Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 26. marts, 2018 – Lyndon og Helga LaRouche har hen over de seneste 35 år spillet en hovedrolle i udformningen af relationer mellem nationer til det bedre: gennem LaRouches idé til præsident Reagans Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ (SDI) fra 1983, og gennem »LaRouche-doktrinen« for stormagtsrelationer, som ledsagede denne idé; og gennem deres kampagne fra 1989 for den »Eurasiske Landbro«, som sluttelig bidrog til Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, der nu udvikler mange nationer i hele verden. Hele vejen igennem var fjenderne af disse tiltag hen mod et nyt paradigme for udvikling, City of Londons finansimperium og britisk geopolitik.[1]

Denne tidligere, hyppigt skjulte virkelighed er pludselig, på dramatisk vis, blevet åbenlys. Den britiske premierminister Theresa May og udenrigsminister Boris »bondske« Johnson har tyranniseret USA og 14 europæiske nationer ind i en eskalerende konfrontation med Rusland, der tilsigter at ødelægge stormagtssamarbejde for fremskridt gennem projekterne i Bælte & Vej, og som meget hurtigt kan føre til verdenskrig.

I går understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at London har gjort dette som en reaktion på miskrediteringen af det af britisk efterretning styrede Russiagate-kupforsøg mod præsident Donald Trump. Hun sprængte den udokumenterede sag om »russisk nervegift« som værende intet andet end Russiagate fortsat, genopfundet og genoplivet. Denne sags foreløbige succes, efter at Russiagate mod Trump var slået fejl, er ekstremt farlig, sagde hun. Både Kina og Rusland vil reagere på denne ændrede, transatlantiske dagsorden.

Kina har, gennem sin præsident Xi Jinping og sine partiorganer som Global Times, indset, at Kinas fredelige opkomst, konfronteret med et sandt stormløb af britisk geopolitisk og økonomisk krigsførelse, måske ikke vil få lov at blive let eller fredelig.

Men Kina har udløst en udviklingsdynamik og hæver produktivitet og levestandarder i mange nationer, såvel som i sin egen, og bruger et nyt koncept, som Lyndon LaRouche for 30 år siden kaldte »Verdenslandbro-udviklingen«. Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ tiltrækker nu også nationer fra selv Vesteuropa. Dets lederskab vil ikke lade sig standse af toldkrig eller investeringsembargo; i stedet anvender det dette nye paradigme for at stoppe dem.

Som Helga LaRouche udtrykte det, så er Kina omsider i færd med at feje Londons århundredelange Malthus-politik og nulsums-geopolitik til side; og Kina erstatter det med et Nyt Paradigme for gensidig fordel for nationer, for udryddelse af fattigdom, videnskabeligt fremskridt og for »et fællesskab for en fælles skæbne«. Lyndon LaRouche har i 50 år insisteret på nødvendigheden af denne udskiftning. Hans LaRouche-bevægelse har fremlagt ammunitionen til overvindelse af angrebene mod præsident Trump, som kommer fra britisk efterretning, og for de tiltag for en økonomisk politik, der kan virkeliggøre Amerikas fremtid på den »Nye Silkevej«.

[1] Se Harley Schlangers præsentation af geopolitikken historie, fra serien, ’Hvad er det Nye Paradigme’ (video; dansk pdf.)

Foto: Præsident Donald Trump i samtale med britiske PM Theresa May under et bilateralt møde i det ovale kontor, 27. januar, 2017. Premierminister May var det første statsoverhoved, der aflagde statsbesøg i Det Hvide Hus. (Official White House Photo)

Vært Matthew Ogden: Det er i dag den 23. marts, 2018, en meget gunstig dato: Det er nemlig 35 års dagen for en meget vigtig dato, som var 23. marts, 1983, hvor præsident Ronald Reagan annoncerede vedtagelsen af det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ  (SDI; Strategic Defense Initiative). I dag er det et meget passende tidspunkt for at bedømme den stadigt mere presserene nødvendige vedtagelse af en ny sikkerhedsarkitektur for planeten, og den samtidige nye økonomiske arkitektur, som må ledsage den.

Vi befinder os i et meget dramatisk øjeblik i verdenshistorien, og jeg mener, at, hvis vi træder et skridt tilbage og ser på det store billede, så står det klart, at verdensordenen, som vi har kendt den i de seneste 70 år, er i færd med at undergå en total transformation. Og udfaldet af de strategiske kampe, der raser netop nu, både på den nationale scene her i USA, men især på den globale scene; udfaldet af disse strategiske kampe vil afgøre menneskehedes historie i mange generationer fremover.

Med de begivenheder, der har fundet sted i løbet af de seneste tre uger, siden den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin den 1. marts annoncerede, at Rusland havde udviklet en helt ny generation af strategiske våben, baseret på avancerede fysiske [principper], og som er i stand til at gennemtrænge alle kendte forsvarssystemer, har vi set, hvor dramatisk nødvendigt det er, med det presserende i en sådan ny sikkerhedsarkitektur. Ikke én, der bygger på Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD; garanteret gensidig ødelæggelse), men derimod én, der bygger på win-win-overlevelse og økonomisk fremskridt for alle nationer på denne planet; nødvendigheden heraf bliver i stigende grad mere presserende. Jeg vil gerne fremhæve, hvad præsident Putin selv sagde i denne tale 1. marts til den føderale forsamling:

Han sagde:

» … lad os sætte os ved forhandlingsbordet og sammen udtænke et nyt og relevant system for international sikkerhed og bæredygtig udvikling for menneskelig civilisation. … Dette er et vendepunkt for hele verden og for dem, der er villige til, og i stand til, at forandre sig; de, der handler og går fremad, vil tage føringen.«

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/56957

Men, snarere end klart og nøgternt at vurdere denne ændrede, strategiske virkelighed, med denne game-changing tale af Ruslands præsident, og besvare dette tilbud for at forhandle, med hans ord, »et nyt og relevant system for international sikkerhed og bæredygtig udvikling for menneskelig civilisation«, for endelig at bringe denne nihilistiske dødsspiral med stadigt mere dødbringende masseudslettelsesvåben til en afslutning; snarere end at gøre dette, har briterne og deres såkaldte »partnere« i Europa forsøgt at oppiske en generel støtte til en krigskonfrontation mod Rusland ved anvendelse af det, Labour-partiets leder, Jeremy Corbyn, meget korrekt karakteriserede som det, han kaldte »fejlbehæftet efterretning« og »uvederhæftige dossiers« af den type, som blev brugt til at retfærdiggøre invasionen af Irak. Og som Jeremy Corbyn advarede om, så bør vi ikke »affinde os med en ny Kold Krig … og en intolerance over for dissens som under McCarthy-perioden«.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i går understregede i sin internationale webcast, så har briterne og Theresa May, i deres forsøg på at gennemtvinge en sådan krigsprovokation, overspillet deres hånd. Deres metoder og deres mål står nu afsløret for hele verden at se. På trods af Theresa Mays bestræbelser på at presse præsident Trump over i et hjørne, hvor han ikke ville vove at forsøge at tage skridt, der ville gøre det muligt for ham at honorere sin forpligtelse til at forbedre relationerne med Rusland; snarere end at lade sig blive bakket ind i et hjørne, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde, så udmanøvrerede præsident Trump imidlertid hele operationen ved at tage telefonen og ringe til præsident Putin og lykønske ham med genvalget og hans næste periode som Ruslands præsident, og fortsatte med en meget sober diskussion mellem de to statsoverhoveder om nogle af de meget vigtige, fælles bestræbelser og fælles udfordringer, som disse to nationer, USA og Rusland, sammen konfronteres med; og som, hvis vi fik lov at gøre det, vi kunne arbejde sammen om at løse, såsom krisen i Syrien; såsom muligheden for et totalt gennembrud for fred på Koreahalvøen; såsom den igangværende situation i Ukraine; og meget signifikant, såsom at forhindre et nyt våbenkapløb.

Umiddelbart efter denne telefonsamtale, blev pressen, som I kan tænke jer, hysterisk, og Det Hvide Hus’ pressesekretær Sarah Sanders holdt en pressekonference i briefing-værelset i Det Hvide Hus, hvor hun ikke mindre end et halvt dusin gange understregede den absolutte betydning af at opretholde en dialog mellem USA og Rusland på lederskabsniveau, omkring fælles interesser og fælles udfordringer.

Jeg vil afspille nogle eksempler på nogle at disse gentagne udtalelser fra Sarah Sanders på denne pressebriefing i Det Hvide Hus.

Her følger engelsk udskrift af resten af webcastet:

SARAH SANDERS:  We want to continue to have a dialogue with
Russia, and continue to talk about some of the shared interests
we have, whether it’s North Korea, Iran, and particularly as the
President noted today, slowing the tensions when it comes to an
arms race, something that is clearly important to both
leaders….
We want to continue to have dialogue so that we can work on
some of the issues that concern both countries, and we’re going
to continue to do that, while also continuing to be tough on a
number of things….
The President once again has maintained that it’s important
for us to have a dialogue with Russia so that we can focus on
some areas of shared interests…
These are conversations that sometimes take place, and
certainly the President finds there to be an importance in having
that dialogue with Russia so that we can talk about some of the
big problems that face the world….
We disagree with the fact that we shouldn’t have
conversations with Russia.  There are important topics that we
should be able to discuss, and that is why the President’s going
to continue to have that dialogue.
Again the focus was to talk about areas of shared interests.
We know that we need to continue a dialogue.  It’s important for
a lot of the safety and security of people across the globe.  We
would like to be able to work with them on things like North
Korea, on Iran, and also both countries shared interest in
lowering the tensions when it comes to an arms race, recognizing
that that’s not the best thing for either country, and so we want
to be able to have those conversations and that was the point of
today’s call…. [end video]

OGDEN:  So, that’s a very clear message, obviously.  Now, on
the same day, President Trump himself reiterated exactly the same
points in a couple of tweets that he posted, and I would like to
just read you those tweets.  He said:
“I called President Putin of Russia to congratulate him on
his election victory (in past, Obama called him also).  The Fake
News Media is crazed because they wanted me to excoriate him.
They are wrong!  Getting along with Russia (and others) is a good
thing, not a bad thing.”
“They can help solve problems with North Korea, Syria,
Ukraine, ISIS, Iran, and even the coming Arms Race.  Bush tried
to get along, but didn’t have the ‘smarts.’  Obama and Clinton
tried, but didn’t have the energy or chemistry (remember RESET).
PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH!” he concludes.
Now of course that final phrase is a quotation directly from
President Ronald Reagan.   And this direct reference is a very
timely one, and perhaps is not merely a coincidental one:  As I
said, today, March 23rd, is the 35th anniversary of one of the
groundbreaking moments in modern history, and it’s one which
completely reshaped the global, strategic geometry at that time,
and which remains immediately relevant all the way up to the
present day.
That moment, March 23rd, 1983 was representative of a
complete shock, a shock wave which was felt around the world.
This was the surprise announcement by President Ronald Reagan at
the conclusion of a live, national television broadcast which was
an address to the nation, nominally on national security.  But
what President Reagan did at the conclusion of that broadcast, to
the surprise of almost all of his leading advisors in the White
House even, was to announce what came to be known as the
Strategic Defense Initiative, or SDI, what President Reagan
called a “vision of the future, which offers hope.”
In the speech, what President Reagan did was that he
committed the United States to a crash program, a crash
scientific program for the development of advanced technologies
which would be based on new physical principles to
(quote/unquote) “free the world from the threat of nuclear war.”
And so, in so doing, President Reagan completely overthrew the
ideology of retaliatory nuclear deterrence through the threat of
instantaneous, total nuclear response in the event of the
detection of a nuclear attack against the territory of the United
States.  This was what was so-called Mutually Assured Destruction
(MAD).
President Reagan completely rejected the very premise of
Mutually Assured Destruction and in so doing, Reagan shocked the
world, and truly did change the course of world history.  So,
right now, why don’t we wind the clock back 35 years, and listen
to what the world heard on that night, March 23rd, 1983:

My fellow Americans, thank you for sharing your time with me
tonight.
The subject I want to discuss with you, peace and national
security, is both timely and important. Timely, because I’ve
reached a decision which offers a new hope for our children in
the 21st century…
The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple
premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never
be an aggressor. We maintain our strength in order to deter and
defend against aggression — to preserve freedom and peace.
Since the dawn of the atomic age, we’ve sought to reduce the
risk of war by maintaining a strong deterrent and by seeking
genuine arms control. “Deterrence” means simply this: making
sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United States,
or our allies, or our vital interests, concludes that the risks
to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he understands that, he
won’t attack. We maintain the peace through our strength;
weakness only invites aggression.
This strategy of deterrence has not changed. It still works.
But what it takes to maintain deterrence has changed. It took one
kind of military force to deter an attack when we had far more
nuclear weapons than any other power; it takes another kind now
that the Soviets, for example, have enough accurate and powerful
nuclear weapons to destroy virtually all of our missiles on the
ground. Now, this is not to say that the Soviet Union is planning
to make war on us. Nor do I believe a war is inevitable — quite
the contrary. But what must be recognized is that our security is
based on being prepared to meet all threats.
There was a time when we depended on coastal forts and
artillery batteries, because, with the weaponry of that day, any
attack would have had to come by sea. Well, this is a different
world, and our defenses must be based on recognition and
awareness of the weaponry possessed by other nations in the
nuclear age….
Now, thus far tonight I’ve shared with you my thoughts on
the problems of national security we must face together. My
predecessors in the Oval Office have appeared before you on other
occasions to describe the threat posed by Soviet power and have
proposed steps to address that threat. But since the advent of
nuclear weapons, those steps have been increasingly directed
toward deterrence of aggression through the promise of
retaliation.
This approach to stability through offensive threat has
worked. We and our allies have succeeded in preventing nuclear
war for more than three decades. In recent months, however, my
advisors, including in particular the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have
underscored the necessity to break out of a future that relies
solely on offensive retaliation for our security.
Over the course of these discussions, I’ve become more and
more deeply convinced that the human spirit must be capable of
rising above dealing with other nations and human beings by
threatening their existence. Feeling this way, I believe we must
thoroughly examine every opportunity for reducing tensions and
for introducing greater stability into the strategic calculus on
both sides….
Wouldn’t it be better to save lives than to avenge them? Are
we not capable of demonstrating our peaceful intentions by
applying all our abilities and our ingenuity to achieving a truly
lasting stability? I think we are. Indeed, we must.
After careful consultation with my advisors, including the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, I believe there is a way. Let me share
with you a vision of the future which offers hope. It is that we
embark on a program to counter the awesome Soviet missile threat
with measures that are defensive. Let us turn to the very
strengths in technology that spawned our great industrial base
and that have given us the quality of life we enjoy today.
What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that
their security did not rest upon the threat of instant U.S.
retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, that we could intercept and
destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own
soil or that of our allies?
I know this is a formidable, technical task, one that may
not be accomplished before the end of this century. Yet, current
technology has attained a level of sophistication where it’s
reasonable for us to begin this effort….
I clearly recognize that defensive systems have limitations
and raise certain problems and ambiguities. If paired with
offensive systems, they can be viewed as fostering an aggressive
policy, and no one wants that. But with these considerations
firmly in mind, I call upon the scientific community in our
country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great
talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us
the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and
obsolete.
Tonight, consistent with our obligations of the ABM treaty
and recognizing the need for closer consultation with our allies,
I’m taking an important first step. I am directing a
comprehensive and intensive effort to define a long-term research
and development program to begin to achieve our ultimate goal of
eliminating the threat posed by strategic nuclear missiles. This
could pave the way for arms control measures to eliminate the
weapons themselves. We seek neither military superiority nor
political advantage. Our only purpose — one all people share —
is to search for ways to reduce the danger of nuclear war.
My fellow Americans, tonight we’re launching an effort which
holds the promise of changing the course of human history. There
will be risks, and results take time. But I believe we can do it.
As we cross this threshold, I ask for your prayers and your
support.
Thank you, good night, and God bless you. [end video]

OGDEN:  That was 35 years ago today.
Now, just as a side note, incidentally, President Trump is
not ignorant of this history.  In 1999, far before he ever was a
candidate for President, in a an interview with none other than
Wolf Blitzer on CNN, President Trump actually addressed what he
thought of as the necessity for the Strategic Defense Initiative,
but also the necessity for sitting down and having talks to work
out the tensions between the United States and Russia.  Here’s
just a quick quote from President Trump.  He said:
“As far as nuclear is concerned, this country, us, we need a
shield….”
Wolf Blitzer said, “A Strategic Defense Initiative?”
And Trump affirmed that, saying, “Because Russia is
unstable. We need a missile defense shield.  People used to
criticize Reagan, but now it’s very developable.  We need a
shield…. We need a change.  The ABM Treaty was 1972.  Who knew
what technology would develop?  We have to sit down with the
Russians and many others.”
So, that was just a side note.  That was Nov. 28, 1999.  But
as I think you can see, now-President Trump remains committed to
that inclination to sit down with the Russians and many others —
North Korea, for example; and to resolve these nuclear threats.
If you just go back again to that date in 1983, this was 35
years ago.  In President Reagan’s own words, he said that what he
announced that night would, indeed, change the course of world
history; and it did.  And, it took most of the world completely
by surprise.  But, it didn’t come out of nowhere, and this
history is very important for viewers to understand.
Let me just read you a portion of what Lyndon LaRouche had
to say at that time.  This is a statement that he issued the
morning following that historic speech, so this is from March 24,
1983.  What Mr. LaRouche had to say was the following:
“Only high-level officials of government, or a private
citizen as intimately knowledgeable of details of the
international political and strategic situation as I am
privileged to be, can even begin to foresee the Earth-shaking
impact the President’s television address last night will have
throughout the world…. [T]he words the President spoke last
night can never be put back into the bottle. Most of the world
will soon know, and will never forget that policy announcement.
With those words, the President has changed the course of modern
history.
“Today I am prouder to be an American than I have been since
the first manned landing on the Moon. For the first time in 20
years, a President of the United States has contributed a public
action of great leadership, to give a new basis for hope for
humanity’s future to an agonized and demoralized world. True
greatness in an American President touched President Ronald
Reagan last night; it is a moment of greatness never to be
forgotten.”
So that was Lyndon LaRouche, March 24, 1983.  Now, as
LaRouche alluded to in that statement, he was no bystander or
casual observer of the events of that night President Reagan
announced the SDI.  In fact, the grand idea behind what Reagan
announced that night, came directly from none other than Lyndon
LaRouche himself.  I would like to play for you a brief excerpt
of Mr. LaRouche, in his own words, speaking about the background
to what had shocked the world that night — March 23, 1983.  This
is taken from a video that LaRouche PAC published about ten years
ago, back in 2008, on the 25th anniversary of the SDI speech.
The video was titled “A Brief History of Lyndon LaRouche’s SDI.”
So, let’s listen to what Mr. LaRouche had to say in that video.

LYNDON LAROUCHE

:  I had been organizing the SDI
operation, including initially from 1977, long before it was
called an SDI.  I was the one who said, “We’re going to make a
project of this thing.”  So, I adopted this and stated this as my
program in 1979, when I was running as a Presidential candidate.
Then, I had this conservation with Reagan, and then as a
follow-up after he was President, we had a follow-up with various
people in the Reagan circle; including his National Security
Council.  I was working with the head of the National Security
Council on this operation, and with people from the CIA and this
and that.  I was sworn to this and sworn to that, so I was doing
the whole thing.  The SDI was my work, which they liked.  And
there was a faction, including the President, who liked it.  He
liked it because he was against, he always hated Henry Kissinger;
and he hated Henry Kissinger particularly because of the
so-called “revenge weapons.”  The idea that you build super
weapons, and if somebody throws a bomb at you, you obliterate the
planet.  That is not considered a good defense, and he was
against that.  When he saw from experts that what I was saying
was accepted experts — military and others — and this was
French intelligence, the leadership of the Gaullist faction in
France; this was the leadership of the German military; this was
the leadership of the Italian military, and all over the world.
So, I was the creator of the SDI.  Reagan liked it, he adopted
it.  I was creating the thing in direct cooperation during the
entire period, with the cooperation of the National Security
Council and the heads of the CIA.  People recognized that I was
right; I had the scientific capability and knowledge to do it,
and we were doing it.

OGDEN:  So, that’s the story in Lyndon LaRouche’s own words.
That is merely the tip of a very fascinating iceberg.  We
encourage you to watch that full video that I cited that that
excerpt was taken from.  But also, to visit the page on the
LaRouche PAC website which gives you the full background of this
story.  As you can see there, the link is larouchepac.com/sdi.
That gives you this full, historic background.  But as you heard
Mr. LaRouche say there in that video clip, this effort on his
part to craft the idea of what then became adopted by the
President of the United States in the form of the SDI, this
effort went all the way back to the mid-1970s.  Here’s an image
of a campaign pamphlet which was commissioned by Lyndon LaRouche,
titled “Sputnik of the ’70s: The Science behind the Soviets’ Beam
Weapon.”  In this pamphlet, Lyndon LaRouche called for an
international crash program to develop a space-based missile
defense system based on new physical principles.  A Manhattan
project-style mission which would provide the economic driver to
fuel global development.  The pamphlet proposed .”.. Long-range
economic and scientific collaboration with the Soviet Union,
among other nations, which would eliminate the danger of world
obliteration,” and it emphasized .”.. Tremendous revolutionary
industrial implications available to this nation and the world if
the political will of the United States forces a recommitment to
technological progress in the form of an International
Development Bank and its national concomitant Third National
Bank.”
So, as you can see, Lyndon LaRouche’s idea of this missile
defense system, was always framed around the idea of not
unilateral defense systems, but rather, a joint missile defense
and joint scientific and economic collaboration between the
United States and the Soviet Union.  To do so, would be to
unleash the revolutionary industrial and economic implications of
such technological breakthroughs as the basis for a new
international, economic order; something which he had been
involved in all the way back to at least 1971 when he first
issued the proposal for a new International Development Bank —
the so-called IDB.  So you can see in LaRouche’s idea, the kernel
of what became the SDI, always had with it a new international
security architecture, overthrowing this entire reign of terror
of Mutually Assured Destruction and revenge weapons.  But
concomitantly, a new international economic order, which would be
driven by the revolutionary, unprecedented economic boom that
would come out of the progress associated with such technological
breakthroughs around these new physical principles in the
collaboration of US and Soviet scientists to develop this joint
missile defense to make International Ballistic Missile and
nuclear war impotent and obsolete.
The history is as fascinating as it is extensive.  Here is
not the time or the place to go through every single aspect of
this history; but the full background, again as I said is
available on that webpage — larouchepac.com/sdi.  But if you
fast forward from that pamphlet “Sputnik of the ’70s” all the way
to the lead-up into the 1980 Presidential campaign in which
Lyndon LaRouche himself was a candidate for President of the
United States.  Let’s take a look at a picture here of Lyndon
LaRouche meeting face-to-face with then-candidate Ronald Reagan
at a candidates’ forum that took place in Concord, New Hampshire.
During this face-to-face meeting and in several other
opportunities to interface with the Reagan campaign team, Lyndon
LaRouche presented this idea, in principle and in detail.
Following Reagan’s victory and his election, Lyndon LaRouche and
representatives of his organization, were brought in for meetings
with first the Reagan Presidential transition team, and then with
leading members of the National Security Council and Reagan’s
intelligence community.  They discussed LaRouche’s idea for this
new strategic doctrine, and the related scientific and energy
policies that would go along with it.  So, Lyndon LaRouche
commissioned numerous reports and campaign pamphlets promoting
this idea.  As you can see here, this is from {Fusion}; this is a
special report titled “Directed Energy Beams; A Weapon for
Peace.”  Here’s the next one; this is an edition of the
{Executive Intelligence Review} magazine from November 30, 1982.
Again, before the March 23, 1983 announcement of the SDI.  This
was titled “Beam Weapons: The Science to Prevent Nuclear War.”
Here’s another one; this is a pamphlet.  “How Beam Weapon
Technologies Can Reverse the Depression.”  So, all along, this
was always an economic idea from Lyndon LaRouche’s standpoint.
As you can see, being an American at this point, in the years
preceding the 1980 Presidential election and then coming out of
Reagan’s victory, 1980, ’81, ’82, the idea of this Beam Defense
system which would be based on new physical principles, was
associated — including in the popular mind — it was associated
with Lyndon LaRouche.  And it had been associated with Lyndon
LaRouche for at least half a decade prior to Reagan’s historic,
groundbreaking speech.
The morning after Reagan’s March 23rd address, the media was
scrambling to try to find experts to interview to explain what it
was that Reagan had presented the night before.  Naturally, they
had to turn to representatives of the LaRouche organization.
Here’s a photograph of Paul Gallagher, who was at that time
Executive Director of the Fusion Energy Foundation, appearing on
CBS’ Evening News program on March 24, 1983 — the day following
Reagan’s address — to explain the science behind Reagan’s policy
that had been announced the evening before.
Immediately following Reagan’s address to the nation, Lyndon
LaRouche launched a mass educational campaign to educate the
American people as to what their President had just presented.
He published and commissioned the publication of numerous mass
circulation reports to inform the American people and also
policymakers on the details of how such a program would work.
This image here is an array of different publications that were
issued by the LaRouche movement, supporting Reagan’s announcement
of the Strategic Defense Initiative and detailing the scientific,
the economic, and the military-strategic implications of the
policy.  There you can see one pamphlet — “Support the
President’s Strategic Defense Initiative; Kill Missiles, Not
People.”
As should be very clear, Lyndon LaRouche was in a leading
position of authority following this groundbreaking announcement,
and the influence that his ideas had come to wield put him in a
position of real power inside the political structure of the
Presidency of the United States.  He used that influence to
launch and to escalate on his campaign to completely reorganize
the entire international economic and strategic architecture of
the planet.  Let’s take a look at a document that Lyndon LaRouche
released exactly one year following Reagan’s March 23, 1983
announcement of the SDI program.  This was called “The LaRouche
Doctrine:  Draft Memorandum of Agreement between the United
States and the USSR.”  This was published March 30, 1984.  Let me
read you some excerpts from what Lyndon LaRouche published under
this title “The LaRouche Doctrine.”  He begins by saying:
“The political foundation for durable peace must be: a) The
unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation-states, and b)
Cooperation among sovereign nation-states to the effect of
promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits
of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all.
“The most crucial feature of present implementation of such
a policy of durable peace is a profound change in the monetary,
economic, and political relations between the dominant powers and
those relatively subordinated nations often classed as
‘developing nations.’ Unless the inequities lingering in the
aftermath of modern colonialism are progressively remedied, there
can be no durable peace on this planet.
“Insofar as the United States and Soviet Union acknowledge
the progress of the productive powers of labor throughout the
planet to be in the vital strategic interests of each and both,
the two powers are bound to that degree and in that way by a
common interest. This is the kernel of the political and economic
policies of practice indispensable to the fostering of durable
peace between those two powers.
.”.. [T]he general advancement of the productive powers of
labor in all sovereign states, most emphatically so-called
developing nations, requires global emphasis on: a) increasing
globally the percentiles of the labor force employed in
scientific research and related functions of research and
development … b) increasing the absolute and relative scales of
capital-goods production and also
the rate of turnover in capital-goods production; and c)
combining these two factors to accelerate technological progress
in capital-goods outputs.
“Therefore, high rates of export of such capital-goods
output to meet the needs of developing nations are indispensable
for the general development of so-called developing nations: Our
common goal, and our common interest, is promoting both the
general welfare and promoting preconditions of durable peace
between our two powers….
“By supplying increased amounts of high-technology capital
goods to developing nations, the exporting economies foster
increased rates of turnover in their own most advanced
capital-goods sectors of production….
“The importer of such advanced capital goods increases the
productive powers of labor in the economy of the importing
nation. This enables the importing nation to produce its goods at
a lower average social cost, and enables it to provide
better-quality and cheaper goods as goods of payment to the
nations exporting capital goods.
“Not only are the causes of simple humanity and general
peace served by such policies of practice; the arrangement is
equally beneficial to exporting and importing nations….
.”.. [T]he general rate of advancement of the productive
powers of labor is most efficiently promoted by no other policy
of practice.”
Then a little later in the report, he reviews the situation
of strategic tensions between the USSR and the United States.  He
says:
“Since the rupture of the wartime alliance between the two
powers, U.S. military policy toward the Soviet Union has passed
through two phases. The first, from the close of the war until a
point beyond the death of Joseph Stalin, was preparation for the
contingency of what was sometimes named ‘preventive nuclear war.’
The second, emerging over the period from the death of Stalin
into the early period of the administration of President John F.
Kennedy, was based on the doctrines of Nuclear Deterrence and
Flexible Response …
“From approximately 1963 until approximately 1977, it might
have appeared, as it appeared to many, that the doctrines of
Nuclear Deterrence and Flexible Response had succeeded in
preserving a state of restive peace, something called ‘détente,’
between the two powers. This appearance was deceptive; during the
period 1977-83, there was an accelerating deterioration in the
military relationships between the two powers….
“Beginning shortly after the inauguration of President Jimmy
Carter, the deterioration of the military situation
accelerated….
“In response to this direction of developments, the U.S.
public figure Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. proposed that both powers
develop, deploy, and agree to develop and deploy ‘strategic’
defensive, anti-ballistic-missile defense based on ‘new physical
principles.’ This proposal was issued publicly by LaRouche
beginning February 1982; he proposed to U.S.A., Western European,
and Soviet representatives that the development and deployment of
such strategic defensive systems be adopted policy, as a means
for escaping from the ‘logic’ of Nuclear Deterrence….
.”.. The true solution must be found in the domain of
politics and economics, and the further shaping of military
relations between the powers must produce military policies by
each coherent with the direction of development of the needed
political and economic solutions….
“On the part of the United States of America, the government
is committed to avoiding all colonial, imperial, or kindred
endeavors in foreign policy, and to establish, instead, a growing
community of principle among fully sovereign nation-states of
this planet. This shall become a community of principle coherent
with the policies of the articles of this draft memorandum. If
any force should endeavor to destroy that community of principle,
or any member of that community of sovereign nations, the United
States will be prepared to defend that community and its members
by means of warfare, should other means prove insufficient. With
respect to the Soviet Union, the government of the United States
offers the Soviet Union cooperation with itself in service of
these principles, and desires that the Soviet Union might enter
fully into participation within that community of principle….
“Under these conditions, provided that all nations share in
development of the frontiers of scientific research, in
laboratories, and in educational institutions, all nations will
be made capable of assimilating efficiently the technological
by-product benefits of the military expenditures on systems
derived from application of ‘new physical principles.’
“To lend force to this policy, the powers agree to establish
new institutions of cooperation between themselves and other
nations in development of these new areas of scientific
breakthrough for application to exploration of space.
“To this purpose, the powers agree to establish at the
earliest possible time institutions for cooperation in scientific
exploration of space, and to also co-sponsor treaty-agreements
protecting national and multinational programs for colonization
of the Moon and Mars.
“At some early time, the powers shall enter into
deliberations, selecting dates for initial manned colonization of
the Moon and Mars, and the establishment of international space
stations on the Moon and in the orbits of Moon and Mars, stations
to be maintained by and in the common interest and use of space
parties of all nations.
“The powers jointly agree upon the adoption of two tasks as
the common interest of mankind, as well as the specific interest
of each of the two powers: 1) The establishment of full economic
equity respecting the conditions of individual life in all
nations of this planet during a period of not more than 50 years;
2) Man’s exploration and colonization of nearby space as the
continuing common objective and interest of mankind during and
beyond the completion of the first task. The adoption of these
two working-goals as the common task and respective interest in
common of the two powers and other cooperating nations,
constitutes the central point of reference for erosion of the
potential political and economic causes of warfare between the
powers.”
That was known as the “LaRouche Doctrine,” published March
30, 1984.  As you can see, what Lyndon LaRouche outlined in that
document was the basis for exactly what we’re calling now a new
international economic and strategic architecture.  In fact, the
one requires the other.  You cannot have a new strategic
architecture without resolving what Lyndon LaRouche characterized
as the root causes behind the conflict between these nations; the
persisting inequalities between nations.  And you cannot have the
kind of cooperation needed for the common, mutual economic
development and the application of these groundbreaking new
physical principles and the technologies that are derived from
those, without the establishment of a new international economic
order.  Elsewhere in that document, Mr. LaRouche described
exactly how such an economic order must take place; with fixed
exchange rates between currencies, massive credits — both
domestically within countries for the upgrading of the
technological and infrastructure platforms within those nations
— but also, international credit treaty agreements in the form
of what he originally described in 1971 as the International
Development Bank, or the IDB.
As you can see, and I think any astute reader of that
document now, almost 35 years later, that document laid the basis
for what we now see as the so-called “win-win” new economic
paradigm.  This idea of the common benefit of all; mutual
cooperation for joint development; the upgrading of the so-called
“developing” nations, which were still suffering under the
effects of colonialism and post-colonial policy.  So, when
President Xi Jinping of China speaks about “win-win” economic
development and a new community of nations with a shared destiny,
I think that the echoes couldn’t be more clear of what Lyndon
LaRouche himself was describing at that time in the middle of the
1980s, almost 35 years ago today.  When Xi Jinping offers the
United States to join this new “win-win” system, the Belt and
Road Initiative, which is already resolving these persisting
inequalities that the world has been suffering, such as in Africa
or Central and South America.  Or, when President Putin offers to
“sit down at the negotiating table and devise together a new and
relevant system of international security and sustainable
development for human civilization,” we should reflect on what
was laid in that document.  That LaRouche Doctrine now almost 35
years ago today, in the wake of that history-changing
announcement by President Ronald Reagan, at which he called a
spade a spade.  The world could no longer survive under the
dictatorship of Mutually Assured Destruction; that reign of
terror that President Kennedy characterized as the Sword of
Damocles hanging by the slenderest of threads over every man,
woman, and child on this planet, threatening nuclear
annihilation.  What Lyndon LaRouche characterized at that moment
as the “LaRouche Doctrine” is the principle behind the new
economic and new security architecture which must be adopted on
this planet today.  Not as a recipe, not taking everything
exactly as it was said, because clearly of course, the world has
changed; and we must apply the principles that lay at the root of
exactly what Lyndon LaRouche had in mind when he proposed the
Strategic Defense Initiative and when he proposed the subsequent
LaRouche Doctrine, and apply those to evolve necessarily to fit
the specific conditions of today.
One thing that Lyndon LaRouche alluded to explicitly in that
document, was the need for joint cooperation in the colonization
and exploration of space.  In fact, that is the form that the
idea of a revived SDI has actually been taken.  The proposal for
not an SDI, but what’s now called an SDE — the Strategic Defense
of Earth — to literally re-tool the strategic nuclear weapons
with these massive payloads that have been accumulated by the
United States, Russia, also other nations — China and India and
other nations.  To re-tool those nuclear weapons and also the
delivery systems, these high-power intercontinental ballistic
missiles, and also the new technologies that Russia has just
announced.  To re-tool these technologies and have what were
offensive weapons become defensive tools against asteroids and
other threats to planet Earth which we may encounter from outer
space.  While this was proposed under that name, the SDE, by
certain individuals inside Russia about five years ago,
coinciding with the 30th anniversary of the original SDI speech.
What this originally actually came out of, had its origins in the
late 1980s and the early 1990s with the scientist Dr. Edward
Teller.  Teller was actually one of the leading scientific
advisors of President Reagan in the 1980s around the SDI
initiative, but following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Dr.
Edward Teller travelled to Russia and visited some of the leading
science cities that had been involved in developing nuclear
weapons and their delivery systems.  He met with some of the
leading former Soviet scientists, the Russian scientists, and
proposed exactly this.  He proposed the idea of the United States
and Russia saying the Cold War is over; let’s now cease this
policy of aiming our nuclear missiles one against the other, and
let’s now aim them against the common threats that mankind as a
whole faces.  Especially with the latest news of an asteroid
which poses a credible threat — what’s called a “non-zero
threat” — to the Earth in the foreseeable future, which was
just discussed in the  media over the past week, this proposal is
all the more timely and all the more relevant today.
So, what I’d like is to just play an excerpt from Helga
Zepp-LaRouche’s international webcast that she delivered
yesterday.  She takes up exactly this idea, so here’s an excerpt
from Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE

:  I think that the SDI proposal,
which was absolutely not what the media made out of it, calling
it “Star Wars,” and things like that, the SDI proposal of my
husband, Lyndon LaRouche was an absolutely farsighted vision of a
New Paradigm!  And if you read the relevant papers about it,
especially the proposed draft for a dialogue among the
superpowers, which was published one year later, which you can
find in the archives or in the newer {EIR}s. This was a vision
where both superpowers would develop together, new physical
principles which would make nuclear weapons obsolete.  And I
think what Putin announced on March 1st in terms of new physical
principles applied for new weapons systems, is absolutely is in
this tradition. And Putin also asked, now they have to sit down
and we have to negotiate and put together a new security
architecture, including Russia, the United States, China, and the
Europeans.
This was all envisioned by my husband in this famous SDI
proposal, and it was a very far-reaching to dissolve the blocs,
NATO and the Warsaw Pact,  to cooperate instead among sovereign
republics, which is exactly what the New Silk Road dynamic today
represents. And it was also the idea to use a science-driver in
the economy to use the increased productivity of the real economy
for a gigantic technology transfer to the developing sector, in
order to overcome their underdevelopment and poverty.
And this is what we’re seeing today, also, in the
collaboration between China, Russia, and the countries that are
participating in the Belt and Road Initiative.
So I think, in a certain sense, part of this danger of peace
breaking out, that there is right now the very vivid tradition
and actualization of that tradition of the SDI, and I think we
should circulate this proposal by my husband again.  I think we
should enlarge it to become the SDE, the Strategic Defense of the
Earth, because it was just discovered that very soon, another big
asteroid is already taking course on the planet Earth. So we need
to move quickly to the common aims of mankind, and all countries
should cooperate and be a shared community for the one future of
humanity.
This is the New Paradigm which I think is so obvious.  I
mean, if you look at the long arc of history, we {have} to
overcome geopolitics and we have to move to a kind of cooperation
where we put all our forces together to solve those questions
which are a challenge to all of humanity — nuclear weapons,
poverty, asteroids — there are so many areas where we could
fruitfully cooperate — space exploration is one of them.  And I
think we are in a very fascinating moment in history, but we need
more active citizens.  So please contact us, work with us, and
let’s together make a better world.

OGDEN:  So, that was Helga LaRouche’s call to action, and I
think that’s a perfect concluding point for our webcast today, as
we observe this very auspicious date — March 23rd — the 35th
anniversary of President Reagan’s groundbreaking speech
announcing the Strategic Defense Initiative.  Let’s take that
kind of sense of victory and the optimism that indeed, ideas can
change the course of history, and consolidate this New Paradigm;
this new security architecture and new economic architecture for
the planet.  The opportunity is greater than it ever has been
before; but the need is ever more dire.
Thank you for joining me, and please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 11. marts, 2018 – Vesten har »gået i søvne i deres arrogance«, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche i denne weekend; først kom de for sent til båden med Kinas Nye Silkevej, og nu er de blevet overlistet af Vladimir Putins dramatiske annoncering den 1. marts om, at Rusland med held har udviklet våbensystemer, baseret på nye fysiske principper, der gør missilforsvarssystemet, der er deployeret omkring Rusland og Kina, ubrugelige og forældede. Det ynkelige forsøg på at miskreditere Putins annoncering som værende et svindelnummer, baseret på den kendsgerning, at de brugte animationer snarere end videoer til at demonstrere det nye, hypersoniske missil, faldt i dag til jorden med det Russiske Forsvarsministerium, der udlagde videoer af den succesfulde testning af Kinzhal aero-ballistiske, hypersoniske missil (se nedenstående rapport).

Responsen fra den kriminelle bande, der udgjorde Obama-administrationen – og som i stigende grad nu afsløres af modige medlemmer af Kongressen som medskyldige i det britiske MI6’s bestræbelse på at bringe Donald Trumps amerikanske regering til fald – har nu åbenlyst bekendt kulør og etableret en ny organisation ved navn, »National Security Action«. Organisationen, en bogstavelig talt ’blå bog’ over persongalleriet i Obama-administrationen, har udtrykkeligt til formål at fjerne Trump fra præsidentskabet og vende tilbage til Obamas forberedelse til krig med Rusland og Kina. Sammensat af 68 af de ledende medlemmer af Obama-administrationen (de bør kaldes »68-erne« til ære for udløsningen af modkulturen i 1960’erne, som drev landet ud i økonomisk og social disintegration), så erklærer deres politiske programmer, at Trump er »uegnet til at lede«, at han har vist »ansvarsløshed« for at have afsløret og udrenset korruptionen i FBI og andetsteds og, det mest åbenlyse, at, »i stedet for at konfrontere Vladimir Putin for dennes skamløse og fortsatte angreb på vort demokrati, så bukker Trump for Moskvas luner« og nægter at »forsvare sig over for Kina«. Mens sandheden er, at Trumps besøg til Beijing sidste november hjembragte $283 mia. i kinesiske investeringer i amerikansk infrastruktur, industri og landbrug som en del af Trumps forpligtelse over for en genrejsning af amerikansk økonomi, så bliver dette ignoreret af de ynkelige »68’ere«, der i stedet klager (uretmæssigt) over, at »Trumps familieforetagender fik særlige aftaler, efter Trump mødtes med den kinesiske præsident«.

Ironisk nok, så går en af deres klager ud på, at »Trumps uberegnelige opførsel har hævet risikoen for en katastrofal konflikt med Nordkorea«. Dette dokument blev udgivet den 27. februar, blot få dage før det historiske gennembrud 8. marts for en løsning af Koreakrisen, da Trump aftalte at mødes med Kim Jong-un til atomnedrustningsforhandlinger. Det var Obama-administrationen, der nægtede at forhandle med Nordkorea – ja, de hilste faktisk Nordkoreas atomvåbenbyggeri velkommen, eftersom det udgjorde et påskud for den massive oprustning af atomvåben og missilsystemer omkring Kina, kendt som Obamas doktrin, »omdrejningspunkt Asien«. Trump har erklæret dette »omdrejningspunkt« for forbi og har opnået gennembruddet i Korea ved at arbejde tæt sammen med Kina og Rusland. Så hvem er det, der »hævede risikoen for en katastrofal konflikt«, og som stadig gør det i dag?

Kendsgerningen er, at Silkevejsånden er i færd med at vinde, og de nationer, der bliver ladt tilbage, har kun sig selv at takke for at holde fast ved City of London og Wall Street snarere end at lytte til Lyndon LaRouches vise ord om at genindføre det Amerikanske System for fysisk økonomi og tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej.

Foto: Vladimir Putin besvarede spørgsmål fra NBC-ankermand, Megyn Kelly. Interviewet blev optaget i Kreml den 1. marts, 2018, og i Kaliningrad den 2. marts. (en.kremlin.ru)

Jeg vil gerne opfordre vore læsere til … at læse følgende artikel af min mand, som blev udgivet 30. marts, 1984 … : »Draft Memorandum of Agreement between the United States and the U.S.S.R.« Jeg har altid ment, at dette særlige dokument var et af de mest fremsynede og visionære artikler af de mange, mange skønne artikler, min mand har skrevet i årtiernes løb, for dette var et år efter, at SDI blev foreslået af præsident Reagan. Som vi ved, så var modreaktionen mod dette forslag utroligt. Det kom fra kredsene omkring Bush i Reagan-administrationen, men det kom også fra Ogarkov-lejren i det sovjetiske militær. Så efter et år fremsatte min mand et meget fremsynet forslag, som var ideen om at grundlæggende set at opløse NATO- og Warszawapagt-blokkene; og bruge samarbejdet mellem NATO og Warszawapagten – men i særdeleshed USA og Sovjetunionen – til at udvikle våben baseret på nye, fysiske principper; anvende dem i civilsektoren til at forårsage en videnskabsdrevet virkning; og dernæst bruge den øgede produktivitet i begge økonomier – men især også i den sovjetiske økonomi – til at gennemføre en betydningsfuld overførsel af teknologi til udviklingslandene og overvinde disses underudvikling og ophøre med at bruge udviklingslande til stedfortræderkrige mellem supermagterne. Principperne, der blev fremlagt i denne artikel, for det politiske grundlag for en varig fred, må være alle nationers absolutte, betingelsesløse suverænitet; samarbejde mellem suveræne nationalstater; ubegrænsede muligheder for at deltage i fordelene ved teknologisk fremskridt, til alle og enhvers gensidige fordel; og så fremdeles.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 7. marts, 2018 – Den tidligere russiske udenrigsminister Igor Ivanov, der i går skrev om den russiske præsident Vladimir Putins tale, som hørtes i hele verden, om nye, russiske, økonomiske politikker og strategiske våbensystemer med ny teknologi, understregede, »Rusland tilbyder en olivengren, ikke atomkrig«. Dette er sandt. Den fornuftige respons til Putins annonceringer er klar, og elementer af den fremmes allerede af visse veteraner af præsident Reagans Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ (SDI). Genopliv SDI som et forceret program, baseret på teknologisk samarbejde mellem USA og Rusland, med det formål at udvikle opsnapning af missiler baseret på nye, fysiske principper og de seneste plasmateknologier og teknologier for dirigeret energi.

Det blev præsenteret i sin helhed i 1984 i »The LaRouche Doctrine: Draft Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R« om betingelser for fred, teknologi og økonomiske politikker for udvikling af tredjelande, våbenpolitikker og forhandlinger om nedrustning.

Putin tilbyder nu en ny mulighed for dette nye fredsparadigme. Første gang omdøbte kredse omkring Bush og Kissinger SDI til blot »antimissil-missiler«, og trak dernæst USA ud af ABM-traktaten i 2002. Idet de tænkte, at Rusland var ruineret, og med kun sin strategiske missilstyrke tilbage, var Bush-planen – Obama fortsatte den – at omringe Rusland med antimissil-jagerfly og slå Rusland ud af selv af klubben for atommagter. Putin har netop demonstreret, hvilken strategisk fiasko, det var; hans annonceringer frembyder en mulighed for igen at forhandle som ligeværdige stormagter. Det kan føre til en genoplivning af Strategisk Forsvarsinitiativ, og mere – til at bruge nye, fysiske principper for at forsvare Jorden mod asteroide- eller meteornedslag, og til at opgradere energiproduktion, industri, landbrug og medicin, som LaRouche forklarede det i 1984.

Præsident Donald Trump, som forstår gensidigt fordelagtige stormagtsrelationer, på trods af alle angrebene mod ham for det, har også udtrykkeligt udtalt, at hans politik over for Korea er samarbejde med Kina for at få direkte forhandlinger med Nordkorea, atomvåbenfrihed og fred på halvøen. Alene dette kunne skaffe det ønskede resultat, hvis nogen politik kan.

Præsidenten går op imod hele Washington ved at nægte at målrette sine handelsstraffe udelukkende mod Kina og Rusland, som det er blevet krævet af britisk geopolitik i imperiestil. Han må gå videre end det og må tilslutte USA det nye paradigme for økonomisk udvikling og fred, repræsenteret af Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ. Dette er afhængigt af, at kandidater og valgte regeringsfolk (Kongres og Senat) kræver det i valgkampagnen i 2018, med en økonomisk politik for USA, kendt som »LaRouches Fire Love«.

I en velkommen overraskelse har vælgerne i Italien netop stemt på nationale kandidater, der stillede op på politiske handlinger, som er foreslået af LaRouche: Glass-Steagall opbrydning af storbanker og statslig bankpraksis for at yde kredit til industri og infrastruktur. LaRouche-bevægelsen i Italien, kendt som Movisol, har i en udtalelse efter valget sagt: »Movisol er den eneste kraft i Italien, der kan samle alle partier, på trods af deres uoverensstemmelser, omkring disse punkter: LaRouches Fire Love og Kinas Nye Silkevej. En regering kan, og må, dannes på basis af dette …«

Dette er afgørende åbninger for et nyt paradigme for menneskeligt fremskridt.

Foto: Den russiske præsident Putin i et møde i Agenturet for Strategiske Initiativers Bestyrelse. 7. marts, 2018. (en.kremlin.ru)  

24. maj, 2017 – I en tale for et publikum på mellem 100 og 200 mennesker i forlaget Phoenix Press Publishing Groups hovedkvarter i Nanjing, Kina, gav Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Schiller Instituttets præsident, en tilbagemelding om sin deltagelse i Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing.

»Bælt & Vej har indsprøjtet optimisme i mange lande«, sagde Zepp-LaRouche, »og dette momentum kan ikke standses«, men at bringe det til at bære den fulde frugt »bliver ikke let«. Umiddelbart efter topmødet, fortsatte hun, optrappedes angrebene mod Bælt & Vej, kombineret med angreb mod præsident Trump, der havde sendt en delegation på højt niveau til BV-topmødet. »Angrebene var baseret på de absurde anklager om aftalt spil med Rusland i valget«, sagde hun.

»Efter den Kolde Krig, ønskede briterne og deres amerikanske allierede at skabe en unipolær verden«, sagde hun. »Og i deres bestræbelser herpå, har de ødelagt Mellemøsten og efterladt det i ruiner.« Dette fremskyndede flygtningekrisen, den generelle reaktion imod »globalisering« og fremvæksten af højrefløjsbevægelser. »Bælt & Vej«, sagde hun, »vil virkeliggøre skabelsen af Verdenslandbroen, som vil forbinde alle kontinenter. Dette er noget, vi har kæmpet for i over 40 år«, sagde hun.

Dernæst beskrev hun den kamp, som hun og hendes mand, Lyndon H. LaRouche, jr., har ført for at bygge en ny, økonomisk verdensorden: LaRouches forslag om en International Udviklingsbank, kampen for den afrikanske udviklingsplan og det latinamerikanske initiativ med samme formål, med samarbejdet med den mexicanske præsident, José López Portillo [1976-82], samt de hundredevis af seminarer på fem kontinenter, som Schiller Instituttet har afholdt, med krav om en Bælt & Vej-udvikling.

»Transformeringen af Bælt & Vej til at blive til en Verdenslandbro vil for første gang rent politisk virkeliggøre en reel fremtid for alle mennesker, der lever på denne planet, og vil etablere former for regeringsførelse for verden.« Men, for fuldt ud at realisere dette, sagde hun, »må man også studere min mands ideer med hensyn til spørgsmålet om økonomi«.

Fr. Zepp-LaRouche gennemgik dernæst de altafgørende kulturelle aspekter af Bælt & Vej og behovet for, at alle de forskellige kulturer bringer alle deres bedste præstationer frem, med det formål at bruge disse til at skabe en dialog mellem kulturer blandt nationerne i Bælt & Vej. Dernæst gennemgik hun betydningen af Friedrich Schiller i tysk og vestlig kultur, og betydningen af Konfucius i kinesisk kultur, idet hun foretog en konkret sammenligning mellem Schillers og Konfucius’ værker, hvor hun viste den nære lighed i disse to, store tænkeres ideer, der var skilt af næsten 2000 år.

Efter fr. Zepp-LaRouche havde Bill Jones, chef for EIR’s Washington-kontor, en fremlæggelse, hvor han viste en power point-præsentation, der beskrev LaRouche-organisationens kamp fra tidspunktet for Nixons ophævelse af Bretton Woods-systemet. Han beskrev Romklubbens angreb i 1970’erne og udgivelsen af bogen »Grænser for vækst«, der havde til hensigt at transformere en fremskridtskultur til en dødskultur, med den internationale indsats for Økonomisk Nulvækst og Befolknings-nulvækst. Han skitserede Lyndon LaRouches og LaRouche-organisationens reaktion på Nulvækst-bevægelsen, LaRouches krav om den Internationale Udviklingsbank (IUB) og det efterfølgende krav om IUB og en Ny, økonomisk Verdensorden ved den Alliancefri Bevægelses Colombo-møde i 1976, og gennem Guyanas udenrigsminister, Fred Willis, i FN’s Generalforsamling.

Jones beskrev den kamp, som LaRouche førte for at bringe præsident Ronald Reagan, der havde vedtaget LaRouches idé om Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI (Det strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ) som et fredsforslag sammen med Sovjetunionen, ind i en arbejdsrelation med de progressive ledere i udviklingssektoren, såsom den mexicanske præsident López Portillo og den indiske premierminister Indira Gandhi. Disse bestræbelser førte dernæst til en reaktion fra vicepræsident George H.W. Bush, der intrigerede for at få LaRouche og flere af hans medarbejdere fængslet på falske anklager. Valget af præsident Bill Clinton bragte LaRouche ud af fængsel og tilbage i en rådgivende rolle, med præsident Clintons forsøg, om end mislykket, på at gå i retning af en ny finansarkitektur. Skabelsen af Bælt & Vej-initiativet (BVI) og Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB) repræsenterer således den type strukturer, som LaRouche og hans bevægelse har forsøgt at frembringe i over fire årtier, forklarede Jones.

Dernæst fulgte professor Bao Shixiu, professor i militærvidenskab, der skitserede Bælt & Vejs strategiske betydning for Kina og viste, hvordan det vil gøre det muligt for landet at overvinde de traditionelle vanskeligheder, det har haft med andre lande, inklusive Indien og Japan. Professor Bao understregede LaRouche-parrets skelsættende rolle med at bringe dette initiativ frem i forreste front, og Lyndon og Helga LaRouches fortsatte kamp for at overvinde modstanden mod det, fra finanseliten i London og New York. Professor Bao fremlagde også både Bælt & Vejs økonomiske og strategiske implikationer for Kina, som ville være med til at sikre et harmonisk klima i området og i verden, der igen ville gøre det muligt for Kina og alle andre lande at fortsat udvikle sig.

Tilhørerne viste stor interesse, især for Helga Zepp-LaRouches forslag om en dialog mellem kulturer og en større grad af interesse i Friedrich Schillers værker blandt personalet i Phoenix-forlaget, af hvilke nogle syntes at have fået et ret stort kendskab til den tyske kulturs værker.

Foto: Som præsident for Schiller Instituttet var Helga Zepp-LaRouche inviteret til at deltage i det netop afsluttede Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, den 14.-15. maj, hvor hun deltog i rundbordsdiskussioner mellem tænketanke. Her ses hun som tilhører under forummet.

5. september, 2016 (Leder) – De afgørende uger, som vi nu har for os, stiller dette spørgsmål til alle amerikanere (blandt andre): Hvordan er det muligt, at det kan lykkes for det enkelte individs inderste, private tankers »lille hjul« at dreje det »store hjul« i den historiske proces, der involverer den kurs og skæbne, som nationen, og menneskehedens mere end syv milliarder individer generelt, i fremtiden, i de kommende århundreder, vil få?

Den virkelige historie om det netop afsluttede G20-topmøde i Kina er den, at den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping, sammen med Ruslands Putin og udviklingslandene under anførsel af BRIKS, samt Japan m.fl., fremtvang spørgsmålet om udskiftningen af det nuværende finansielle system. De insisterede på, at Wall Street/London-systemet, baseret på hasardspil, har kurs mod en ny krise, og at det må erstattes af et produktionsorienteret system, funderet i videnskab og store internationale, avantgarde-projekter: det system, der er centreret omkring Kinas Nye Silkevejs-politik, som præsident Xi kalder »Ét Bælte, Én Vej«.

Det finansielle fundament for dette nye, menneskelige system leveres af en række udviklingsbanker, som Kina har været med til at lancere, såsom den Asiatiske Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), og BRIKS’ Nye Udviklingsbank (NDB).

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i går bemærkede, vil det, efterhånden, som resultaterne af G20-topmødet og det forudgående Vladivostok-topmøde i løbet af de næste par dage bliver kendt, blive klart, hvem, der forsvarer menneskehedens sag, konfronteret med udsigten til økonomisk udslettelse, og hvem, der forsøger at lægge hindringer i vejen. I løbet af disse dage vil den amerikanske Kongres, den 6. september, træde sammen, og FN’s Generalforsamling træder sammen den 13. september. Samtidigt vil rækken af topmøder på højeste niveau fortsætte i Asien.

Det, som den amerikanske Kongres må gøre, når den atter træder sammen, er at vedtage Glass-Steagall, for hvilken lov der er fremsat tværpolitiske lovforslag i begge Kongressens huse. Kongressen må ligeledes handle på de kendsgerninger, der er blevet afsløret i de »28 sider« af den Fælles Kongresundersøgelsesrapport om 11. september (2001): den må handle med henblik på at fjerne Obama for hans beviste, overlagte mørklægning af saudiernes (og briternes) ansvar for 11. september, og samtidig fremtvinge flere skjulte fakta om den britisk/saudiske sammensværgelse, og om Bush’ og Cheneys – men først og fremmest Obamas – medskyldighed. Det faktum, at vi ikke fjernede Bush og Cheney, gav os Obama, som er endnu værre. Hvis vi nu ikke fjerner Obama, vil vi få noget, der er værre endnu, hvis vi da ellers stadig vil være i live til at opleve det.

Netop nu, hvor omgående, politisk handling er presserende nødvendig, forbereder ledelsen af Lyndon LaRouches bevægelse, der er lokaliseret på Manhattan, det, som LaRouche har kaldt for et »levende mindesmærke« for ofrene for 11. september – først og fremmest de direkte ofre og deres familier, men også USA og enhver del af verden, som er blevet offer for forbrydelsen og dens mørklægning. Centrum for dette »levende mindesmærke« vil blive opførelser af Mozarts Rekviem, i hvilken en stor skaber fejrer, ikke døden, men det uforgængelige liv og dets mission, konfronteret med døden, igennem alle århundreder i fortid og fremtid.

Med dette »levende mindesmærke«, og ud over dette, arbejder den Manhattan-centrerede LaRouche-bevægelse på at genskabe et funktionsdygtigt præsidentskab for USA, ud fra selvsamme Manhattan-lokalitet og gennem de samme principper, som Alexander Hamilton anvendte til at skabe det oprindelige George Washington-præsidentskab for USA.

For at vende tilbage til vores indledende spørgsmål om »det lille hjul« og »det store hjul«: Politikken med Den Nye Silkevej begyndte som en idé: ideen om den Europæiske Produktive Trekant, som Lyndon LaRouche udviklede i slutningen af 1980'erne, og som han, sammen med sin hustru Helga, videreudviklede til den Eurasiske Landbro, Den Nye Silkevej og Verdenslandbroen. Og det, der udløste det kinesiske rumprogram, som i 2018 for første gang nogensinde vil lande en robot på Månens bagside – var også først en idé. Det var Ronald Reagans Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ (SDI), der overbeviste det kinesiske lederskab om behovet for et forceret, videnskabeligt udviklingsprogram, inklusive et forceret rumprogram, som vi vil gå i dybden med i det næste nummer af EIR, 9. september. Det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ var en politik, der helt fra bunden af blev opfundet af Lyndon LaRouche, og som overbeviste Reagan.

Og de udviklingsbanker, der i dag bliver lanceret, blev udtænkt af Lyndon LaRouche i 1970'erne, hvor de blev forelagt FN’s Generalforsamling af Guyanas agtværdige udenrigsminister, nu afdøde Fred Wills.

Som den store, russiske videnskabsmand Vladimir Vernadskij viste i første halvdel af det tyvende århundrede, så er den menneskelige noesis, eller kreative tænkning, den mest magtfulde kraft i universet. Der er ingen kraft, der kan måle sig med det menneskelige intellekt med hensyn til kreativ opdagelse.

Foto: Brasiliens præsident Michel Temer, Indiens premierminister Narendra Modi, Kinas præsident Xi Jinping, Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin og Sydafrikas præsident Jacob Zuma ankommer til Kina for at deltage i G20-topmødet, der finder sted 3. – 5. september, 2016 [www.gcis.gov.za/flickr]

18. august 2016 (Leder) – Den nutidige historiske periode er fuldstændig ny i sine karakteristika; den kan ikke sammenlignes med noget andet i menneskehedens hidtidige historie. Af denne grund er det kun nogle få personer, der har været i stand til, i deres intellekt, at frembringe et begreb om, hvad karakteristika er for denne epoke, der intet fortilfælde har: personer som Albert Einstein, Krafft Ehricke og Lyndon og Helga LaRouche. Fordi det store flertal af almindelige dødelige mennesker ikke i deres erfaringsmateriale har noget sammenligneligt, og intet, som de har hørt eller læst om, har de ingen kriterier, ud fra hvilke de kan bedømme eller forstå det; de er på herrens mark. Af denne grund kan grupper, bestående af så få personer som i Lyndon LaRouches Manhattan-projekt, få en afgørende indflydelse netop på dette tidspunkt. Alene de kan se vejen frem, om end denne vej undertiden kan synes utydelig, og de må famle sig frem. De øvrige går i blinde, eller, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche ofte siger, »har ikke den fjerneste idé«.

I 2018 vil en kinesisk mission nå Månens bagside – under forudsætning af, at det inden da lykkes os at besejre Det britiske Imperiums kaosmagter. Denne mission vil blive en del af et helt, generelt program for at opdage og udforske de endnu ikke virkeliggjorte implikationer af Einsteins fundamentale opdagelser, som Lyndon LaRouche har påpeget. Og, som rumforskningsgeniet Krafft Ehricke – sammen med LaRouche – forudså, så vil den aktuelle energigennemstrømningstæthed, der for tiden står til menneskehedens disposition, være en forløber for fusionskraft, og herfra føre til stof-antistof-reaktioner, og herfra atter videre frem til niveauer, som vi i dag ikke engang kan give et navn.

Under forudsætning af, at vi overvinder de aktuelle forhindringer, som repræsenteres af Obama og det Britiske Imperium, så er vi i færd med at glide ind i det, Helga Zepp-LaRouche har kaldt »en æra, i hvilken vi bliver ægte menneskelige«.

På lignende måde er det, man måske kunne have kaldt det »system af alliancer«, der nu spænder over og gennemkrydser Eurasien og breder sig ud herfra, i realiteten slet ikke et »system af alliancer« i den betydning, vi har kendt til fra fortiden. Det er i realiteten snarere en projektion tilbage i tiden og ind i nutiden, fra det fremtidige univers, der inkorporerer de fremtidige opdagelser, der bringes tilbage fra Månens bagside. Putin har, sammen med Kina, inkorporeret principperne fra Den Westfalske Fred, men de er gået langt, langt videre end det. Begynd blot med den ekstraordinære relation, der er opnået mellem Rusland og Kina. Er man klar over, at vi taler om nationer, der så sent som i 1969 udkæmpede en syv måneder lang, ikke-erklæret krig over Ussuri-floden? Nu har de ikke alene regelmæssige topmøder mellem præsidenterne, og regelmæssige topmøder mellem premierministrene; det er det mindste af det. Der er ikke mindre end tretten mellemregerings-kommissioner, der hele tiden er i kontinuerlig kontakt med hinanden. Alle de mange meningsforskelle og uoverensstemmelser – og der er mange – bliver kontinuerligt løst på et både bredt og dybt plan i begge regeringer.

»Og vi finder altid frem til løsninger«, føjede Putin til denne beskrivelse.

Processen med at fuldbyrde denne ekstraordinære relation har været genstand for en dybtgående undersøgelse af Kinas dr. Ren Lin, der talte på Schiller Instituttets konference i Berlin i juni måned, og af mange andre kinesiske og russiske, akademiske lærde.

Fuldbyrdelsen af en sådan relation udgør hjertet af BRIKS-processen og udviklingen af Den nye Silkevej. Det var kernen i Putins forgænger, nu afdøde russiske premierminister Jevgenij Primakovs idé om Den russisk-indisk-kinesiske Strategiske Trekant. Skabelsen heraf går tilbage til ikke alene Lyndon og Helga LaRouches idé om Den produktive Trekant og Den eurasiske Landbro, men endnu længere tilbage, til LaRouches Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ[1], der havde en formativ indflydelse på Rusland til trods for, at Ruslands daværende leder, Juri Andropov, havde afvist initiativet på vegne af sine britiske herrer.

Dette nye system med fremtidens relationer mellem nationalstater, der går ud over nationalstatsbegrebet, som LaRouche længe har forudsagt, går med syvmileskridt hastigt frem hen over hele det eurasiske kontinent og mere generelt på et tidspunkt, hvor vi nærmer os det Østlige Økonomiske Forum i Vladivostok den 2. – 3. september, FN’s Generalforsamling, der begynder den 13. september, og BRIKS-topmødet i Goa, Indien, den 15. – 16. oktober.

Foto: Portræt af Einstein i 1905, da han offentliggjorde sin opdagelse af den specielle relativitetsteori.[2].

3. november 2015 – Rusland har i mindst 2 tilfælde i de seneste år tilbudt USA samarbejde om en politik for et virkeligt internationalt, ballistisk missilforsvar, men er i begge tilfælde blevet afvist af Bush/Obama-regeringerne. Alexander Grushko, Ruslands ambassadør til NATO, sagde i et interview til Rossiya-24 TV, at Washington i stedet er i færd med at udvikle sit globale missilforsvarssystem med det formål at opnå militær overlegenhed over Rusland.

”Desværre blev chancen for at udvikle et virkeligt globalt missilforsvarssystem spildt. Dette system ville ikke have været baseret på en specifik alliance, men ville i stedet effektivt beskytte mod virkelige, ikke fiktive, missiltrusler. NATO afviste at forfølge dette, hovedsageligt af ideologiske grunde”, sagde han.

Den nyligt afholdte missilforsvarsøvelse ud for Skotlands kyst viser, at ”det system, der er ved at blive udviklet, ikke tilsigter at forsvare mod den såkaldte ”atomtrussel fra Iran”, bemærkede han. ”Desværre udvikler USA i øjeblikket sit missilforsvarssystem i et forsøg på at opnå militær overlegenhed over Rusland.” Selvom Grushko tilsyneladende ikke direkte henviste til nogen eksempler på tilbud om samarbejde, så kom den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin med et sådant tilbud til præsident George Bush ved et topmøde i Kennebunkport, Maine, i 2007, og nogle år senere tilbød Rusland NATO at anvende deres antimissil-radarstation i Aserbajdsjan. Begge disse tilbud var et ekko af Reagan-LaRouches forslag om samarbejde om SDI (Strategisk Defense Initiative; det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ) fra 1983, som på det tidspunkt blev afslået af Yuri Andropov, der fungerede som en agent under britisk indflydelse.

I slutningen af sidste uge afholdt det russiske Forsvarsministerium det, som de kaldte en kommando-og-kontrol-øvelse, der involverede ægte lanceringer af missiler fra hver af deres strategiske atomtriades tre ben, såvel som fra kortdistancesystemer. Forsvarsminister Sergei Shoigu meddelte i går, at øvelsen var vellykket. ”Som helhed viste øvelsen de strategiske atomstyrkers og langdistance-præcisionsvåbenkompleksernes høje kampberedskab”, sagde han.

Ruslands forhøjede niveau af militær aktivitet repræsenterer noget af en gåde for USA, især på det maritime område. Bør Obamas doktrin med ’Omdrejningspunkt Asien’ (Asia Pivot) fortsætte efter planen, eller bør USA sætte flere skibe ind i Europa?

”Deres ubådsstyrke og flåde er aktive i en grad, de ikke har været i lang tid, i omkring 20 år”, sagde chefen for marineoperationer, admiral John Richardson, til Financial Times i et interview. ”Hvordan skal vi fordele vore styrker for at sikre, at vi bevarer en passende balance og er passende engageret?” Richardson sagde, at flåden var i færd med at vurdere, om de skulle forøge deres tilstedeværelse i Europa og Stillehavsområdet. ”Det er, hvad vi i øjeblikket drøfter.”

En nyligt deklassificeret rapport fra 1990, der blev udfærdiget af Præsidentens Efterretnings-Råd (eng.: PFIAB) viste, at truslen om en atomkrig i 1983, ud fra et sovjetisk perspektiv, var blevet drastisk undervurderet af den amerikanske efterretningstjeneste, hvilket skabte en meget reel fare for atomkrig på daværende tidspunkt. Lyndon LaRouche henviste til denne rapport som værende en afgørende markør for det amerikanske lederskabs forfald efter dette tidspunkt, baseret på LaRouches eget kendskab til den situation, som rapporten omhandler – selv om der ikke blev henvist til disse kendsgerninger i selve PFIAB-rapporten.

Kendsgerningen er, at daværende præsident Ronald Reagan den 23. marts 1983 havde vedtaget det forslag, som LaRouche havde udarbejdet, om et fælles udviklingsprojekt mellem USA og Sovjetunionen om at bygge et rumbaseret, anti-missilsystem, baseret på nye, videnskabelige principper (partikelstråle- og laserstrålesystemer), som ville have gjort en ende på den ekstreme fare, der hidrørte fra politikken med »Gensidigt Garanteret Ødelæggelse« (Mutually Assured Destruction, MAD), en politik, der er baseret på at fastholde verden opdelt i Øst og Vest, og hvor begge sider retter massive arsenaler af atomvåben, der kan udløses ved mindste varsel, mod hinanden.

Mordforsøget på Ronald Reagan, der blev udført af en bekendt af Bush-familien kort tid efter Reagans indsættelse, havde nær afsluttet dette historiske samarbejde mellem Reagan og LaRouche, men Reagan overlevede og annoncerede programmet under navnet Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) (Strategisk Forsvarsinitiativ). Men britiske interesser i både USSR og USA saboterede indsatsen – en proces, der reflekteres i PFIAB’s indrømmelse af efterretningsfiaskoen fra 1983 vedr. truslen om atomkrig.

Siden denne sabotage af SDI og Reagans erstatning med den forræderiske Bush-familie i tre embedsperioder og Obama i to perioder, har der i USA været et udtalt forfald ned i økonomisk og strategisk vanvid, der har muliggjort Wall Streets og City of Londons bankinteressers dominans over regeringen, og som har lanceret den ene krig efter den anden i kolonialistisk stil over hele planeten og drevet den vestlige verden ud i kaos, som det nu reflekteres i flygtningekatastrofen i Sydvestasien og Europa.

SE »den fulde historie om SDI« 

Med skabelsen af BRIKS og dettes nye finansinstitutioner, der er helliget international infrastrukturudvikling, samt præsident Putins fremragende flankeoperation i Syrien, er verden nu i en position, hvor Det britiske Imperium langt om længe kan blive stedt til hvile. Obama, og Hillary Clinton (der underkastede sig Obamas ondskab), er blevet afsløret som støtter af terrorisme med det formål at opnå »regimeskift« over for nationer, der nægter at underkaste sig, og som beskyttere af de morderiske finansfyrster på Wall Street ved at afvise den nødvendige genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, der skal underkaste Wall Street en konkursbehandling.

De interventioner, som talsfolk fra LaRouchePAC i løbet af de seneste uger på Manhattan og andre steder i hele USA har gennemført, har fået repræsentanter fra Imperiet til at søge dækning med den voksende bevidsthed om sandheden af deres forbrydelser, der er blevet offentligt udtalt og har ødelagt deres evne til at hjernevaske og tvinge godtroende amerikanere. Tiden er inde til at lukke Wall Street ned, fjerne Obama og til, at solen endeligt må gå ned over Det britiske Imperium.

Se: En kort gennemgang af historien om LaRouches Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ, fra LPAC (Jeff Steinberg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOpVhtVdS7A

2 EIR-artikler om Lyndon LaRouches skelsættende indgriben i verdenshistorien:

‘LaRouche stoppede britisk overtagelse’, hvor LaRouche debatterer nedskæringspolitik og fascistiske regimer.

‘LaRouches Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ’, som i 1983 af præsident Ronald Reagan blev annonceret som officiel, amerikansk politik.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Download (PDF, Unknown)

– En ny, international orden for menneskeheden.

Intet betydningsfuldt opnås uden kamp. (Og dette er ganske afgjort en kamp).

GÅ MED I KAMPEN! 

UDBRED DENNE NYE, VERDENSFORENENDE POLITIK FOR FRED OG FREMGANG FOR ALLE.

NU komplet digital version 36 sider. Trykt version 20 sider.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Download (PDF, Unknown)