»Drag ikke udenlands i søgen efter uhyrer at ødelægge«.
LaRouche PAC Internationale Webcast,
22. sept., 2017.
I sin berømte tale til Kongressen advarede John Quincy Adams om, at Amerika »drager ikke til udlandet i søgen efter uhyrer at ødelægge«, men snarere respekterer »andre nationers uafhængighed samtidig med at bevare sin egen … og afholder sig fra indblanding i andres anliggender«. Et ekko af denne principerklæring fra John Quincy Adams kunne i denne uge høres i præsident Trumps tale til FN’s Generalforsamling, hvor han reelt erklærede afslutningen på politikken for regimeskifte og en unipolær verdensorden, som har domineret de seneste to administrationer, og erklærede, »Vi forventer ikke, at forskellige lande skal være fælles om de samme kulturer, traditioner eller endda regeringssystemer« og opfordrede til »en verden af stolte, uafhængige nationer, der … gør fælles sag i den største fælles interesse for os alle: en fremtid med værdighed og fred for befolkningen på denne vidunderlige Jord«.
Men præsident Trump modsagde imidlertid sig selv i selvsamme tale og opremsede bogstavelig talt et litani af ikke mindre end et halvt dusin »uhyrer, der skulle ødelægges«, fra Nordkorea til Iran, til Cuba, Venezuela og Syrien. Denne dobbelthed, som man ikke kan karakterisere som andet end »En fortælling om to taler«, som indeholdt det bedste og det værste, reflekterer den kamp, der nu raser, om dette præsidentskabs sjæl. De positive elementer af denne tale, som åbenlyst reflekterer en hældning mod at arbejde sammen med nationer som Kina og Rusland, må omfavnes. Men de andre, meget destruktive aspekter må opgives og summarisk afvises, og erkendes som det, de er: forsøg på at køre af sporet, det positive potentiale for et nyt system med win-win-relationer, udført af dem, der af geopolitiske grunde er imod det fremvoksende, nye paradigme for fred gennem økonomisk udvikling, som eksemplificeres af Kinas politik for den Nye Silkevej.
Vært Matthew Ogden: Godaften; det er 22. sept. 2017. Tak fordi I lytter til vores ugentlige, strategiske webcast her fra LaRouche PAC.
I denne uge har vi set FN’s Generalforsamling samles i New York City. Lad mig begynde aftenens udsendelse med at citere en stor, amerikansk præsident, statsmand og diplomat, hvis 250. fødselsdag vi fejrer i år: John Quincy Adams sagde det følgende i sin berømte tale til Kongressen den 4. juli, 1821: »Amerika udråbte for menneskeheden de umistelige rettigheder, som er menneskets natur, og de eneste lovlige fundamenter for regering. I forsamlingen af nationer … rakte Amerika det ærlige venskabs, den ligeværdige friheds og den generøse gensidigheds hånd frem til dem. Hun har … respekteret andre nationers uafhængighed og samtidig hævdet og bevaret sin egen. Hun har afholdt sig fra indblanding i andres anliggender, selv, når konflikterne har været over principper, som hun holder sig til, som til den sidste, vitale dråbe, der når hjertet … Hvor som helst standarden for frihed og uafhængighed har udfoldet sig, eller vil udfolde sig, dér vil hendes hjerte, hendes velsignelser og hendes bønner være … Men, hun drager ikke til udlandet i søgen efter uhyrer, der skal ødelægges. Hun er en velynder af frihed og uafhængighed for alle. Hun forfægter og advokerer kun sin egen. Hun vil anbefale den almene sag gennem sin stemmes udtryk og sit eget eksempels venlige sympati. Hun ved meget vel, at, ifald hun melder sig under andre faner end sin egen, er det end fanen for udenlandsk uafhængighed, ville hun involvere sig, så hun ikke kunne vikle sig ud, i alle krigene født af interesse og intrige, af personlige griskhed, misundelse og ærgerrighed, der antager frihedens farver og tilraner sig en frihedens standard … Hendes politiks fundamentale grundsætninger ville umærkeligt skifte fra frihed til magt. Båndet på hendes pande ville ikke længere gløde med frihedens og uafhængighedens uudsigelige pragt; men ville i dets sted snart blive erstattet af et imperialt diadem, der med falsk og uren glans udsender de skumle stråler af herredømme og magt. Hun kunne blive verdens diktator: hun ville ikke længer være herskeren af sin egen ånd.«
Denne principerklæring fra John Quincy Adams, som blev holdt for næsten 200 år siden, og som på mange måder var forudvidende på grænsen til det profetiske i sin advarsel; denne tale bør udgøre grundlaget for vores udenrigspolitik som republik, og er faktisk fortsat i centrum for spørgsmålet og fred og krig den dag i dag. Det er i forhold til denne erklæring, at vores lederes udtryk, siden dengang og frem til i dag, for amerikansk udenrigspolitik må måles og sammenlignes.
Her følger engelsk udskrift af resten af webcastet:
Now, let us shift our focus to the speech which President
Trump delivered at the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday
of this week. I don’t think that there’s any other way of
characterizing what President Trump had to say other than to call
it “The Tale of Two Speeches”. In some respects, it could be
seen as the best of all possible speeches; but in other respects,
and in a very large way, very substantially so, it was the very
worst of all speeches. As Helga Zepp-LaRouche said, it was
almost as if he delivered two completely separate and
contradictory speeches at once. One thing that’s very clear for
the observer, is that there are many opposing interests at work
in this administration, and that there’s a fierce policy war
ongoing right now behind the scenes for the very soul of this
Presidency. It’s one which it is our responsibility to be very
clear-eyed about, to understand what the factors involved here
are, including the ongoing political coup attempt against this
Presidency from inside many of the institutions of our own
government. But also to articulate the fact that this war is
ongoing, with sobriety and clarity. And we must do this if we
are indeed intending to allow the very positive potential which
is reflected in this speech, to defeat the very negative
tendencies which are also very clearly present.
So, let’s take a look first at the positive elements of this
speech. Granted, if you’ve only been reading the Western media
accounts, you might not have been exposed to many of the parts
which you are about to hear; and you might be very ignorant of
the fact that there was a very substantially positive aspect of
this speech. For those who were there in the assembly hall
listening to the speech, and then for you who are viewing this
webcast right now, you might be surprised at the positive and
hopeful and clear-headed tone which began this speech. One which
is perhaps very reminiscent of some of the statements that you
just heard John Quincy Adams make in that speech from almost 200
years ago.
What I’d like to do for you, is just play about seven or
eight minutes of the beginning of President Trump’s speech to the
United Nations General Assembly.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP
: To put it simply, we meet at a
time of both of immense promise and great peril. It is entirely
up to us whether we lift the world to new heights, or let it fall
into a valley of disrepair.
We have it in our power, should we so choose, to lift
millions from poverty, to help our citizens realize their dreams,
and to ensure that new generations of children are raised free
from violence, hatred, and fear.
This institution was founded in the aftermath of two world
wars to help shape this better future. It was based on the vision
that diverse nations could cooperate to protect their
sovereignty, preserve their security, and promote their
prosperity.
It was in the same period, exactly 70 years ago, that the
United States developed the Marshall Plan to help restore Europe.
Those three beautiful pillars — they’re pillars of peace,
sovereignty, security, and prosperity.
The Marshall Plan was built on the noble idea that the whole
world is safer when nations are strong, independent, and free. As
President Truman said in his message to Congress at that time,
“Our support of European recovery is in full accord with our
support of the United Nations. The success of the United Nations
depends upon the independent strength of its members.”
To overcome the perils of the present and to achieve the
promise of the future, we must begin with the wisdom of the past.
Our success depends on a coalition of strong and independent
nations that embrace their sovereignty to promote security,
prosperity, and peace for themselves and for the world.
We do not expect diverse countries to share the same
cultures, traditions, or even systems of government. But we do
expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties: to
respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every
other sovereign nation. This is the beautiful vision of this
institution, and this is foundation for cooperation and success.
Strong, sovereign nations let diverse countries with
different values, different cultures, and different dreams not
just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual
respect.
Strong, sovereign nations let their people take ownership of
the future and control their own destiny. And strong, sovereign
nations allow individuals to flourish in the fullness of the life
intended by God.
In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on
anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to
watch. This week gives our country a special reason to take pride
in that example. We are celebrating the 230th anniversary of our
beloved Constitution — the oldest constitution still in use in
the world today.
This timeless document has been the foundation of peace,
prosperity, and freedom for the Americans and for countless
millions around the globe whose own countries have found
inspiration in its respect for human nature, human dignity, and
the rule of law.
The greatest in the United States Constitution is its first
three beautiful words. They are: “We, the people.” Generations
of Americans have sacrificed to maintain the promise of those
words, the promise of our country, and of our great history. In
America, the people govern, the people rule, and the people are
sovereign. I was elected not to take power, but to give power to
the American people, where it belongs.
In foreign affairs, we are renewing this founding principle
of sovereignty. Our government’s first duty is to its people, to
our citizens — to serve their needs, to ensure their safety, to
preserve their rights, and to defend their values.
As President of the United States, I will always put America
first, just like you, as the leaders of your countries will
always, and should always, put your countries first. [Applause.]
All responsible leaders have an obligation to serve their
own citizens, and the nation-state remains the best vehicle for
elevating the human condition. But making a better life for our
people also requires us to work together in close harmony and
unity to create a more safe and peaceful future for all people.
The United States will forever be a great friend to the
world, and especially to its allies. But we can no longer be
taken advantage of, or enter into a one-sided deal where the
United States gets nothing in return. As long as I hold this
office, I will defend America’s interests above all else.
But in fulfilling our obligations to our own nations, we
also realize that it’s in everyone’s interest to seek a future
where all nations can be sovereign, prosperous, and secure.
America does more than speak for the values expressed in the
United Nations Charter. Our citizens have paid the ultimate price
to defend our freedom and the freedom of many nations represented
in this great hall. America’s devotion is measured on the
battlefields where our young men and women have fought and
sacrificed alongside of our allies, from the beaches of Europe to
the deserts of the Middle East to the jungles of Asia.
It is an eternal credit to the American character that even
after we and our allies emerged victorious from the bloodiest war
in history, we did not seek territorial expansion, or attempt to
oppose and impose our way of life on others. Instead, we helped
build institutions such as this one to defend the sovereignty,
security, and prosperity for all.
For the diverse nations of the world, this is our hope. We
want harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife. We are
guided by outcomes, not ideology. We have a policy of principled
realism, rooted in shared goals, interests, and values.
OGDEN: So, that was the beginning of President Trump’s speech to
the United Nations General Assembly. As has been reported,
immediately afterwards in a press conference, Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov of Russia responded very favorably to that aspect
of the speech. As he said, “I think it’s a very welcome
statement, which we haven’t heard from an American leader for a
very long time.” This is true, in this aspect of the speech;
because what you just heard from President Trump was essentially
a declaration that the policy of regime-change was over. He
said, we’re looking for a coalition of strong and independent
nations that will be sovereign nations, but will exist in shared
security, prosperity, and peace. So, an end to the so-called
“unipolar” world. He said, “We do not expect diverse countries
to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of
government.” He said we should “let diverse countries with
different values, different cultures, and different dreams not
just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual
respect.” And, he said, these countries can work to make a
better life for all people by working together in “harmony and
unity”. For the diverse nations of the world, this is our hope,”
he said. “We want harmony and friendship, not conflict and
strife.”
So, this is a very positive statement of US foreign policy;
and one which could be taken as an end to the commitment to
geopolitics and a unipolar world. However, from there, the
speech took a very dramatic turn. Immediately after vowing that
the policy of regime-change was over, President Trump proceeded
to list off no less than half a dozen regimes in this world which
must be changed or overthrown. Literally, he had a litany of
“monsters to destroy”, in the words of John Quincy Adams. Apart
from vowing to “totally destroy North Korea”, he also called to
dismantle the Iranian nuclear deal; calling the Iranian
government a “corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a
democracy”. And he similarly went after Syria, Cuba, and
Venezuela. Curiously, nowhere did he call out the Saudis for
their genocidal war that’s now being perpetrated against the
people of Yemen, or their support — financial and otherwise —
for the hijackers that attacked the very city in which he was
speaking on 9/11 and killed almost 3000 Americans. A case which
is now being litigated by family members of the victims of 9/11
in front of US court.
So, after hearing the initial statements of harmony and
friendship and respect for sovereignty and not seeking to impose
our way of life on anyone, but rather letting diverse nations
with diverse values, cultures, dreams, and even systems of
government, not merely mutually coexist but work side by side on
the basis of mutual respect. After hearing those words —
frankly so reminiscent of what you heard John Quincy Adams say in
his address from 1821 — it was rather shocking to then hear in
exactly the same speech, President Trump proceed with a litany of
threats and regime change which frankly was reminiscent of George
W Bush’s infamous Axis of Evil speech. We saw how that proceeded
with the case of the regime-change war in Iraq. So, this is
precisely what John Quincy Adams had warned so strongly against
in the words “Let us not go abroad in search of monsters to
destroy.”
But then, after that litany of threats, President Trump then
proceeded to conclude his speech by saying the following: “Our
hope is a world of proud independent nations that embrace their
duties, seek friendship, respect others, and make common cause in
the greatest shared interest of all. A future dignity and peace
for the people of this wonderful Earth. This is the true vision
of the United Nations, the ancient wish of every people, and the
deepest yearning that lives inside every sacred soul.”
So, as I said, it was almost like the Tale of Two Speeches,
which somehow both got combined into one address. But the kind
of self-contradiction and duality which was on display and came
across almost as being schizophrenic on the part of the speech
writer, taking very due note of the very positive aspects of what
he laid out in the beginning, what maybe could be called the
Trump Doctrine, the end of this unipolar world and the end of
regime change; the very dangerous and negative aspects of what he
then proceeded to say in the very same speech should not be
sugar-coated by any means.
In speaking with Helga Zepp-LaRouche earlier today, she had
the following to say. She said, “It’s very clear that Foreign
Minister Lavrov responded to the positive elements of Trump’s
speech. But it’s also clear that there are very negative and
very destructive elements of Trump’s speech which came across as
almost two different speeches. How can you denounce regime
change on the one hand, and then make a list of half a dozen
regimes that you demand to be changed in the very same speech?”
She said that “The solution here is that Trump has to follow
through on the constructive things he said; but he must also
abandon the policies which are obviously destructive. This North
Korea thing could blow up at any minute, if this policy
continues,” she said. “It’s nice that he said the things that he
did in the beginning; but it’s almost like they are two opposing
policies coming out of his mouth. What’s very clear is that
there are two opposing interests working on Trump. There’s a war
ongoing for the soul of this Presidency. The positive elements
of this policy statement must be reinforced and strengthened,”
she said. “But, the negative elements — such as the verbal
escalation against North Korea — should be recognized as an
effort on the part of certain elements in this administration to
drive a wedge in the potential for cooperation between the United
States and China. This policy,” she said, “has clearly been
inserted by the neo-con elements which are still influencing this
Presidency.
“What we must do, is demand that Trump stick to his promise
which he expressed in the campaign, to cooperate with Russia and
with China. This is the world of independent nations united for
‘common cause and shared interests’ which he referred to in the
conclusion of his speech. This should absolutely be pursued,”
she said, “but what that means is that this other stuff has got
to go.” She noted that now with the increase in the US military
budget, which is now greater than ever before, we have nearly
$700 billion in our military budget; far greater than the next
seven countries in the world combined. She asked the question:
How much of this money could be used for infrastructure instead?
She also emphasized that the point is that we have an
extraordinary opportunity on our hands; but there are also very
real dangers facing us as well.
In reflecting on what’s occurred this week, it’s always very
important to approach the situation from above; from the top
down. The defining question for anybody who’s sober-minded in
international relations today is, will the world unite around the
New Paradigm of development which has been initiated by China in
the form of the New Silk Road policy? Or, will a continuation of
the perpetual warfare policy and regime-change policy of the past
two administrations be allowed to escalate and to derail this
emerging potential? Both in terms of undermining the ability of
the United States and countries such as China and Russia to
cooperate, and also in a very real way, threatening to actually
bring the world to the brink of thermonuclear war. Will the
United States abandon the geopolitics associated with the Cold
War and the British imperial of zero-sum game and unipolar
hegemony, and instead embrace the win-win paradigm of peace
through development and relationships between countries based on
mutual respect, mutual benefit, and mutual gain?
The answer to that question still remains unclear in the
wake of President Trump’s address to the United Nations General
Assembly, either in the positive or in the negative. But, if you
look at the world stage, we are watching before our very eyes, a
new paradigm in the relations between nations emerge. This is
seen very clearly in the Belt and Road Initiative and all the
developments that are associated with that — the positive
development projects that China is bringing to central Asia, and
emphatically bringing to Africa, and bringing to Latin America.
Apart from all the political gossip and all the partisan
propaganda and media punditry that you’re exposed to on a daily
basis, the question for an American citizen to ask is, how will
President Trump respond to this emerging new paradigm? And how
will the United States fit into that emerging new international
dynamic of peace through development? That’s the measuring rod
against which not only his words but his actions must be judged.
He has some very clear opportunities in the coming months to
follow through on what is clearly his inclination for a positive
relationship with China and with Russia; including his seemingly
very positive personal relationship with President Xi Jinping.
The ASEAN summit is upcoming in less than two months, and it has
been announced that President Trump will be travelling to attend
the ASEAN summit. As part of that trip to Asia, he will be
making his very first state visit to China. This has all of the
positive potentials; it implies everything that could occur in
terms of the United States joining the New Silk Road, following
up on the attendance to the Belt and Road Forum by Matthew
Pottinger, who was sent personally by Trump as an envoy of the
United States. The personal visits that President Xi Jinping has
made to the United States; the very good appointment of Terry
Bransted to be the Ambassador to China, who we know has very
positive views of China-US relations. Also, emphatically the
question of Chinese investment into rebuilding the infrastructure
of the United States, in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane
Irma, now Hurricane Maria and the destruction that that has
wrought on the island of Puerto Rico. This question of not only
reconstruction, but construction of an entirely new
infrastructure platform in the United States could not be more
urgent. President Trump has committed himself to at least $1
trillion in investment in that kind of infrastructure. We know
that the scale is far, far greater; and that requires a return to
Hamiltonian economics. But it also requires the United States to
enter into a very decisive and reciprocal relationship with China
in terms of mutual investment and mutual development. That is
the framework around which the positive opportunities for
cooperation with China can be built.
If we take that kind of approach from above and say it’s not
within the interstices of Congressional partisan politics, or
bickering inside the halls of Congress that we’re going to make
the necessary policy revolution in terms of the economics of the
United States. But it’s from recognizing that a far greater
global process is now underway; a dynamic which is sweeping the
planet. It’s sweeping away both the geopolitical paradigm of
British imperial divide and conquer geopolitics; but it’s also
bringing in an entirely new approach to how you construct peace
through economic development.
So, the defining question in international relations is, how
will the United States fit into that? That remains the
overarching question at the very root of this fight for the soul
of the US Presidency.
As we’ve documented and will be continuing to document in an
exposé which is forthcoming from LaRouche PAC, there is a very
real concerted effort from inside the institutions of the United
States to undermine this Presidency and to box Trump into making
very real strategic mistakes. The time has come for him to learn
those lessons and to throw that aspect out, and to embrace the
positive aspects as you could hear in the beginning of this
address to the United Nations General Assembly.
So, let me go back to the words of President John Quincy
Adams, who was our chief diplomat as Secretary of State for many
years, who was diplomat to the nation of Russia, and after being
President for one successful term, returned to the United States
Congress and fought a battle against slavery which in turn
inspired Abraham Lincoln. But in his prophetic and very
prescient speech, he warned that yes indeed, the United States of
America will proclaim the “inextinguishable rights of human
nature”, will abstain from “interference in the concerns of
others”, will “respect the independence of other nations while
asserting and maintaining her own.” “But America does not go
abroad in search of monsters to destroy.” He warned that if we
were to do that, the “fundamental maxims of our policy would
change insensibly from liberty to force. We would no longer beam
with the splendor of freedom and independence, but instead an
“imperial diadem would be substituted, flashing in false and
tarnished lustre in the murky radiance of dominion and power.”
We would become the dictator of the world; “no longer the ruler
of [our] own spirit.”
So, let us take a lesson from the words of John Quincy
Adams. Let us once and for all abandon the regime-change
geopolitics of the last two administrations; and let us embrace
decisively and fully the new win-win paradigm which has been
spelled out so clearly by President Xi Jinping of China, both in
words and in actions. And was indicated by President Trump in
the beginning of his speech to the United Nations General
Assembly. Let us embrace those policies, and let us abandon the
policies of regime change and perpetual war.
Thank you for joining me here today, and please stay tuned
to larouchepac.com.