, the Saudi Arabian government reacted very unnerved, and
this was again reported in the {New York Times}, that they would
sell off $750 billion in U.S. Treasuries, if the U.S. would allow
a bill that would allow Saudi Arabia to be held responsible in
court, for their role in 9/11.  Now, that's not exactly a sign of
sovereignty, but of despair.  There are several U.S. Senators,
among them Mrs. Gillibrand from New York, who demand that this
whole question of the Saudi Arabian role in 9/11 must be on the
agenda when President Obama goes to Riyadh this week.  Which in
any case, may not happen, but it will not be the end of the story
because the genie is now out of the bottle.
OK:  How do we respond to these many, many crises? Well,
there is a solution to all of these problems.  The trans-Atlantic
should just do exactly what Franklin D. Roosevelt did in 1933, in
reaction to the  world financial crisis at the time.  Implement
the full banking separation — Glass-Steagall — and the whole
offshore nightmare which is being revealed in the Panama Papers,
and remember, that this firm Mossack Fonseca is only the fourth
largest of such firms, and 11 million documents still need to be
read through, and processed.  But we have to go back to the kind
of international credit system, as it existed in the Bretton
Woods system, before Nixon ended the fixed exchange rate in 1971,
opening the gate for  floating exchange rates and especially the
creation of offshore money markets for the unlimited creation of
money and other illegal operations as it now is coming out.
Then we need a writeoff of the absolutely unpayable state
debt, which has accumulated and ballooned after the bailouts of
2008 and afterwards. And we have to basically get rid of the
toxic paper of the whole derivatives markets, because they are
the burden which is eating up the chance for the investment in
the real economy.
Then, we need a Marshall Plan Silk Road; and the only reason
I'm  talking about a Marshall Plan, despite the fact that China
is {emphatic} that they do not want a Cold War connotation to the
New Silk Road, it gives people in the United States and Europe a
memory, that it is very possible to rebuild war-torn economies,
as it happened in Europe after the Second World War.
Now, with the ceasefire which was negotiated between Foreign
Ministers Kerry and Lavrov, you have now a still-fragile, but you
have the potential for a peace development in Syria, and soon
other countries in the region.  But it is extremely urgent, that
the peace dividend of this ceasefire is becoming visible for the
people of the region, immediately.  That is, there has to be a
reconstruction and economic buildup, not only of the territory
and the destroyed cities, but the entire region, has to be looked
at as one:  From Afghanistan to the Mediterranean, from the North
Caucasus to the Persian Gulf.  Because you cannot build
infrastructure by building a bridge in one country.  You have to
have a complete plan for the transformation of this region, which
mainly consists of desert.
Now, the idea is to have a comprehensive plan, greening the
deserts, building infrastructure, creating new, fresh water from
desalination of ocean water, of tapping into the water of the
atmosphere through ionization, and various other means. And then
build infrastructure corridors, new cities, and give hope to,
especially, the young people of the region, so they have a reason
not to join the jihad, but to become doctors, to become
engineers, to care for their family and their future.
Now this is not just a program any more, because  when
President Xi Jinping visited Iran about two months ago, he put
the Silk Road development on the agenda for this region.  So, all
you need to do, is extend the Silk Road, and the first train has
already arrived in Tehran; you have to continue to build that
road, from Iran, to Iraq, to Syria all the way to Egypt.  Other
routes should go from Afghanistan, to Pakistan, to India. From
Central Asia to Turkey to Europe, and this obviously can only
work because the problem is so big, that all the neighbors of the
region, Russia, China, India, Iran, Egypt, but also the countries
which are now torn apart by the refugee crisis such as Germany,
Italy, Greece, France, and all other European countries must all
commit themselves to work on such a Silk Road Marshall Plan for
the reconstruction and economic buildup of the Middle
East/Southwest Asia, {and} all of Africa, because the economic
situation is equally dire in that continent.
The United States must be convinced that it is in their best
interest to cooperate in such a development, and stop thinking in
terms of geopolitics.  Now, the United States should only be
encouraged to cooperate in the development of these regions, but
the United States needs {urgently} a New Silk Road itself.
Because if you look at the condition, not only of the financial
sector in the United States, but especially the physical economy;
if you look at the social effects of the  economic collapse, like
the rising suicide rates, in all age brackets of the {white}
population, and especially rural women in the age between 20 and
40, the suicide rate is quadrupling and even beyond.  This is a
sign of a collapsing society.
Now, China has built as of last year, 20,000 km of fast
train systems.  Excellent, top-level technology fast-train
systems;  it wants to have 50,000 km by I think the year 2025.
How many miles of  fast train as the U.S. built?  I don't any.
But if the United States would join the New Silk Road and
participate  in the economic reconstruction, as Franklin D.
Roosevelt did it with the Tennessee Valley Authority plan, with
the Reconstruction Finance Corp. in the '30s, the United States
could very, very quickly be a prosperous country, and could again
be regarded by the whole world as "a beacon of liberty and a
temple of freedom," which was the idea of America when it was
founded.
So, the whole fate of the whole world will depend if we all
succeed to get the United States to go back to its proud
tradition of a republic, and stop thinking like an empire,
because that cannot be maintained in any case;  because all
empires in the whole history of mankind always disintegrated when
they became overstretched and collapsed.  There is not one
exception to this idea.
Now, therefore, let's go back to the idea from the
beginning:  Let's approach all problems in the present from the
idea, where is the future of mankind?  Where should mankind be?
Do we exist, or will we destroy ourselves.  And that requires a
change in paradigm, which must be as fundamental and thorough,
like the paradigm shift from the European Middle Ages to the
modern times.  And what caused that shift was such great figures
as Nikolaus of Cusa, but also Brunelleschi, Jeanne d'Arc, and
many others; but what they introduced was a rejection of the old
paradigm–scholasticism, Aristotelianism, all the wrong ideas
which  led to the destruction of the 14th century, and they
replaced with a  completely {new} image of man, man as an {imago
viva Dei}, which was a synonym for the unlimited creative
potential and perfectability of the human being.  It led to a new
image of man which created a blossoming of science, of modern
science, of the modern sovereign nation-state;  it made possible
the emergence of Classical arts.
And that is what we have  to do today:   We have to stop
thinking in terms of geopolitics, and we have to focus on the
common aims of mankind.  Now, what are these "common aims of
mankind"?  It is, first of all scientific cooperation to
eradicate hunger, poverty, to develop more and more cures for
diseases, to increase the longevity of all people.  We have to
study much more fundamentally, what is the principle of life?
Why does life exist?  How does it function?  What, really, is the
deeper lawfulness of our universe?  And that must define the
identity of human beings, which is unique to the human species.
And I have an idea of the future, which will be full of joy.
Because we will discover new principles in science and in
classical art, and we will create a new Renaissance.  As the
Italian Renaissance superseded the Dark Age of the 14th century,
what we have to do today, is we have to revive the best
traditions of all great nations and cultures of the world; and
make them known to the other one.  Have a dialogue of the most
advanced periods of Chinese, of European, Indian, African, other
cultures, and revive–and that is being done in China,
already–the great Confucian tradition, which is in absolute
correspondence with the best neo-Platonic humanist ideas of
Europe.  We must revive the great Vedic tradition in India, the
Gupta period; the Indian Renaissance of the late 19th to the 20th
century.  We must revive the Abbasid Dynasty of the Arab world;
the Italian Renaissance; the Andalusian Spanish Renaissance, the
Ecole Polytechnique in France, the great German Classical period.
The great Italian method of singing in Verdi tuning and the bel
canto method.  And if all of these riches of all the different
countries become the common good of all children of this planet,
and everyone can learn universal history, other cultures as if it
would be their own, I can already see how humanity can make a
jump, and how we can create the most beautiful Renaissance of
human history so far.
I think everybody who is thinking about these questions, has
a deep understanding, that we are at the most important crossroad
in human history. And it is not yet clear which way we will go,
but it is clear to me, that we will {only} come out of this
crisis if we mobilize the subjective emotional quality, which in
the Chinese is called {ren}; and the European equivalent, you
would call {agapë}, love.  And we will only solve this problem if
we are able to mobilize a tender, maybe even {passionate} love,
for the human species.  [applause]




Forlæng Verdenslandbroen ind i Sydvestasien og Afrika:
Afskrift af Hussein Askarys tale på Schiller Instituttets og EIR’s seminar på
Frederiksberg den 18. april 2016

Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background
Slide background

Kommer senere på dansk.

Hussein Askary Speech in Copenhagen to the Schiller Institute-EIR
Seminar “Extend the World Land-Bridge to Southwest Asia and
Africa,” April 18, 2016

{Hussein Askary had fair number of graphics and charts, which he
used to illustrate his presentation.}

TOM GILLESBERG:  The next speaker is somebody very unique
and unusual,  Hussein Askary originally comes from Iraq and had
to get out under very nasty circumstances, as many others.  But
that became a blessing at least for our organization, because
Hussein, through Norway, ended up to become part of the
international LaRouche organization in 1994, and has since then
been contributing quite fantastically to our international work.
And he is one of the authors of the original {New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge} report; but then also made a
decision, that this cannot simply stay in the English language,
or Chinese.  This also has to be in the Arabic language.  So
Hussein took it upon himself to translate this into the Arabic
language and then also of course, write some extra parts to it,
which is necessary for the present circumstances in Southwest
Asia to have.
This report just came out.  It was release on March 17, in
Cairo, in a meeting presided over by the Egyptian Transportation
Minister who then introduced Hussein, and the hope of course is
that this will become something read and studied and acted on in
the whole Arabic world, as well as the rest of the world.  So
Hussein?

HUSSEIN ASKARY: You have heard Helga today, giving a very
stern and sobering warning about the state of affairs in the
world, the dangers are very real to the world today. What I am
going to do, and please don’t misunderstand me, I’m not going to
give you a picture of how rosy and nice things are, either in
Southwest Asia, the so-called Middle East, or in Africa, but, as
they say in sports, you have to keep your eye on the ball. What
Helga just said, is that there is a new paradigm in the world,
which can lead to a completely different, and new world order.
And it’s that paradigm, within which myself, the Schiller
Institute, and the people we are talking to, we want to direct
their attention to that new paradigm.
I’m thankful to Leena Malkki for her beautiful singing, and,
especially, the {Aida} aria. It was actually performed at the
opening of the Suez Canal, the second Suez Canal, last year.
The idea of great projects, the idea of great challenges,
like Hela was explaining, this idea of being in space, looking at
the world from space, and, also, the idea of major projects, like
the Suez Canal, like the Three Gorges Dam in China, the New Silk
Road, the effect they have on people, is that they challenge
their imagination, and challenge their creativity, because they
represent major difficulties, major technical problems,
intellectual problems, that have to be solved, before you achieve
these major projects. And that transforms the idea of people. It
also gives people an idea of a creative constructive identity,
and the position of man in the world, on this Earth, and also in
the universe. That is why we try to work on these concepts of the
New Silk Road, the extension of the New Silk Road, to {inspire}
people to think outside of the box, outside of the box of
geopolitics, which Helga was trying to explain. We have to get
out of geopolitics. We have to act {human} again. But that has
practical implications. There are practical problems, and other
issues, and even scientific issues we have to resolve.
So, for those who are not familiar, this is the extension of
the New Silk Road. The New Silk Road has existed as the new
strategic policy of China since 1996, but we want to expand this
into a global collaboration, a blueprint, as Tom said, a concept
for peace and cooperation among nations. We have to connect the
Economic Belt of the Silk Road (the one with the yellow), which
is already being built. As Helga said, the first train arrived
from China to Tehran last month. There are projects going on in
Siberia. So there are trains going from Asia to Europe. There is
no problem with that. We need to extend it into the Southwest
Asia region, the so-called Middle East (I can explain later why I
say Southwest Asia, and not the Middle East), and into Africa,
and of course, into the Americas.
So, you can see that the red lines are where we have the
biggest deficits, the biggest deficits in infrastructure, both
transportation infrastructure, but also in other needs, deficits
in water, and deficits in electricity.
What is different in the Arabic part, which I rewrote
certain parts of it, like the Southwest Asia part, we also added
the Arabian Peninsula, also, to the idea of the connection to the
New Silk Road. This is no longer simply a Silk Road; this is the
World Land-Bridge, which can unite all the continents of the
world.
In 1996, I had the great fortune to work with Helga
Zepp-LaRouche and the team of {EIR} to make the first major study
of the New Silk Road, and it was that one which was adopted by
the Chinese government as the strategic policy of China. It was
also a thick report like this.
This work is being done, mostly in East Asia, Central Asia,
Iran, Turkey, Russia, all these nations are involved, but what is
lacking is the connection to the rest. So it has been 20 years
since that idea emerged, but there was no response from the
countries in the Arab world, for example, or in Africa.
Now, the idea with all these lines is not only about trade.
We want to warn people, that we are not talking about moving
goods from China to Europe. That’s not our concept. That’s a
byproduct. What we mean by the New Silk Road, the World
Land-Bridge, that we need to create development corridors: a
development corridor where you bring power, water, and technology
to areas that are landlocked, that are far from industrial zones,
and, explore the resources, human and natural resources of that
region, to develop new centers of economic activity. Like
landlocked nations, like in Central Asia, or the Great Lakes
region in Africa. That’s the concept. It’s not about trade,
although trade is an important aspect of this.
In 2002, Mr. Lyndon LaRouche, the American economist and
political leader, the husband of Mrs. LaRouche, was in Abu Dhabi,
in a conference about oil, and the role of oil in world politics,
and the future of oil.  And there were many ministers of oil
actually from the Arab countries — the gentleman to the right is
the energy minister of the United Arab Emirates — and Mr.
LaRouche shocked everybody, and said that the Arab countries, or
the Gulf countries, have to gradually stop exporting raw oil, and
actually use raw oil and gas as an industrial product, for
petrochemicals, plastics, where every barrel of oil will give
many times its value, rather than burning it as energy. He said
that you should use your position in the world, as a crossroads
of continents. You have to utilize that position as a crossroads
for world trade, but also, the connection between Africa, Asia
and Europe.
So I added these to the Arabic version, because I think that
this is a very unique area in the world,  not only that its
strategic location is very unique, no other part of the world has
that; you also have two-thirds of the world’s energy resources,
so-called, oil and gas in that region, but also, most
importantly, you have about 450 million people. Most of them are
young people. And actually, many of them have a good education.
You also have nations with a very ancient history and culture,
and a very historical identity, like Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and
so on, and they also have an idea of themselves as becoming key
players in the world, but we hope that they will become key
players in the world in the economic, scientific and cultural
sense.
The problem is that all these advantages have been turned
into disadvantages. So this region has become a center for global
politics, for global geopolitics, and that is why we see the
conditions we have in the whole Middle East region becoming like
this.
Our idea is, now we have this new situation with the Russian
intervention, the prospect, the possibility of having a peaceful
political solution in Syria, the prospect of uniting many powers
to fight ISIS and al-Qaeda, and so on, both in Iraq and Syria,
and also in Libya. But this should be followed, as Helga said, we
need a Marshall Plan, we need an economic development plan, to
establish peace on a true basis.
The reason I joined the Schiller Institute in 1994, was that
I was in Oslo, and I was working as a translator, and there was a
Palestinian children’s delegation coming with Yasser Arafat; and
I was going around with them, and, at that time, you had the Oslo
peace agreement. A week later, I saw a sign that the Schiller
Institute was having a meeting in Oslo. They had a very
interesting title. They said in the meeting that if you don’t
start with the economic development of the Palestinian people,
the people in Jordan, Syria, Israel, and so on, if you don’t base
the peace process on a solid economic basis, this whole thing
will fail. And the peace process is, of course, dead now, both
because of that, but also because of geopolitics which has
prevented reaching a true peace.
So, therefore, to establish true peace, we need an economic
and scientific program. Helga referred to president Xi Jinping’s
visit to the region in January this year. I consider this as an
historic turning point, actually, because at that point, in late
January, Saudi Arabia and Iran were at the point where there was
a big risk of a direct war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, because
of the beheading of a Shi’a clergy in Saudi Arabia, which led to
demonstrations, the burning of the Saudi Embassy in Tehran, and
so on. So the Chinese intervention came at a very crucial point,
where they said, “Look, all these religious conflicts and
problems you have with each other, can lead the whole world into
a disaster. Why don’t we work on our method? We offer you to join
the New Silk Road. We offer economic development, and technology,
and even financing, so we can connect all of your countries which
are in conflict with each other together into this global
process.” And this is very, very important. And nations in the
region have to really grasp that opportunity now, and, instead of
discussing the fate of President Assad, they should discuss what
kinds of economic projects they should work together on.
One of the issues that I didn’t mention, is that, for
example, even as Helga said, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, they can
join this, if they stop this other policy, because we also have
one of the largest concentrations of financial power in the Gulf
countries; the so-called sovereign funds of the Gulf Cooperation
Council countries is about $2 trillion. This can be transformed
into credit.
In the report, I propose the establishment of the Arab
Infrastructure Investment Bank. A bank which will be financed by
these rich countries, which would have a capital of $100-200
billion, and that capital will only be earmarked for
infrastructure and development projects.
So every nation has a role in this. And in the report, we
have also added, which is not in the English report, a plan, a
general outline for the reconstruction of Syria, by utilizing
Syria’s position also as a bridge for the Silk Road, both from
Asia, and from Europe, into Africa. We also propose the
construction of a Syrian National Reconstruction Bank, which is
very important. We have a very important chapter in the report
about how nations can internally finance major infrastructure
programs. Because, the big question, which comes all the time
when I am in Arab countries, or in Africa, is, they say “OK. This
sounds good. Who will pay for this? Where will the money come
from?” Actually, you don’t really need money, in that sense. You
can create the money, but you have to know where to use that
money. As Helga said, the central banks in Europe and the United
States are pumping massive amounts of liquidity into the
financial and banking system. But none of that is transformed
into technologies or projects, public projects, or housing
projects, or industrial projects in Europe or anywhere. So money
is being printed, but it is not being used.
But there is a method, which we call the Hamiltonian
national credit system, which every nation can actually
internally generate credit to finance part of its national
development plans, and this is one thing we put in the Syria
plan. Because every time there is a war like in Bosnia, in
Lebanon, and so on, you have donor conferences, where every
nation says that we will give you so much money, 100 million, 50
million, but there is no centralized idea about how to rebuild
the whole country. It all depends on donations, small drops which
come. We want something massive. We want something big. Foreign
governments should contribute to that by exporting technology to
Syria, for example, which Syria cannot afford to build, or afford
to buy, in the current situation.
Also, a part of our plan for Southwest Asia is to fight
against desertification, by managing and creating new water
resources, stopping the expansion of the desert. This is the
Iraqi Green Belt project to stop the effect of sand and dust
storms, which actually is a big problem for many cities in Iraq,
sometimes even reaching into Iran, by building a Green Belt,
planting trees in a large scale, a belt by using both ground
water and water from the rivers.  This is a kind of national
program which can unite the people of Iraq for an idea of their
future together. Not Sunni, Shi’a, Kurdish, Turkish, and so on,
and so forth. These are the kinds of projects, real physical
projects, which will challenge people to work together in a
country like Iraq.
Now, I took this Egyptian model, because in Egypt, you have
a very terrible situation, which is the accumulation of 30 years
of destructive economic and financial policies, mostly caused by
former President Mubarak’s and Anwar Sadat’s collaboration with
the IMF and the World Bank. There should be a shift in the way
Egyptians consider their economy. Because Egypt always waits for
the IMF or the World Bank, the EU or the United States to give
some money so that they can start something new. And usually
money does not go to large scale. Europe, the United States, the
UN, the IMF and the World Bank will {never} finance large
infrastructure projects. That’s the policy.  Small, small, small
is beautiful. That’s what they say.
But in Egypt, with the new leadership in Egypt, you have the
focus on mega-projects, which is a necessity. If you want to save
Egypt’s economy, Egypt’s entire infrastructure has to be built
from scratch again. There should be new industrial and
agricultural centers, which they are focusing on.
Using high technology, they try to attract the highest
levels of technology, and internal financing. You know, President
el-Sisi, when they wanted to build the Suez Canal, there was no
money, as usual, they said. So what he did was something unique.
He went outside the central bank. He went outside the budget, and
said, “I will go on TV, and I will tell the Egyptian people that
we want to build this canal. It’s crucial for our nation. We want
you to give the money.”
In 2013 I wrote a memorandum for Egypt, an Egyptian Economic
Independence Document, I called it. Actually, inside Egypt, you
can raise more than $100 billion, because there are resources
inside Egypt. People, even today, buy dollars. They take part of
their salary, and buy dollars or gold, and keep it at home, so
that financing disappears from the system. It’s not reinvested in
the system. People keep their money because of the unstable
economic situation.
But if you encourage the Egyptian people with this kind of
national development projects, which will put their kids to work,
unemployed young people, they would come out with the money. And
this is what el-Sisi did. I wrote at the time, that they should
build a National Development Bank, not just one fund for the Suez
Canal, as they did. But as soon as President el-Sisi came on TV
and said, “We want to build this canal, but we don’t have the
money. We want the Egyptian people to pay for it.” So they went
out, and in one week they raised $8 billion. And people were
queuing late into the night; I met a banker last year, who said,
“We had to stay open into the night, because people were queuing
at the banks to buy the bonds!” Egyptians are real patriots. They
love their country, but if they are encouraged by good
leadership.
Of course, the Suez Canal is not giving back what was
supposed to be already from the beginning, because world trade
has collapsed. The level of transit in the Suez Canal has gone
down, not because of Egypt’s policy, but because the world
economy is going down. Global trade has been collapsing. But the
idea is to use the Suez Canal as a development zone. And this is
what I got from people in the Suez Canal Authority — that they
are not only thinking about transport of goods, but they want to
utilize that route to build new industrial zones around the
canal, like we showed in the development corridor idea. And, of
course, Egypt has a very key role, both in the Arab world — it’s
the most important Arab country — and also in Africa.
Now Egypt has one big problem — it’s the demographic
problem. People say that Egypt is overpopulated. That’s not true.
Egypt is not overpopulated. Cairo is overcrowded!  Ninety million
people live on only 5% of the land of Egypt; 95% of the land of
Egypt is empty. It’s not used, but it’s not overpopulated. The
United States and Europe have been financing the Egyptian
government with hundreds of millions of dollars for family
planning, so that women will have fewer children. But no projects
were built to expand Egypt’s economic potential to accommodate to
the new generations, so that they can have new agricultural and
urban centers out in the desert!
After I was in Egypt last year, I wrote a report for a major
economic conference in Egypt to attract investment; but these are
the ideas which came out of both the conference, and my
observations about Egypt’s role in the New Silk Road. In Egypt,
people were very negative to the idea of the New Silk Road,
because they said that the transshipment on the Silk Road will
take away trade from the Suez Canal — that shipments will go
from Asia to Europe by land, and we will lose. So there are a lot
of people in Egypt who are actually against the idea. But I was
telling people, “Look. It’s not about trade. If you have economic
development, you will need more Suez Canals to accommodate the
trade. But if the world economy is not growing, there is no
development, there will be no trade. And people will compete on
attracting trade into other areas.”
So the idea is to develop Egypt’s economy, but also
contribute to more development and more trade among nations. And
it’s in utilizing Egypt’s position to connect to Sub-Saharan
Africa, to North Africa, the Middle East, and to the Arabian
Peninsula. Interestingly, after I was in Egypt, last week the
Saudi King was in Egypt, and they decided to build this bridge.
At Sharm el-Sheikh, there is a connection over the Gulf of Aqaba.
I think that the Egyptian President invited the Saudi King to
support the building of this bridge between the Saudi territories
and southern Sinai, which will turn Sinai from an isolated area,
suddenly into becoming the center between two major economies.
There are now big problems in Egypt, because the President
made a terrible mistake by conceding sovereignty over the Tiran
and Sanafir islands to the Saudis. There was a dispute between
the two countries for many years, but President el-Sisi suddenly
declared that they are Saudi islands, and now there is a big
uproar in Egypt. And the mistake was that there was no public
discussion about it. The parliament didn’t have anything to say
about this. So, now there will be a review of the agreement.  But
the idea of this project is very important.
Now, for Egypt to get out of that demographic box, is for
Egypt to expand its economic activities into the desert. This is
the development corridor proposed by Dr. Farouk El-Baz, who is a
space scientist, and he is right now an advisor to the President.
And he designed this idea of creating the new valley, the new
Nile Valley, by building railways, roads, and new urban centers.
I added these green zones, because these are actually becoming
new agricultural areas that the Egyptian government wants to
invest in, by creating new farmlands — they are talking about 4
million acres of land, and settling young people into these
regions, and building new agro-industrial centers. But what is
needed is to extend the development corridor, the black line,
into the economic zones.
This is the Africa Pass. One of our Egyptian friends, an
engineer, presented this at our conference in 2012, it’s the same
idea, connecting Egypt to North Africa, to Europe, and into the
Great Lakes region of Africa. Now, the Great Lakes region
countries, like Rwanda, Burundi, the eastern Congo, Uganda, they
have massive problems of economic development, also because they
are very far from the transport corridors of the world.  We wrote
a series of reports two years ago about the cost of shipment of a
container. The Danish shipping company A.P. Møller-Mærsk has
statistics that the cost of a shipment of a container from
Singapore to Alexandria is $4,000, to Mombasa in eastern Kenya,
it becomes $5,000; but to the capital of Uganda, it goes to
$8,000, because there are no good roads to ship that container!
Into Rwanda and Burundi it reaches $10,600 per container. So they
cannot bear the cost of shipment of containers that maybe have
technology inside them, and machines, and that is a major problem
for these so-called land-locked countries. So you need to have
new lines of transport which will reduce the cost of the
transport.
Now these are ideas which the African nations, the African
Union, have had for many years. There are many very nice plans,
but the attitude of the rest of the world to Africa, because
Africa, by itself, does not have the technology, at least, to
build these projects, and there has been no willingness in
Europe, or the United States, to finance, or contribute to
building the projects proposed in any of these major reports, to
integrate the infrastructure of Africa and enhance economic
development. Because without infrastructure, you cannot have
economic development.
But some of these lines are now coming on the agenda, thanks
to the intervention of the BRICS nations, and also of China. For
example, the Cairo-Cape Town highway idea, President Jacob Zuma
of South Africa, presented this actually twice at the BRICS
summit in 2013 and 2014, and he said, “This is a crucial, a key
element in the development of Africa. We need to work with the
BRICS nations and China, Russia and India to build these
projects.” There are 400 road and rail projects involved in this.
But this is a big challenge, both in terms of financing, and in
terms of technology.
There is also the possibility of connecting the river
systems of Africa for river transport, like in Europe, the
Main-Rhine-Danube Rivers are an important transport artery, and
development artery. In the same way, you can connect the Nile to
the Great Lakes, to the Zambezi River through a number of canals,
and so-called trans-modal transport systems, where you can ship
from rivers to rail, and back to rivers, to lakes, and so on, in
an easy way.
Filling the gap which the United States and Europe have left
for many, many years, now the Chinese–.  Well, in Europe, we
have a very problematic and twisted relationship to poverty, to
poor countries, to underdeveloped countries. Europeans look at
Africa as a burden. It’s a problem. How do we solve this problem?
But the problem is that the whole focus has been on aid,
emergency relief, and so on, and so forth, but that really
doesn’t solve problems. I mean, people talk about genocide. In
Africa, every year there are 4 million children who die. Now,
talk about a war crime.  There are 700,000 children before the
age of five who die every year in Africa.  So, you cannot solve
these problems with small aid projects here and there. You need
to think big. You need to provide those people with adequate
transport, electricity, water systems, and this cannot be done by
so-called aid programs. In Africa 600 million people don’t have
access to electricity, out of 1 billion.
But you look at the Chinese, when they look at an
underdeveloped country, they see an opportunity. They see
potential. They see a “win-win” strategy — new markets, new
areas of development, and they should intervene in that
situation.
It is the same idea that President Franklin Roosevelt of the
United States had. All of his fights with Churchill were exactly
about this problem. Roosevelt told Churchill in the middle of
World War II, that you British are very stupid, because you suck
the blood of the Africans, and you get pennies, you get nothing,
by sucking their blood. But if you develop Africa, as independent
nations, as modern nations, as we did with the United States,
then you will gain much, much more; if you treat them as humans,
if you develop their infrastructure, schools and hospitals.
And this is exactly what the Chinese are thinking about. Out
of the problem, they see an opportunity. Prime Minister Li
Keqiang was in East Africa, and also Nigeria in May 2014, and
immediately said, “We want to help Africa to connect all the
capitals with railways,” which is a big deficit problem. And they
started from East Africa. And now there are projects being built
from Lamu, a new port, into the land-locked South Sudan, into
Uganda, into Rwanda and Burundi. And China is both financing
major parts of this, but also contributing to building it, to
solve the problems of the land-locked countries and the need for
development.
China recently completed, it’s not running yet, but part of
the railway is running, from Djibouti to Addis Ababa. There is an
old railway, which is not functional, built by the French
colonialists, but now there is a new, electrified railway, which
goes from Djibouti to Addis Ababa.
Two interesting things about this railway are, firstly, that
Ethiopia is always associated with famine and food problems. Some
of these problems still exist. These are on the way to being
solved, but to bring food from the ports to inside the country
usually took two months, because of the lack of infrastructure.
So starving people could not have food in time. Even if the food
existed in the port, coming from around the world to Djibouti, it
was almost impossible to bring the food to the people who needed
it. Now, that food can be shipped in 10 hours, to the capital,
and also to other areas. The other interesting fact about this
railway is that China is not just building the railway, and
financing it, but training and educating engineers and workers to
run these systems.
Now, Ethiopia has a massive infrastructure plan for
connecting all the major cities of Ethiopia, with the railway and
roads. The other thing about the railway is that it is all
electrified. And the Ethiopians will use all these new dams they
are building, to electrify the railway. So they don’t need import
oil, and gas and diesel to run the railway system. They will
domestically provide the energy to run the trains.
So, Ethiopia, I am very sure it will never be associated
anymore with famine and poverty. Ethiopia is a great nation, a
very proud nation. They have massive resources, but these
resources have been dormant, have not been utilized. But now,
with the Chinese intervention, and also India is active there,
these resources will be developed.
This is just a metaphorical picture. This is the
Mombasa-Nairobi railway being built by a Chinese and a Kenyan
worker. In Africa, the propaganda goes that the Chinese never let
the locals work in these projects. They bring their own workers,
they bring their own engineers, their own technology, they build
the thing, and then they leave. It’s not true. They always
involve local workers. They train them, because they cannot run
these systems; the locals will have to run these systems
themselves.
But they are also training the labor force in Uganda. They
are building an Army Corps of Engineers, so that the Army can
play a positive role in the development of the country.
Traditionally, the Army Corps of Engineers played a very
important role, even in advanced countries. So this is part of
the same project.
Another important infrastructure project for Africa is
Transaqua. Lake Chad is drying up, which is a known fact, and 30
million people are affected, because they live as fishermen, or
they have grazing land around the lake in Chad and Nigeria, and
Niger. All these countries are affected. There are 30 million
people around that region, and there will be massive migration
actually from the Lake Chad region. So there is an idea called
Transaqua, which was developed by one of our friends, an Italian
engineer, to bring 5% of the water from the Congo River, or the
tributaries of the Congo River, and build a 2,800 km.-long canal
into the Chari River, and then flow downwards into Lake Chad, to
refill the lake; but also to have a new economic zone, and build
the Mombasa-Lagos highway, which was one of the plans I showed
earlier.
So you can transform that part of Africa, which in people’s
minds is a complete jungle, into a new economic zone, but also to
bring water to the Lake Chad region.
Now, there are some other issues I want to address.   One of
the big deficits of course in Africa, is the energy consumption.
And as I said not everybody has that; the average international
level of energy consumption is about 2,800 [kw?] but that’s not
equal.  The only two countries which are exception are South
Africa and Libya, before that.  So the energy needs in Africa are
{enormous}!  I mean Africa has a lot of wealth, but also the
hydropower potential which has never been built.  But the
attitude of the Western countries, like the Obama administration,
they have something called “Power Africa Initiative,” that
certain nations in Africa will get energy provided.  But they’re
not talking about hydropower, they’re not talking about nuclear
power, they’re not talking about coal or gas or so on.  They’re
talking about so-called “renewable” or “sustainable energy.” And
the International Energy Agency has a criteria for access to
energy, which is a modern access to energy is about 100kw-hours
per year per person.  And this diagram shows very ironically,
that that amount will be consumed by an American in three days!
But they expect Africans to live with that for a whole year!
Here’s just one more ironical idea:  My refrigerator can consume
many times as much as an Ethiopian individual.
These are the criteria for President Obama’s Power Africa
plan, that the plan will eventually help these nations come to
this line, while the real needs are that big now, and they will
be that big in a few years.  So, all these ideas to help Africa
from the Obama administration, they’re not adequate!  It’s just a
complete bluff. It does not help, if you just look at the
numbers.
And this is also another irony of the Obama administration
policy. These are the sources of energy for the American people,
the American economy, and these are what the Obama administration
{doesn’t} want you to do.  So it’s “do as we say, not as we do.”
So the United States produced 37% of its energy from coal, that’s
forbidden for Africa; 30% produced by natural gas, that’s a very
suspicious policy, because there’s the carbon problem; 19%
nuclear — absolutely no nuclear for Africa; 7% hydropower — the
United States is very suspicious of hydropower projects, and so
on and so on.  So what is left is solar, so-called geothermal,
and biomass, which the United States produced only 0.1% of its
needs.  But that’s recommended for Africa. [laughter]
So anyway, the idea is that if Africa joins the new paradigm
shift, African nations, they have exactly, in African families
and African individuals, they have exactly the same needs as we
have; as we have in Europe or in the United States.  There is
absolutely no difference.  So they’re trying to convince the
Africans that they should just, maybe, if they’re lucky they
could get a lightbulb at home, so the kids can read, by having a
solar battery.  They will not bite!
I mean, if you bring electricity to a village, what people
will do, is not simply have a lightbulb, if you bring electricity
to a village,  — and one of our friends made a study in India —
is that people will start to want to use new devices.  They have
to have other appliances at home, you need to have a stove, so
women don’t have to many hours and cut trees and come home and
cook with the wood, and suffocate with the smoke.  Farmers will
have to have tractors.  They will need to have workshops which
use electricity; people will want to have TV sets, computers.
They want to build industrial projects.   They will need
refrigeration which is a big problem in Africa, because most of
the food produced in the Sub-Saharan goes wasted because there’s
no refrigeration.
So just to give yourself an illusion that you will provide
every African lightbulb, just forget about it!  Because the needs
of those people are so immense, and they will not give up on
their right to have a living standard which is similar to ours.
Why shouldn’t they have it?  And this is what — here, in the
ideology in Europe and the United States I know, they should not
have this kind of technology, they should not have this kind of
development in Africa, because that’s not “sustainable.” Which is
not true.  It is sustainable, if you provide the tools and the
technology to do that.  Actually in Africa, there are more
resources than in Japan or in the United States and Europe, to
sustain industrial development!
So the problem is in the policy.  The problem is how they
look at Africa, and how they look at the problem of poverty and
so on.   And that has also to change, exactly as we changed with
geopolitics, we have to change our attitude to the problems of
Africa, and have really the right methods to solving them, and
treating African nations as equal to us, and African families as
equal to us, and African individuals as equal to us.
Nobody here will give up their living standard, and live in
the forest — maybe some people who do, there are some Danes and
Norwegians… [laughter]  But we want to have education. We want
to have warm housing, we want to have clean water; we want to
have a future for our kids; we want to have trains which go on
time.  This is what the Africans want.  You know, there’s nothing
different, we’re all one human race!
So, when you design policy and you say, “No, Africans should
have ‘sustainable energy,’ not nuclear power,” then you are
breaking with that idea of a real human family and equality.  So
I think I’ll stop here. [applause]

 

Dias til talen:

20160418_askary_dias1 20160418_askary_dias2 20160418_askary_dias3 20160418_askary_dias4 20160418_askary_dias5 20160418_askary_dias6 20160418_askary_dias7 20160418_askary_dias8 20160418_askary_dias9 20160418_askary_dias10 20160418_askary_dias11 20160418_askary_dias12 20160418_askary_dias13 20160418_askary_dias14 20160418_askary_dias15 20160418_askary_dias16 20160418_askary_dias17 20160418_askary_dias18 20160418_askary_dias19 20160418_askary_dias20 20160418_askary_dias21 20160418_askary_dias22 20160418_askary_dias23 20160418_askary_dias24 20160418_askary_dias25 20160418_askary_dias26 20160418_askary_dias27 20160418_askary_dias28 20160418_askary_dias29 20160418_askary_dias30 20160418_askary_dias31 20160418_askary_dias32 20160418_askary_dias33 20160418_askary_dias34 20160418_askary_dias35 20160418_askary_dias36