2. del: 26 min.

Diskussion i dialog med Jens Jørgen Nielsen (historiker, forfatter, journalist, lærer), og Mrutyuanjai Mishra (fra Indien, journalist og lærer.)

Se videoerne fra Schiller Instituttets Berlin-konference her:

Video links (4), talerlisten og invitation til Schiller Instituttets internationale konference i Berlin og online den 12.-13. juli 2025:
»Mennesket er ikke en ulv for mennesket«
For et nyt paradigme i internationale relationer!

Læs og del gerne Schiller Instituttets udtalelse:

Oase-planen for Palæstina og Israel: Fred gennem gensidig udvikling!
Ny Schiller Institut erklæring i forbindelse med FN konference om en to-statsløsning for Israel og Palæstina

12. juli 2025 — H.E. Dr. Naledi Pandor var Sydafrikas udenrigsminister fra 2019 til 2024. Hun var også medlem af parlamentet (MP) for African National Congress (ANC) fra 1994 til 2024.

Dr. Zepp LaRouche, medarbejdere i Schiller Instituttet, ærede talere og paneldeltagere, deltagere, mine damer og herrer:

Godmorgen. Mange tak, formand. Jeg er også den nuværende og nye formand for Nelson Mandela-fonden. Jeg vil gerne minde alle delegerede tilstede på mødet om, at den 18. juli er ’Den Internationale Nelson Mandela Dag.’ Det er dagen, hvor Nelson Mandela bad hver enkelt af os om at bruge en time på at gøre noget for en anden person eller et samfund i nød. Så jeg håber, at I alle har planer for den 18. juli, hvor I vil ære den afdøde præsident Nelson Mandelas ønske, som kun bad os mennesker om denne ene ting.

Lad mig begynde med at takke Dr. Zepp-LaRouche og teamet i Schiller Instituttet for at have inviteret mig til at deltage i denne meget vigtige konference i Berlin. Jeg beklager, at jeg ikke kan være tilstede, da jeg i øjeblikket befinder mig i USA. Jeg mener, at dette møde i Berlin er yderst vigtigt. For afrikanere kan ideen om en Berlin-konference, som i sikkert ved, være en skræmmende påmindelse om vores koloniale fortid, og den rolle Berlin spillede i sanktionen af kolonialisme i det 19. århundrede.

Jeg bifalder derfor Schiller Instituttet for at bringe en stemme for frihed, retfærdighed, fred og sikkerhed til Berlin. Og jeg håber, at Berlin vil tage føringen i at skabe betingelser i verden, der kan udgøre en modvægt til det nuværende fjendtlige miljø, som er skabt af de mest magtfulde i verden.

Schiller Instituttet har påtaget sig den meget vigtige opgave at skabe nye og velinformerede samtaler om vores verden i dag. Alle tilstede her er klar over, at vi som globalt samfund befinder os ved eller nær et vendepunkt, især med hensyn til det mulige udbrud af en ukontrollabel global konflikt og global krig eller en faktisk handelskrig, der vil forårsage enorme skader, især for udviklingslandene.

Instituttets initiativ til oprettelsen af en international fredskoalition vil være et vigtigt bidrag til udviklingen af et nyt globalt partnerskab og en frisk tilgang til multilateralisme. Jeg vil gerne stadfæste, at Sydafrika og mange lande på det afrikanske kontinent fuldt og fast tror på en multipolær verden. Og vi mener, at multilateralisme bedst støttes gennem et effektivt, velfungerende og reformeret FN – især Sikkerhedsrådet, som skal spille sin rolle i at sikre fred og sikkerhed.

Det afrikanske kontinent støtter alle initiativer for fred. Fred er godt, og fred er tæt forbundet med udvikling. Vores kontinent, Afrika, er fortsat udfordret af dårlig eller utilstrækkelig infrastruktur, lavt niveau af industrialisering, lav produktionskapacitet og mangel på teknologisk innovation, der kan tilføre værdi til Afrikas rige naturressourcer.

Derudover lider Afrika under interne konflikter, manglende demokrati i mange lande og utilstrækkelige menneskerettighedspraksisser samt offentlige institutioner, der ikke kan udføre deres offentlige servicefunktioner effektivt. Alt dette bidrager til de betydelige problemer Afrika har.

Men heldigvis er Afrika begyndt at fokusere på løsninger. Digitale teknologier og innovation er ved at slå rod i afrikanske økonomier som Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda og Sydafrika. Øgede investeringer i landbrug og fundamentale sociale ydelser inden for sundhed og uddannelse understøtter også betydelige fremskridt.

Efter min mening er det vigtigste led i udviklingen Den Afrikanske Unions ‘Agenda 2063’ med henblik på det Afrika, vi ønsker i 2063. Agenda 2063 tilbyder en struktur for udviklingen af Afrika, som er implementerbar, til et Afrika, som alle afrikanere ønsker sig i 2063. Den Afrikanske Union styrer og leder implementeringen af af denne dagsorden og søger partnerskaber med internationale samarbejdspartnere for at sikre, at vi gennemfører de 17 prioriterede initiativer, der er fastlagt i Agenda 2063.

Konflikten i Sudan samt en forsinket tilbagevenden til demokrati i flere vestafrikanske stater har forsinket bemærkelsesværdig fremskridt med Agenda 2063. Men på trods af dette er det en plan, der nyder bred tilslutning på det afrikanske kontinent.

Oase-planen, som er blevet offentliggjort af Schiller Instituttet, supplerer Afrikas ambitioner, og der bør være samarbejde om gennemførelsen af disse udviklingsplaner. Efter vores opfattelse kan Europa spille en yderst vigtig rolle i et sådant samarbejde.

Desuden hænger både Oase-planen og Agenda 2063 meget fint sammen med FN’s mål for bæredygtig udvikling. Alle disse udviklingsplaner bør stå i centrum hos det globale samfund, og det er meget bekymrende, at den aktuelle globale diskurs slet ikke refererer til udvikling. Den aktuelle diskurs er meget maskulin, meget konfliktorienteret og står i skarp kontrast til FNs mål for bæredygtig udvikling (SDGs), Afrikas Agenda 2063 og Oase-planen. Det er afgørende, at deltagerne på denne konference finder måder at nå ud til verdens ledere, ledere, der er en del af G7, en del af BRIKS og en del af G20, og med én stemme bør vi skabe tilstrækkelig fremdrift til at overbevise disse ledere om, at vi vil opnå mere vækst, mere udvikling og mere sikkerhed, hvis disse planer udgør kernen i en globale indsats.

Vi er nødt til at gøre det klart for verdens ledere, at vi forventer, at de bevæger sig væk fra den nuværende kurs og dedikerer deres opmærksomhed til global udvikling. Det negative og giftige geopolitiske miljø, hvor militær magt og økonomisk mobning er dominerende, kommer aldrig til bidrage til opbygningen af en bedre verden. Indsatsen for at sikre globalt samarbejde skal intensiveres; øget opmærksomhed på at opbygge respekt for multilateralisme og respekt for international lov er de eneste veje til at skabe en verden, hvor ulighed, fattigdom og eksklusion kan adresseres. Disse tre problematiske områder er de centrale fokusområder, som det globale samfund bør forene sig om.

Den konference I afholder i dag, er nødt til at nå frem til Berlin-konference konklusioner, der stadfæster samarbejde, som støtter investeringer i de sårbare og marginaliserede, og som kraftigt afviser konflikt og øget militarisme.

Jeg håber, at de drøftelser i har i dag, vil sætte en ny dagsorden for det globale samfund og indlede en proces, der vender lande væk fra en tilgang, hvor man søger at ødelægge hinanden.

Vi har oplevet tilbageskridt på grund af det konfliktfyldte miljø med hensyn til fremskridt indenfor ligestilling mellem kønnene, samt fremskridt inden for bekæmpelsen af racisme og fremskridt inden for udvikling. Det er derfor bydende nødvendigt, at vi alle i det globale samfund går sammen om at skabe en mere retfærdig og fredelig verden, der fokuserer på at sikre, at alle lever i velfærd og kan nyde godt af udvikling. Jeg er sikker på, at det er muligt at forfølge disse mål. Sydafrikas historie med bekæmpelsen af apartheid har bevist uden tvivl, at det globale samfund kan stå sammen i international solidaritet for at bekæmpe et onde, en forbrydelse mod menneskeheden, for at sikre, at alle mennesker nyder frihed og retfærdighed. Verden hjalp Sydafrika i den internationale anti-apartheidbevægelse med at opnå frihed efter mange årtier. Verden kan i dag gå sammen om at skabe et fundament for at sikre fred, retfærdighed og udvikling for dem der ikke nyder disse rettigheder. Vi er nødt til at ændre verdens fokus i en positiv retning. Verden bliver ledt af Dr. Zepp-LaRouche såvel som teamet i Schiller Instituttet og giver os et klart grundlag for at forfølge de mål, jeg har nævnt. Jeg håber, at i vil slutte jer til Schiller Instituttet i denne vigtige indsats, og jeg ser frem til at se konklusionerne for en massiv vækst i Den Internationale Fredskoalition og vi vil – fra land til land – definere, hvordan vi vil handle for at sikre, at vi får en positiv indflydelse på verdensbegivenhederne i dag.

Jeg vil gerne sige tak for jeres opmærksomhed, og ønsker jer held og lykke med jeres drøftelser under konferencen.

 Mange tak.

Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale er på dansk.

ANASTASIA BATTLE: Hello everyone! It’s been a real joy at the various conferences in the United States and in Germany. This is the International Peace Coalition, this is our 111th consecutive meeting. Thank you for joining us. We’re coming off a very exciting conference that was held in Berlin, where there were many top speakers from around the world. I also got to meet many of you who have been participating in these meetings over the last two years.

Today is a very special day. Today is the birthday of the late South African President Nelson Mandela. It’s officially the Nelson Mandela International Day. He declared that on this day, people should devote at least one hour to doing something for another person or a needy community. I’m sure I do not need to tell all of you to go and do that; I’m sure all of you are already doing those things. But you should encourage other people to do those things, especially in honor of Nelson Mandela’s birthday; it’s really a wonderful day to bring everyone together.

I like to remind people why we created this forum 111 weeks ago, in order to bring the peace movement together from around the world. People of many different philosophies, they could differ; many different languages, cultures, religions. But we’re all coming together around the concept of one mission: That we want to create true peace in the world, and we’re going to accomplish that with the collaboration of our organizations and our joint efforts. So thank you to everyone who has been participating in this, and welcome to new people who have joined this week.

To start us off, I’d like to have Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who is the founder of the Schiller Institute and the initiator of the International Peace Coalition. Please, go ahead Helga.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Velkommen til jer alle. Vi er netop kommet fra en yderst vigtig konference i Berlin, arrangeret af Schiller Instituttet. Først vil jeg gerne opfordre alle, der endnu ikke har lyttet til det, til at tage sig tid i weekenden eller om aftenen til at lytte til alle paneldeltagerne. For dette skulle ikke bare være en engangs-konference, men vi forsøgte – og jeg tror det lykkedes – at præsentere et alternativ til den nuværende geopolitiske konfrontation. Jeg synes, at vi ud over at have haft fremragende talere fra alle dele af verden – virkelig top-talere, der hjalp os med at advare verdensbefolkningen, eller dem vi kan nå, om den umiddelbare fare for 3. verdenskrig. Men vi præsenterede også et alternativ til samarbejde ved at appellere til landene i Vesten – hovedsageligt Europa og USA – om at gå sammen med landene i det Globale Syd, den Globale Majoritet, for at engagere sig i reel udvikling; industrialiseringen af Afrika, Mellemøsten og andre dele af det Globale Syd. Og vi præsenterede en rapport, som I kan få adgang til sammen med konferencens dokumenter. Jeg vil bede jer alle om måske at gøre det til jeres Nelson Mandela-gode gerning, som Dr. Naledi Pandor har bedt os om. Hun er tidligere minister for internationale relationer i Sydafrika.

Grundlæggende ønsker vi at gå ind i en kampagne for at sige, at der virkelig er et alternativ til 3. verdenskrig, at vi er nødt til at overvinde geopolitik og begynde at samarbejde om udvikling. For det nye navn for fred er udvikling. Det kunne ikke komme på et mere presserende tidspunkt, for det ser ud til, at nogle af de vestlige ledere er fast besluttede på at føre verden ind i en atomar katastrofe. Da dette ikke kommer fra én stemme, men fra alle hjørner – fra massemedierne, mange politiske hjørner – er der ingen tvivl om, at der i baggrunden, eller ikke længere så meget i baggrunden, er en aktiv plan for et opgør. Næstformanden for den ældste britiske tænketank, Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), Malcolm Chalmers, havde allerede i maj 2022 foreslået, at NATO skulle overtage Krim og på den måde forårsage en atomkrise med Rusland og få det, han kaldte en cubansk missilkrise på steroider. Derefter, på højdepunktet af en sådan atomopgør, ville det forhåbentlig skabe betingelser, hvor Rusland kunne tvinges til at forhandle. At have en sådan tankegang er yderst bekymrende.

Den samme herre foreslog i marts 2025 i et interview med The Economist endnu en sådan bravado-operation ved at foreslå, at der skulle affyres en atomraket fra en britisk ubåd, ikke mod en stor russisk by, hvor det ville medføre for mange tab. Nej, målet skulle blot være en militærbase, som skulle angribes med en atombombe. Ikke en rigtig stor bombe, siger han nådigt, bare en lille bombe på størrelse med den, der blev kastet over Hiroshima, det ville være nok. Og han håber, at det ville have samme effekt og få Rusland til endelig at forhandle. Det ville alt sammen bare være en akademisk luftboble, men desværre forlader denne samme person, Malcolm Chalmers, nu sin stilling i RUSI-tænketanken for at blive strategisk rådgiver for den britiske forsvarsminister John Healey. Så det ville bare være en bekymrende begivenhed, hvis man ikke havde en meget ildevarslende opgradering af den såkaldte koalition af villige. Det er et udtryk for den kendsgerning, at der indenfor NATO, selv om ikke alle medlemmer af NATO er enige i den nuværende kurs med optrapning, såsom at sende landtropper til Ukraine og forsyne Ukraine med alle former for langtrækkende våben, imidlertid er denne koalition af villige, som nu anføres af Storbritannien, Frankrig og Tyskland.

I sidste uge var der et møde mellem Macron og Starmer, hvor de aftalte at koordinere deres atomarsenaler bedre, for de er trods alt de to atommagter i Europa. I går var kansler Merz også i London, hvor han sammen med Starmer underskrev det, de kalder en tysk-britisk venskabstraktat – den såkaldte Kensington-traktat. Kensington er en henvisning til et palads og dronning Victorias rolle. Merz nævnte hende faktisk ved navn, hvilket viser, at denne kansler ikke er ved sine fulde fem. Victorias regeringstid var den tid, hvor briterne aktivt planlagde 1. verdenskrig, hovedsageligt mod Tyskland blandt andre. At henvise til dette viser helt klart, at kansler Merz har en forkærlighed for det

Britiske Imperium, som han nu gladeligt underkaster sig. Men det er også en yderst bekymrende udvikling.

Jeg mener derfor, at artiklen i Times of India, der beskriver vores konference i Berlin, hvor der står: »Er Europa ved at blive slagmarken for den kommende konfrontation med Rusland?«, er en præcis beskrivelse.

Desværre er dette, som jeg sagde, ikke den eneste yderst bekymrende udvikling. Samtidig havde man den amerikanske hærchef for Europa og Afrika, Christopher Donahue, der for blot et par dage siden holdt en konference i Wiesbaden, hvor Donahue stolt meddelte, at NATO nu er parat til fuldstændigt at afskære den russiske enklave Kaliningrad, hvilket er en snubletråd. Der er ingen tvivl om, at russerne har gjort det meget klart, at de har Iskander-missiler udstationeret i denne region for at imødegå at afskære denne region Kaliningrad i form af en blitzkrieg. Så jeg kan kun sige, at hele diskussionen om at fortsætte med at optrappe på denne måde, fortsætte med at sende langdistance-missiler til Ukraine til brug langt inde på russisk territorium, betyder, at vi er på en meget kort vej mod en optrapning til 3. verdenskrig, hvis dette ikke stoppes.

Nu vil vi senere høre om situationen i Mellemøsten. Situationen i Gaza er fortsat et symbol på Vestens moralske forfald, og hvis der ikke gøres noget ved det, tror jeg, det er et tegn på, at al folkeret er ved at bryde sammen. Heldigvis mødtes Haag-gruppen af udviklingslande i Bogotá, Columbia, og de har en handlingsplan for, hvad der skal gøres. Jeg kan kun håbe, at der i FN på kort sigt kan findes passende støtte til denne aktion.

Der er andre vigtige udviklinger, der går i den modsatte retning. Det er sikkert, at Rusland sender aktive signaler og tager skridt til at genoplive RIC-formlen – Rusland, Indien, Kina. Det var ideen, at disse tre atommagter, en gruppe, der blev oprettet af premierminister Primakov i 1990’erne, skulle genoplive denne kombination. Jeg synes, det er et meget godt skridt. Min afdøde mand, Lyndon LaRouche, havde på tidspunktet for Primakovs forslag foreslået, at USA skulle være en del af denne kombination, og at alle problemer så kunne løses. Det synes ikke at være den retning, præsident Trump går i lige nu, men det er den mulighed han har, hvis han ønsker at blive kandidat til Nobels fredspris, ikke blot som en symbolsk gestus, men i den virkelige historie.

Præsident Lula da Silva fra Brasilien er stærkt imod det, Trump nu kommer med i form af en 50-dages frist for at indføre en told på 50 % mod Rusland og sekundære mål, men også mod alle andre lande. Det er stadig den samme form for økonomisk krigsførelse, som kun kan føre til et tidligt sammenbrud af det finansielle system. Lula mindede også Trump om, at han ikke er blevet valgt til verdens kejser, men til præsident for USA, og afviste dermed sådanne forslag.

Vi har også til hensigt at bruge tiden mellem nu og den 28. og 29. juli, som er meget kort, til at genoptage vores kampagne for Oase-planen. For den tostats-(Palæstina og Israel)-konference, der blev aflyst i juni, skal nu finde sted i slutningen af denne måned. Jeg vil opfordre alle tilhængere af Oase-planen til at genoptage jeres bestræbelser på at bruge alle de kanaler I har i FN, i denne tostats-konference, til at sige, at den eneste måde, hvorpå der kan være håb om fred, er en kombination af det, som Bogotá-Haag-gruppen foreslår, og Oase-planen som den virkelige plan for fred og udvikling.

Jeg tror, vi har meget arbejde foran os. Dr. Pandor opfordrede alle i forbindelse med vores Berlin-konference til at gøre IPC til den største organisation nogensinde. Få folk til at melde sig ind; det er mere presserende end nogensinde før. Krigsfaren stiger praktisk talt for hvert minut, og selve civilisationens eksistens står på spil som aldrig før. Men gør det med den pakke vi har, for at få de

vestlige lande til at samarbejde med den Globale Majoritet om at sætte reel udvikling på dagsordenen for Afrika. Vi har fremlagt et udkast til forslag om industrialisering af Afrika, vi har Oase-planen. Begge disse planer er i overensstemmelse med den afrikanske dagsorden for 2063, og det er den vej, vi skal gå. Vi må lægge geopolitik bag os og gå efter reel udvikling som grundlag for fred. Det var det, jeg ville sige til jer i begyndelsen.

Remarks during the Discussion:

På engelsk:
[1] I think the description of the conference we had was quite accurate in different aspects. I think the organizing from Paris also gives people an idea that we are not talking about academic presentations, but we really want to engage many institutions and also so-called ordinary people. Because the more you look at how the world is going, we are in such an unprecedented danger of civilization, and therefore my appeal to you, and obviously what other speakers have said is, become active! Don’t look at the IPC process as a thing to just watch. Become active, because the world is more in need of peace activists. I can only repeat what Dr. Pandor said. We have to work to make the IPC the most powerful peace organization on the planet by uniting everybody. The problem is that there are many groups even in Germany—I say even in Germany because Germany is still one of the most controlled and occupied places. There are many people who are really so absolutely frightened and concerned. When they realize that they are not the only ones, that there are many co-thinkers, it gives them courage to speak out. I think we need to change the policy. I think what Chancellor Merz is proposing in Germany is really going in the wrong direction. I am really calling on all people in France, Macron being in a similar orientation. But let’s really move Europe in the direction of cooperation with the Global South. Then all the problems could be solved very easily. The United States has their 250th anniversary next year, and America could go back to its own anti-colonial tradition of the American Revolution, the American War of Independence which was the first anti-colonial war in history. All problems would be easily solved, and that is not an empty promise. I know the BRICS countries would receive Europe and even the United States with open arms if they would just say we want to stop this insane geopolitical confrontation. So, contact Anastasia after the call, and let’s broaden our outreach by several orders of magnitude.

[2] I want to pick up on what Dmitri Trenin said in his conference presentation. That was actually mentioned in the Times of India article. He is one of the eminent spokesmen of Russia; a strategic thinker. He used to be with the Carnegie Foundation; he’s now in all kinds of important think tanks and positions. He said that Russia will react to the present NATO provocations, and he said it will not happen in the Far East, it will happen here in Germany. There are many other analysts now who say, “When is the Oreshnik moment for Russia coming?” I think there is a general discussion among analysts around the world as to what will be the appropriate reaction coming from Russia. It is generally estimated that Russia, and Putin in particular will try everything possible to not go into the trap of being entangled in something which could get out of control and end civilization. But Russia will be reacting in a very measured way. The Oreshnik moment would be the moment when they are sending the equivalent of an Oreshnik missile, however without a nuclear warhead because that could be put on the Oreshnik. But just by the kinetic energy of this new type of hypersonic missile, they could demonstrate that there are new physical principles at work. Such a reaction has to be expected soon.

Now, I think this will happen, because if the West is continuously upping the ante, as with the Malcolm Chalmers appointment to be strategic advisor to the British Defense Minister, this should get everybody alarmed. Because these people are in a Cuban Missile Crisis on steroids mindset; or breaking the emergency glass, just break the rules and go completely out of control. That will be the moment when we have really the existence of civilization at stake. So, I would really urge people to get active now. We are in that very short window of opportunity where something still can be done. For Merz to go to London and make this Kensington Treaty is a demonstration of the absolute lack of any historical instinct. If you know what the role of the British was in bringing about the two world wars—which would require a whole other discussion—it is just unbelievable. It is one thing to be the slave of the United States and the underling and colonial entity of the United States, but to go like that into the den of the lion and submit to policies which have already led to two world wars, is either a complete lack of political instinct, or it is what Merz also did. He had a meeting in the Chancellor’s office a couple of days ago, where the content of the discussion was not revealed, but after much pressure by journalists, they got the spokesman of the government to admit that one of the key individuals meeting there with Merz was a key representative of BlackRock. Maybe that’s the answer to the whole mystery, because BlackRock is in weapons companies all over the world. Maybe that is the connection which makes this whole thing tick.

But we need an active response to that by increasing the peace movement and many demonstrations of it.

Re comment: “The internet is not enough; we need outreach together with all parties who stand for peace, left or right, confessional or atheistic.” And Q from Denise Ham: “Please address the idea that evil is not a force, but the problem is the lack of the good. What is needed is to get people to do the good. That is what people need to do: Wake up and act as world citizens.”

I think concerning the comment, I can only agree, and we need activists. I think we made a big step forward with the Berlin conference, because people realized that as Stephan mentioned in the beginning, the Schiller Institute has demonstrated over the decades that we can bring forces together from all over the world. That is not a miracle; we didn’t go and pluck a rabbit out of a hat, and bring all these people together. The reason why the Schiller Institute can do that is because it is a reflection of our work for half a century. We have organized in Africa, in Latin America, in Asia since the early part of the 1970s, but in earnest since 1975. The fact that we have worked with the Non-Aligned Movement, with Indira Gandhi on a 40-year development plan; with López Portillo, President of Mexico, on Operation Juárez, which was a plan for the economic integration of all of Latin America. We have worked on a 50-year plan for the Pacific Basin; the Oasis Plan, the Africa development plan, the Eurasian Land-Bridge. We published “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” We had literally hundreds of conferences and seminars over the decades on five continents. So, that is why people trust the Schiller Institute; why we are much more known to people internationally than let’s say in Germany where the mass media is really not at all our friend. In fact, if they ever did publish something, it was a calumny, a slander, or some idiotic description which had nothing to do with our work.

Fortunately, as I keep telling my German associates, Germany is not the navel of the world, and I absolutely refuse to look at the world picture from an inner German point of view, because you get depressed. If you look at Germany as Germany, it looks almost hopeless—or many people think so—and then people get depressed. So, the best thing is to really try to see the world dynamic as it is developing right now and take that as your starting point.

Therefore, I call on people listening and watching to get in contact with us. We are prepared to amplify the impact of this recent conference many-fold. I’m absolutely certain that what we are saying in terms of the perspective of cooperating with the countries of the Global South, is in the real interest of Germany. It’s in the interest of the German industry, the German mittelstand, the German trade unions, the German civil organizations. Is it in the interest of Germany that the health budget gets cut? No, it’s in the interest that we bring a health system to every country on the planet.

Anyway, all I’m saying is, there are a zillion things we can do. Everything really depends on whether we can multiply our efforts in the very short term. I think there is hope.

Now to Denise, I want to say, I fully agree naturally with you. Evil is not a force, because in the tenth of my proposed Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture, I maintain that man is good by nature, and that evil is the result of a lack of development, and therefore can be overcome by development. It is my experience that there is a very small percentage of human beings who have decided to be evil, to be a force of evil. Depending on how old they are, you can’t do much about it because they are set in their ways. But they are just a tiny percent, and the reason why it is good to be optimistic about the Global Majority is because while naturally if you have a country of several hundred million inhabitants, not everybody is on the same line, but look at the trajectory. The trajectory of a country is what counts. If a country is moving upwards, it tends to pull its citizens in a positive direction.

I give you one example. I don’t know if I mentioned it here in this program, but when I grew up it was in the postwar period. And I played with my fellow children many times on rubblefields; because Trier, my hometown, was pretty much bombed out due to General Patton—who I still hold a grudge against. In any case, there were many rubblefields. But we played, and because the general direction of the country was characterized by the German Economic Miracle, we all felt it was going forward. So, we all thought we had a great time, even if the environment was maybe a rubblefield.

Likewise, the countries of the Global South, who have the feeling that things are going forward because of China, because of the BRICS, their general outlook is positive. While if you go to Europe or the United States, it’s more in the opposite direction because people have the sense that the future of their children and grandchildren will be worse than that of themselves; and therefore the trajectory is going downward. Subsequently, people are pessimistic.

I think it is very important that we really have the idea to turn this around by a mass movement: Optimists of the world unite! Then we can beat the evil.

Re Q on how can I contribute to this struggle as an African since Africa is somewhat removed from international conflicts; instead we face terrorism, etc. within our community. I think we have a lot to contribute though not directly affected like the Middle East.

I’m very happy about this question, because it allows me to elaborate a little bit more of what we plan to do. We have presented at the conference a short report, a work-in-progress, in which we outline certain absolutely necessary investments and parameters for the development of Africa, starting with electrification. Some 600 million people in Africa have no access to electricity. That can be remedied not in one day, but maybe in a few years if we really get our act together. We have defined certain game-changer projects like the Grand Renaissance Dam in Ethiopia, which is a very fine example of Chinese-Italian-African cooperation. It is providing water and electricity. Likewise the Inga Dams for the Congo, and the Transaqua project also starting with some water from the Congo River; bringing it through a system of canals and rivers to Lake Chad, to refill Lake Chad and provide water for the Sahel zone. This Transaqua project was already agreed upon by six governments of the Lake Chad Commission in Abuja. There was such a conference, and right now, that would be something which could be started and transform 12 countries along the route of these waterways.

I would suggest that you immediately download our report and if you have contacts among engineers and scholars and various such people, we can fill out the details. This is just the beginning of a report. We have to think about a transcontinental infrastructure plan for all of Africa, where you start with the idea that you want to have an integrated continental infrastructure which integrates roads, railways, high-speed rail, waterways, with energy production and distribution, with communication. And you look at the map of Africa as a whole, and think if you would forget all the difficulties and political obstacles, but just say this map of Africa would be like Europe. The European transport ministers meet at least once a year, and they always discuss how to have an integrated infrastructure grid. We need to do the same thing for Africa, because then we can start building different parts of this continental grid simultaneously, and it all will grow together nicely; especially if we put it on the agenda.

Now, I can only very roughly say that the idea of it is to overcome any poverty and under-development in Africa within really a few years, and make every African nation a middle level income country; providing for new cities, new science centers, education, universities, just everything you need to transform the population. By the year 2050, Africa will have 2.5 billion people, most of whom will be young. That’s a tremendous asset. Africa is the only continent which has demographic growth of significant percentages, which will be an enormous advantage; provided we can create a billion or more productive new jobs. That is what this program is all about.

So, we have to fill out this program; we already have published many previous plans which we can integrate with our present approach. Part of the World Land-Bridge is the transformation of Africa. Then we have to get discussions in universities, in think tanks, in academies like yours, across the entire continent and get everybody inspired. The Chinese economic miracle has inspired not only China, but the rest of the world. Many years ago, 70, 80 years ago, the German economic miracle inspired many people around the world. They said, Germany could rebuild from the rubblefield; that has unfortunately been gone for a long time, but there was a period when people were admiring the German economic miracle. Likewise, I think if you put this development perspective on the table and have it discussed in universities, in conferences, in think tanks, and get especially the young people as a fighting force to get that kind of program, we can turn the whole world around and make it happen.

So, I would suggest you download this report and then we have a follow-up discussion on what we can do between your academy, the Schiller Institute, and other such organizations. But it is something which is now a complete game-changer on the table.

Closing Remarks:

I can only support what President Ramotar just said about this money thing. These people who have dollar signs in their eyes when you look at them; one of them is clearly Ursula von der Leyen. She just came out with a new budget for the European Union for seven years from 2028 to 2034 or ’35. She wants to have a budget of $2 trillion, so even the German government—which is on the same trajectory—said no, that’s too much. All the German industry associations came out and said, “How can you put up such an armaments budget when the industries are already collapsing?” These people have no sense of reality, and I think the contradiction between what their greed demands and what people in the real world can do, that gap is becoming bigger by the day.

Now, let me conclude with again reminding ourselves that today is Nelson Mandela Day, and the call that today everybody should spend one hour today doing something for somebody else. I think this is very important. The Schiller Institute likes this approach because of aesthetic education—a method developed by Friedrich Schiller about how people can self-improve their own emotions to be on the same level as reason by educating your emotions. You can will yourself to be loving. Lessing said that; Confucius said that; Schiller said that. I think you think you should, as part of your own self-perfection, decide that you will be a loving person for at least one hour today, and do it with some good deed, whatever you feel like, but do it. If you make that a habit every day, you will see that in a very short period of time, you will have gained a whole world. Because whatever you love, you gain; and whatever you hate, you lose. So, the more loving you are, the more rich you become, in a true, human sense. 

22. juli 2025 — I dag har Schiller Instituttet i Frankrig udsendt følgende erklæring til bred international distribution:

Den 28.-29. juli 2025 indkalder Frankrig og Saudi-Arabien til en konference i FN i New York om en to-statsløsning for Israel og Palæstina.

Denne konference er nødt til at skabe rammerne for fred mellem palæstinensere og israelere ved denne gang at nå frem til konkrete initiativer i overensstemmelse med de humanistiske principper i de abrahamitiske traditioner (islam, jødedommen og kristendommen), med folkeretten og FN’s charter.

I dag er menneskeheden i den virkelige verden, som den formidles af verdensmedierne, direkte vidne til et forfærdeligt skue: en israelsk regering, der i navnet af retten til at »forsvare sig mod terrorisme« begår krig mod menneskeheden og barbariske handlinger, der kan sammenlignes med folkemord. Denne regering holdes kunstigt i live af regeringerne i Washington og London gennem tilførsel af milliarder af dollars og stadig mere dødbringende våben.

I den sammenhæng er det absolut nødvendigt at anerkende og oprette en palæstinensisk stat. At give den suverænitet over sine vand- og energiressourcer vil være en af de uundværlige søjler for at gøre en drøm til virkelighed. Det er vores forslag til en »Oase-plan« for gensidigt fordelagtig udvikling.

Dette perspektiv må vedtages til gavn for alle deltagere i Sydvestasien, som skal definere dets modaliteter og midler til dets gennemførelse.

Allerede i 1975 havde den amerikanske statsmand og økonom Lyndon LaRouche (1922-2019) foreslået Oase-planen for at håndtere de geologiske realiteter for befolkningerne i Israel, Palæstina og Jordan, der bor i en tør region, hvor tre kontinenter mødes. Den essentielle udvikling af vandinfrastruktur for at få ørkenerne til at blomstre og transportforbindelser for at muliggøre voksende handel og produktion var centrale elementer i hans vision for de økonomiske udviklingsplaner, der er nødvendige for at nå frem til politiske løsninger.

En sådan plan er i strid med britisk geopolitik og kolonimagter. Oase-planen definerer et udviklingsperspektiv, der går ud over Verdensbankens planer, de franske forslag og forslagene fra Den Arabiske Liga, hvilket er nødvendigt.

Den er inspireret af den forsoningskommission, som Nelson Mandela oprettede for at overvinde apartheid.

Schiller Instituttet opfordrer til

• øjeblikkelig våbenhvile

• frigivelse af gidsler og fanger

• øjeblikkelig genoptagelse af humanitær hjælp og forsyning af vand og elektricitet

• øjeblikkelig anerkendelse af en palæstinensisk stat som fuldgyldigt medlem af FN.

Oase-planen er hjørnestenen i skabelsen af et nyt paradigme for »détente, entente og samarbejde«.

YouTube link til panel 1: Klik her. 

YouTube link til panel 2: Klik her.

YouTube link til panel 3: Klik her.

YouTube link til panel 4: Klik her.

12. juli 2025 (EIRNS) – Schiller Instituttet holdte en to dage lange internationale konference, »Mennesket er ikke en ulv for mennesket: Et nyt paradigme i internationale relationer!«

Panel 1: Samarbejde mellem BRIKS og Europa om at gennemføre Oase-planen for Sydvestasien og Agenda 2063 for Afrika

Panel 1 åbnede i Berlin i morges med en koropførelse af African National Congress’ hymne »N’kosi sikelei« i en firestemmig bearbejdelse af Benjamin Lyloff.Stephan Ossenkopp fra Schiller Instituttet introducerede derefter temaet for den nye dynamik for skabelsen af en ny global økonomisk og sikkerhedsmæssig arkitektur som vejen til at overvinde Vestens inkompetence og dets neokoloniale aggression, en aggression, der, hvis den ikke stoppes, vil eskalere til atomkrig.

Hovedtalen blev holdt af Schiller Instituttets præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche, der fremhævede Friedrich Schillers begreb «punctum saliens», det historiske vendepunkt, der rummer potentialet for alle aktiviteter, der skaber betingelserne for et nyt paradigme. Dagens situation er resultatet af årtier med forværring af den strategiske situation siden 1971, fortsat med NATO’s udvidelse mod Sovjetunionens grænser, på trods af løfter fra vestlige politikere om ikke at gøre dette. Sovjetunionen stolede på disse løfter, men de blev forrådt. Jeltsin-æraen, hvor den russiske økonomi blev indskrænket af IMF’s »chokterapi«, Maidan-kuppet i Ukraine og dets udvikling til krig mod Rusland, i overensstemmelse med det vestlige dogme om, at Rusland skal ødelægges, at Rusland skal tabe krigen mod Ukraine, eller for at citere den daværende amerikanske formand for Joint Chiefs of Staff, general Mark Milley, der i slutningen af 2022 sagde, at der ville være krig i mange år fremover … Det tyske folk må indse, at deres egen overlevelse ikke er en prioritet, at den vil blive ofret, hvis denne politik ikke stoppes. Og ideen om en begrænset atomkrig fungerer ikke, som Theodore Postol har påpeget: Den vil straks blive til en generel krig – 80 år efter Anden Verdenskrig, hvor »Aldrig mere krig« blev proklameret. Tyskland er udsat for en eksistentiel trussel om at blive ofret af den anglo-amerikanske fraktion.

Aldrig før har det været så presserende at skabe en ny global arkitektur, og det, der blev erklæret på Bandung-konferencen i 1955 af Den Alliancefrie Bevægelse, nemlig afslutningen på 500 års kolonialisme og krige, må nu blive til virkelighed. Kina har givet et lovende eksempel på, at et nyt paradigme er muligt: Det har løftet 800 millioner kinesiske borgere ud af ekstrem fattigdom og har konsekvent udviklet sin økonomi, så det i dag ifølge en australsk undersøgelse er førende inden for 57 ud af 63 globale banebrydende teknologier. Bælte- og Vej-Initiativet, der blev søsat i 2013, samarbejder i dag med 150 nationer. Dets økonomiske aktivitet involverer mere end halvdelen af menneskeheden, og intet af dette er rettet mod Vesten; i stedet er det rettet mod at overvinde underudvikling – hvilket Vesten bør samarbejde om.

Schiller Instituttet er i gang med en rapport, der tager fat på potentialet i et euro-kinesisk-afrikansk samarbejde om store projekter for økonomisk udvikling, efter eksemplerne fra nogle projekter, der allerede er foreslået for Afrika: Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, Transaqua-projektet og Grand Inga Hydroelectric Project. Europa har ekspertisen til sådanne projekter. Parallelt hermed skal Oase-planen realiseres for at give Sydvestasien en fredelig og produktiv fremtid. I modsætning til Vestens konfrontationsmetoder er det nye paradigme et tilbud til alle nationer om samarbejde.

Igen: Som Friedrich Schiller skrev i 1786, befinder verden sig ved et punctum saliens, der rummer potentialet for en overgang til frihed, hvor menneskets eksistens bliver større end omstændighederne. Dette er et revolutionært øjeblik i menneskehedens historie, hvor sværdet erstattes af ønsket om at forbedre tingene, ikke kun for sig selv, men tillige for andre.

Den anden taler var professor Zhang Weiwei (Fudan Universitet, Kina), der præsenterede aspekter af »Vestens relative tilbagegang og resten af verdens fremgang, især BRIKS-landene«, hvis BNP allerede overstiger G7-landenes. Hvad angår udviklingen i Afrika, handler Kina, mens Europa taler. Derfor er den kinesiske tilgang relevant for Afrika. Kinas projekt for at opdyrke Taklamakan-ørkenen er en model for Afrikas kamp mod ørkenerne. I modsætning til Vestens »hårde magt« er Kinas tilgang »at diskutere sammen, bygge sammen, drage fordel sammen«. I stedet for Vestens »del og hersk« tilbyder Kina »enhed og velstand«. En sådan tilgang giver mulighed for et optimistisk blik på fremtiden, og det er yderst gode nyheder for verden.

Dernæst var der en videopræsentation af Dr. Naledi Pandor, tidligere minister for internationale relationer og samarbejde i Sydafrika, der understregede, at denne konference i Berlin ville være begyndelsen på noget helt andet end Berlin-konferencen om Afrika i slutningen af det 19. århundrede. Det ville være begyndelsen på en bevægelse, der, mens verden står på randen af atomkrig og handelskrig, ville skabe et nyt system. Pandor henviste til Schiller Instituttet og dets aktiviteter i den Internationale Fredskoalition som vigtige bidrag til dette nye system. Afrika står over for betydelige problemer, men også betydelige fremskridt. For eksempel er Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda og Sydafrika på vej til at realisere Agenda 2063 – udviklingspotentialer, som suppleres af Oase-planen. Efterhånden som den internationale diskurs bliver mere bekymrende, må disse planer blive fokus for den globale diskurs. Det er muligt, sagde Pandor, da der engang blev skabt en international solidaritet for at bringe apartheid til ophør, at en sådan ny solidaritet kan gøre disse planer til virkelighed.

På baggrund af sine 27 års tjeneste for FN, bl.a. som assistent for FN’s generalsekretær, talte Hans-Christoph von Sponeck fra Tyskland om »De strategiske udfordringer og den nye verdensorden, der er ved at opstå«. Nu, hvor vi befinder os i den største geopolitiske krise, bør man huske drømmen fra Jalta, drømmen om oprettelsen af FN, om at der efter afslutningen af Anden Verdenskrig ville begynde en æra med samarbejde. Denne drøm var meget kortvarig og blev afløst af et mareridt af frygt og konfrontation, men FN-pagten fra 1944 er stadig et tilbud til en menneskehed på 8 milliarder mennesker. FN har brug for reformer: FN’s Sikkerhedsråd er en fiasko, USA’s unilateralisme lammer FN, mindretallet i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd underminerer Generalforsamlingens flertals vilje, og FN’s institutioner skal gøres uafhængige af indblanding. Manglende respekt for folkeretten må have konsekvenser. Der må ikke længere være en vestlig centreret verden, men et system bygget på en multilateral holdånd, der afspejler viljen hos FN’s 193 medlemsstater, som det blev udtrykt på et særligt topmøde i september 2024 med en »pagt for fremtiden«. Den nuværende geopolitiske situation antyder, at vejen til en ny, retfærdig verdensorden er lang, med mange forhindringer, huller og landminer, men det er muligt at opnå noget i overensstemmelse med denne pagt. Alle nationer bør acceptere denne pagt, ikke af geopolitisk pragmatisme, men af humanitære årsager. »At skabe noget nyt betyder at yde modstand. At yde modstand er at skabe noget nyt,« citerede Von Sponeck den store franskmand Stéphane Hessel.

Den næste taler i panelet var Dmitri Trenin, akademisk leder af Institut for militær verdensøkonomi og Strategi, Higher School of Economics University, Moskva. Trenin gav en nøgtern vurdering af de dybtgående forandringer, som Europa og især Tyskland har gennemgået. Europa er fast besluttet på at blive frontlinjen i den militære kamp mod Rusland. Denne konfrontation tjener som en samlende faktor for Europa, der vil erstatte USA som strategisk aktør mod Rusland, mens USA fokuserer på Kina som sin næste fjende. Alt dette sker under den latterlige påstand, at Rusland planlægger at angribe NATO, en påstand, der skal retfærdiggøre militære forberedelser til et angreb på Rusland i løbet af de næste fem år. Fokus på langtrækkende systemer og planer om at sende tropper til den ukrainske front er baseret på illusionen om, at Rusland ikke vil gøre gengæld. Situationen er nu farligere end under Cuba-krisen i 1962, men der er stadig håb om, at det værste kan forhindres ved relevante handlinger i denne 11. time, sagde Trenin.

I en videooptagelse præsenterede Daqi Fan, vicepræsident for Academy of Contemporary China and World Studies, et uddrag af en rapport udarbejdet i samarbejde med Schiller Instituttet. Arbejdstitlen på rapporten, der udkommer i september, er: »Kina-EU’s økonomiske og handelsmæssige samarbejde«. Rapporten er baseret på vurderingen, at Kina og Europa, som er hinandens vigtigste handelspartnere, kan bidrage meget til skabelsen af en ny multipolær arkitektur og dermed yde et stort bidrag til verdensfreden og stabilitet, udvikling og velstand. Dette sker med henvisning til de nu 50 års diplomatiske forbindelser mellem EU og Kina. Partnerskabet mellem dem bør karakteriseres som et partnerskab, der har samarbejde som hovedtræk, uafhængighed som en nøgleværdi og win-win som retningslinje for de næste 50 år.

Den tidligere CIA-analytiker Ray McGovern (USA), medstifter af Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), var den næste taler, som fortalte konferencen de »gode nyheder« om det personlige møde mellem den amerikanske udenrigsminister Rubio og den russiske udenrigsminister Lavrov, der drøftede en interessant køreplan for Ukraine. Selv om detaljerne fra mødet naturligvis ikke er blevet offentliggjort, må man gå ud fra, at fokus var på at forhindre en stor krig – og det er en god ting. USA må indse, at verden har ændret sig, at en unipolær verdensorden ikke længere er mulig, at der er to andre magter – Rusland og Kina – på scenen, hvor kineserne spiller en særlig rolle. Det står nu 1 mod 2, og kineserne ved, at hvis Rusland taber, bliver Kina Vestens næste mål.

Problemet er, og det indrømmer de russiske ledere, at Rusland stolede på de amerikanske løfter om, at NATO ikke ville udvide sig mod øst – et løfte, der blev givet mundtligt, men ikke skriftligt. Så NATO udvidede sig mod øst. Var sovjetrusserne naive, som Putin har sagt? I det mindste kan man stole på, at Trump ønsker at forhindre en stor krig. McGovern fortalte en anekdote om en kirke i Tyskland, der blev genopbygget efter 2. verdenskrig, men hvor Kristusstatuen ikke havde hænder. Statuen blev alligevel sat på sin plads, og præsten sagde: »Nu er der ingen andre hænder end dine …«

Denne præsentation blev efterfulgt af et indlæg af professor PLO Lumumba, tidligere direktør for Kenya School of Law, der påpegede, at Afrika består af 54 stater, der alle lider under kolonialisme og efter Anden Verdenskrig under USA’s overherredømme. Afrika er stadig en legeplads for andre magter; der er i bedste fald smukke ord, men virkeligheden er en anden. Afrikanerne må overvinde deres egne svagheder, som er udviklet i dette system; de må styrke deres svage institutioner, det er kampens realitet. Der findes løsninger, men diplomati består af høfligheder, som ikke svarer til virkeligheden, som f.eks. de sanktioner, USA netop har indført mod fem afrikanske stater. Afrikanerne har brug for regeringsførelse, ikke nogen urealistiske demokratiske ordninger, hvor andre bestemmer deres skæbne. De stærkeste må ikke få lov til at bestemme, og grusomheder som Tony Blairs ”numre” i Gaza må ikke accepteres. Afrika skal sidde med ved bordet, hvor beslutningerne træffes, og ikke acceptere at blive udelukket. Der skal træffes beslutninger i Afrikas interesse, herunder om gældsspørgsmålet. Vil BRIKS-landene arbejde sammen med en ny overherre, eller uden?

Den sydafrikanske journalist Abbey Makoe var næste taler, som berettede, at han havde lært meget af George Bizos, Mandelas juridiske forsvarer, der reddede Mandela fra at blive hængt under apartheid og i stedet fik ham og hans kammerater idømt livsvarigt fængsel. Journalistikken har gennemgået en dybtgående forandring siden tiden med den amerikanske præsident George W. Bush og den britiske premierminister Tony Blair, hvor »fastlåst« journalistik tjente invasionen af Irak og dens iscenesættelse gennem løgne. Tendientiøse journalister følger reglen: Hør intet ondt. Se intet ondt. Sig intet ondt. Derfor er der ingen rapporter om, at Netanyahu er ond, at Hamas er ond, men at selv efter Israels ødelæggelse af Hamas vil krigen fortsætte.

Ægte journalistik er forpligtet til at følge sandheden. Dette er også netop blevet italesat af Brasiliens præsident Lula på BRIKS-topmødet: »International lov eksisterer kun på papiret.« Hvad angår LaRouches »genopbygning af den globale økonomi« og de »næste 50 år«, synes det at være langt væk, på grund af det faktum at Europa ønsker krig, at det for NATO »er lettere at investere i krig end i udvikling«, som Lula netop har anklaget. Når Lyndon LaRouche (1922-2019) ser på tingene fra himlen, er han måske modløs, gættede Makoe.

Resten findes på engelsk her:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Og her:
Panel 2: Voices of Sanity from the Western World

The second panel, moderated by Claudio Celani, editor of the {E.I.R. Strategic Alert Service}, began with a musical offering: Tenor John Sigerson, accompanied by pianist Martin Kaptein, presented two songs by Robert Schumann, {Belsazar} (to a text from Heinrich Heine), and {Der Himmel hat eine Träne geweint} (to a text from Friedrich Rückert).

Then, Jacques Cheminade from France, President of Solidarité et Progrès, discussed “A new beginning to avoid human annihilation”. He started out quoting Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s “tenth principle”, that man is fundamentally good. “This has to be the position, from which to meet the strategic challenge. No way to hide, no place for romantic despair. In such a world, to take refuge in the coward comfort of pessimism would amount to cooperate with the evil.” We have to confront the worst danger in human his tory, he said, because it is based on its control of the most ad vanced technology deployed worldwide, “to rule the world with digital weapons.” But, their policy is self-de structive, “like a casino player who continues betting against the reality principle.” Their system is “doomedtodrownfor lack of energy,” and the devel opment of the generative artifi cial intelligence (AI) has reached its limit: “To steal data from the web andonline human activity has reached its limit, and to face this scarcity in the real world, the tech masters are issuing artificially generated data by the algorithms from … AI itself!… Of course this creates the conditions of a model collapse: increase of biases, loss of diversity and amplification of mis takes and errors.”

“From Intel Officer to Peace Activist,” was the theme of Elizabeth Murray, former U.S. Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Middle East. Since retiring, she has become an activist and taken part in several protests, including one at a Raytheon facility which manufactures nuclear weapons. She faces charges of criminal trespassing for entering this facility on Ash Wednesday with a sign that said “Raytheon nu clear weapons will turn all of us into ashes.” She organized at another military base, as part of an action that had been going on for 40 years, respectfully planting seeds of doubt. “Never underestimate who will be influenced with your actions,” she ended.

Ali Rastbeen, president of the Académie de Géopolitique de Paris, France, which co-sponsored the conference, described the frontlines of the conflicts in the Middle East, since 1970: “On the one hand, a pro-Western axis formed by Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt; on the other, an ‘Axis of the Resistance,’ composed of Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas, often backed by Russia.” In this context, he raised the question, “What theoretical and practical perspectives allow us to think about peace in the Middle East today?” He answered: “Peace cannot be thought of without law, without justice, without the sovereignty of peoples. It can only exist if the balance of power is governed by common, universal rules that are applied fairly. It requires a rebuilding of trust, based not on domination, but on cooperation and mutual recognition.” He warned: “Multipolarity, if not accompanied by shared norms, will only result in disordered chaos. It will only become an opportunity for peace if it allows for the emergence of a cooperative, non-conflictual balance.”

Donald Ramotar, former President of Guyana (2011 2015), stated that U.S. and European policies “are based on wars and threats of wars,” including sanctions “against countries and international organizations, and even against individuals…. There is a genocide taking place, in the plain sight of the world, but no attempt to stop it is being done.” The United States and NATO members in particular, he said, “are not just complicit in this barbarism, they are participants and facilitators. They have even moved to destroy inter national law and international institutions.” But there is hope, he said, because of “the rise of the Global South,” as a result of the decisions taken by Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, to come together, in order to create a more fair and more equitable system and prosperity. “This win-win philosophy of mutual benefit is what we have to look forward to. New institutions are being created, like the BRICS bank, and hopefully other institutions that look for justice and prevent wars, by creating development.” But: “We have to continue to be on guard against the machinations of the West.

Italian trade unionist Alessia Ruggeri, a representative of the Southern Italy Party, read a short message supporting the Schiller Institute’s call for a new international security and development architecture.

Diane Sare, president of The LaRouche Organization and former independent candidate for one of New York’s seats in the U.S. Senate, asked: “We have been accustomed to measure our success with arbitrary standards, like number of votes, numbers of social media likes.… But how does the universe measure ‘success’?” “Why does this matter?” she asked. “Because we are up against an enemy that believes it can disregard the principles of the creation of the universe, including the nature of man.” But “the controller of the narrative does not win the war. The Truth always has the final say, even if we can’t predict the precise moment that will occur.” Here lies the importance of what is happening in Gaza. “For the last year and a half, I have been saying that the children of Gaza will save the United States.… Because a mass strike isn’t just when people protest an injustice which has been done to them. The change occurs when people are moved to risk their own safety and security for another.… This is what is moving the young people who are protesting the murderous policies of their governments throughout the world. The power of the children of Gaza is located in their physical weakness.” She concluded: “So, speaking here as an American, I would like to propose that instead of emulating the barbarian hordes of the Crusaders, the Spanish Inquisition, the fascist scourge we defeated 80 years ago, or the Modern ‘Global Britain’ of King Charles III, that we … swallow our unjustifiable arrogance, and join forces with the Global Majority, whose dedication to the advancement of the human species is in perfect harmony with our true ideals.”

Dr. Jérôme Ravenet, professor of philosophy and sinologist from France, gave a very thought-provoking speech on “Lyndon LaRouche as a Precursor.” His basic thesis was LaRouche`s placing of human creativity at the heart of a productive physical economy. This is the way to overcome a concept of the economy where man becomes a wolf against man, while according to the logic of the dominant paradigm of economic “reason,” the possession of a good by some implies its deprivation for others. LaRouche, he stressed, opposes the paradigm of rivalry with the promise of creativity. He underpins his hope with a rereading of ancient, Re naissance and post-Renaissance authors ranging from Plato to Schiller and Nicholas of Cusa. LaRouche used the idea and concept of potency “to philosophically ground his approach, for example through the concept of ‘successful survival’ developed in his text In Defense of Common Sense [1989].… LaRouche never ceased to criticize empiricism and logical-deductive reason as inferior or limited modes of knowledge, to emphasize the superior fruitful ness of a ‘creative reason’ placed at the service of a ‘common sense’:he exalted this intelligence capable of seeing with the eyes of the future, of immediately grasping the arrangements or compositional relationships likely to help life prosper.”

He was followed by Achim Bonatz, vice president of the East German Board of Trustees of Associations (Ostdeutsches Kuratorium von Verbänden, OKV), which was a co-sponsor of the conference, speaking on “5% of GDP for the Defense Industry: A Redistribution of National Wealth—Too Great a Demand on Society.” He started his speech, quoting from Friedrich Schiller that “The best merchant is war. It turns iron into gold.” He referred to the latest June 25 NATO summit. This summit decided on bypassing national parliaments to spend 5% of NATO countries’ GDP on armaments. He stated that his math teacher often said that you cannot compare apples with oranges. “This is done deliberately here to deceive the population. Five percent of GDP can account for almost 50% of a country´s national budget. This puts massive pressure on all other budget items, especially social spending.” Five percent of Germany’s GDP is €215 billion. In 2024, the German national budget amounted to €476.8 billion. The calculation for the cost of the planned reintroduction of military service ended up at €500 billion, which is more than the entire budget of 2024. Mr. Bonatz went on to calculate the cost of rearma ment, with more and more shocking figures, showing that even with massivecuts, the state will still be unable to meet its obligations. The armaments and interest payments are eating up all other budgets.

Cornelia Pretorius, of the Mothers against War Berlin-Brandenburg, reported about their affiliated peace groups in different townships in Berlin. Some groups have as many as 30 youths participating. These youths are very well-informed when they join. That is a cause for optimism, she said.

Then, a number of former German and French military officers addressed the audience. Wolfgang Effenberger, a former officer of the German Bundeswehr, who has published books on the pax Americana, among others, discussed “International Law and the so-called ‘Values-Based Order’ of the U.S.A.” He started out presenting core concepts from Immanuel Kant’s Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch (1795): that no unjust peace should be concluded that contains the seeds of future conflicts (such as the Treaty of Versailles after the First World War); that national territories cannot be exchanged or ac quired; that standing armies must be disbanded; and that no state debts should be incurred in relation to external state affairs. Then, Effenberger listed the numerous wars the United States has begun, during the recent 30 years, in violation of international law, with the intent to gain perpetual advantage over Russia, China, and anyone else. “This is precisely why we should remember Kant’s principles,” Effenberger concluded. “A unipolar world will always end in des potism. Respect among states allows only a multipolar world order.”

Major (ret.) Florian D. Pfaff, a representative of the Darmstädter Signal, an association of active duty and former soldiers who are active in the peace movement, reported on how school administrations invite Bundeswehr recruiters to address school classes, but try to keep him and other opponents of war away from the students. 

Colonel (ret.) Jacques Hogard, a former officer of the French Foreign Legion and the French Special Forces, reported on how he, a career officer coming from a military family, resigned his commission when he recognized, during the Kosovo War, “that the U.S. were our ‘best enemy’.… We were in a false position since we were coming to help an Albanian rebellion … [that] was considered until 1997 as a terrorist movement, included on the list of terrorists by the United States of America, and strangely suddenly passed into the camp of our best allies.” He called for a return to General Charles de Gaulle’s concept of a “Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.… That Europe would make sense. Because it would be a balanced Europe, between two poles. To the West, one pole would be France, and to the East, Russia.” He then quoted Chateaubriand: “When Russia and France are allies, are close, well, Europe does well. And when they are divided, Europe
does badly.”

The following has not been edited:

Concert: A Musical Dialogue of Classical Cultures

A highlight of the conference was the concert on Saturday night, titled „The Beauty of Cultural Diversity“. The performers were professional musicians, as well as members and friends of the Schiller Institute, from many countries and ages from 25 up to 90 years. The combination really radiated cultural diversity, with a Swedish-Finnish soprano, an Albanian-Danish-German soprano, an American tenor, a Chinese baritone, a young Dutch-Russian-German pianist and the Schiller-Institute chorus bringing together singers from Paris, Copenhagen, several German cities and the U.S., directed by a French as well as a German member. A professional conductor from Berlin who had years ago led one of our performances helped in the preparation and joined the chiors.

The concert was a little over an hour long, beginning and concluding with the chorus, whose members were excited to sing together again after a long pause.

We got many positive reactions from the audience. Two of the professionals praised the „profound sound“ of the chorus. Three contacts from France, with no acquaintance with Classical music ever before, were enthusiastic, and one of them expressed the wish to learn to sing.

There was an arc between the opening, with the 2nd movement of Haydn’s great work „The Creation“, ending on beautiful harmonies to the words „A New World Sprang Up“, and the end, with two songs about freedom, the spiritual „Oh, Freedom“ and the famous German song „Thoughts Are Free“ (Die Gedanken sind frei). The audience thanked with great applause.

—– Box —–

The program:

Joseph Haydn – From “The Creation”:

Nun schwanden vor dem heiligen Strahle … Und eine neue Welt

(Now vanish before the holy beams … A new created world)

Choir of the Schiller Institute, conducted by Werner Hartmann,

John Sigerson, tenor, Martin Kaptein, piano

Lola A. Gjoka – Eja Vashe (“Come, girl”), Albanian song

The Brocade Lute, Chinese song

Kanding Love Song, Chinese duet

Feride Gillesberg, soprano, Fan Xu, baritone, Martin Kaptein, piano

Robert Schumann – From the Heine Songs, Op. 24

Es treibt mich hin, es treibt mich her (“It drives me here, it drives me there“)

Schöne Wiege meiner Leiden (“Beautiful cradle of my sorrows“)

Anfangs wollt’ ich fast verzagen (“At first I almost despaired“)

Mit Myrten und Rosen (“With myrtle and roses“)

John Sigerson, tenor, Martin Kaptein, piano

Alexander Siloti – Prelude in B minor after J.S. Bach

Sergei Rachmaninoff – Prelude in G major, Op. 32,5

Martin Kaptein, piano

Franz Schubert – Die Götter Griechenlands (“The Gods of Greece“)

Peter I. Tchaikovsky – Adieux Forets (“Farewell, Mountains”), Aria of Johanna

Giuseppe Verdi – Ave Maria from “Othello”

Leena Malkki, soprano, Werner Hartmann, piano

Oh Freedom, Negro Spiritual

Die Gedanken sind frei (Thoughts Are Free), German folksong

Choir of the Schiller Institute, conducted by Johanna Clerc

—–

Panel 3: The Scientific Challenges in the New Paradigm

The third panel of the conference, on Sunday morning, began with a presentation of Franz Schubert’s song, {Ganymed}, by Leena Malkki (Soprano) and Werner Hartmann (pianist). Moderated by Michael Gründler of the Schiller Institute, the panel addressed Lyndon LaRouche’s conception of what a scientific method of inquiry should be. The panel also presented a challenging and humorous critique of current policies that are driven by false scientific dogma, especially in the field of energy.

Jason Ross, the keynote speaker, went through evidence of the uniqueness of the human species pathway of evolution compared to all other forms of known life. Humanity has been able to increase its demographic potential exponentially, through the use and development of fire, sciences such as chemistry, and the developing mastery of electricity and nuclear power. Ross outlined a few fields where the new frontiers of science are, such as fusion energy; a solution to the Plank-Einstein contradiction; understanding how galaxies move and the universe expands, etc. He then quoted from Lyndon LaRouche on how “information theory,” precursor to modern AI, has replaced scientific teaching in schools and destroyed education, and on the subject of “metaphor,” which LaRouche adopted from the field of poetry as a “crucial feature of those thought-processes bearing upon the geometrical fundamental of physical science.” Ross then announced a series of classes, starting next week, to learn how to think scientifically, going through the thought-process of Plato, Kepler, Fermat, Leibniz, Gauss and Riemann.

He was followed by Prof. Franco Battaglia, former professor of physical chemistry at the University of Modena, who was connected from Italy. Prof. Battaglia showed how “No energy transition is occurring, or is going to occur.” First, Battaglia showed that solar energy is the energy of the past, when, before fossil energy sources were discovered, humanity depended on the sun and most were slaves. He said that the dream of 100% non-fossil fuels, pursued by the EU, is a chimera. Battaglia showed a chart of daily energy demand in an Italian city, which is representative of all cities in the world. Energy demand peaks at 7 PM, when solar panels produce zero electricity. This peak demand must be satisfied with fossil and nuclear sources, and to some extent with hydroelectric. He then showed that the costs of solar energy per kWh produced, is much higher than nuclear power. Finally, he compared solar and fossil energies with the bicycle and the car. People like to use the bike, which consumes no gasoline, but it works only for short distances, with good weather and good physical condition. The car, in contrast, can always be used. Battaglia’s proposal was that governments should scrap all subsidies to solar plants.

Prof. Carl-Otto Weiss, speaking also in the name of his colleague Horst-Joachim Luedecke, demolished the fiction of climate emergency. He demonstrated that 1. Climate change depends on the activity of the sun, and 2. it is impossible to decrease CO₂ amounts in the atmosphere. He also warned against the “time-bomb” represented by CO₂ storage schemes.

Prof. Weiss contended that current climate emergency claims are supported by no scientific measurement. Out of 3000 papers based on measurement, zero of them have found any evidence of significant influence of CO₂ on climate. The atmosphere is a recipient that tends to constantly balance inflows and outflows. If CO₂ is taken away, it will be recovered from the oceans. As to CO₂ storage projects, called “carbon capture and storage,” the high pressure needed to store CO₂ is of 200-300 bar, such that no stone could resist. In case of a pipeline leak, CO₂ would come to the surface and build a 7 meter high layer which could kill every form of life. CO₂ storage is such a weird idea, that Prof. Weiss raised the suspicion that perhaps someone has pushed it as the best way to achieve population reduction.

From nuclear fission to nuclear fusion: Dr. Robert Lechner-Schobel, from Austria, ran a slide-show as a quick introduction to fusion power, the energy of the future that fulfills LaRouche’s concept of energy flux-density. He said there are two kinds of fusion energy: the “hot one’ and the ”cold one.” Whereas there are 45 projects worldwide on the former, the latter, also called Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, exists already, but must be further explored.

Lyndon LaRouche’s scientific discovery in economics was presented by Dennis Small of the Ibero-America desk of EIR. Dennis listed several of LaRouche’s major economic forecasts, starting from the one on August 15, 1971, to Lyn’s famous “Typical Collapse Function” curve, or “Triple Curve,” which prophetically forecast the collapse of the financial system in 2008. He then went on to compare Nicholas of Cusa’s demonstration of the “subjectivity” of science, and LaRouche’s correlation of applied creativity in scientific discoveries with the increase of relative potential population-density. LaRouche’s “Triple Curve” function is still useful today to explain why the system has taken a path of self-destruction recently, with the

decision to expand a bubble of privatized money into unprecedented dimensions. The system must be urgently put into bankruptcy reorganization, as LaRouche demanded.

The last speaker in the panel was a young farmer from Kenya, Jusper Machogu, who has founded an organization called Fossil Fuels For Africa. Jusper explained why Africa needs to use its fossil resources to develop agriculture, and won’t allow anyone to prevent that. African farmers need fertilizers, as they use them much less than their colleagues in Europe or in China. This is the key reason for the lower yield of African crops. Then, an increase in water use, mechanization, and industry is required in order to process their own food products. Finally, there is a need to produce cement, steel, etc. for other industrial activities required to support a self-sufficient agriculture. He praised the Schiller Institute for its fight in defense of African interests.

In the remaining short time for the discussion, the question on the safety of nuclear power was raised from the audience, to which both Weiss and Lechner-Schobel answered. Whereas the latter emphasized fusion as the solution to radioactive waste, Weiss pointed to advanced methods for significantly reducing the waste, mentioning as an example Bill Gates’ natrium reactor project.

Professor Battaglia was asked by the moderator to comment on the fact that, whereas Europe tries to reduce CO₂ emissions, in the rest of the world they grow. Battaglia exposed the insanity of the EU target for zero emissions, which will never be achieved.

Finally, Ross had a few words on the damage done to science by climate ideologues and activists, who claim they speak “in the name of science.” To remedy that, we should not be defensive and react by referring to “traditional” science, as tradition can be good or bad, but rather resume “classical” science, about which he will have more to say in the upcoming international seminar series that begins next week.

Panel 4: The Beauty of the Diversity of Cultures…

If humanity is to establish continuity, then it is crucial that its future be put up for serious consideration and deliberation. This has been the central theme to Lyndon and Helga LaRouche’s life work. This is why Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who moderated this panel, started off the fourth panel, by stressing the importance of the return to Classical European Culture, and the role of the youth in rediscovering the classical culture and developing the necessary milieu, a seed crystal of a dedicated youth cadre, to execute such a feat, which is admittedly very difficult in the present situation in the West. Helga posed this as a challenge and a necessity to escape the current crisis.

To that, the floor was passed off to Harley Schlanger, who noted that we are dealing with a British oligarchy that harbors a disdain toward humanity, promoting geopolitics and dividing humanity into warring nations and parties. The oligarchy also pushes pessimism onto populations to make them believe in the alleged futility to take on the oligarchy, despite the emergence of a global rebellion against the oligarchical establishment.

Humans are, Schlanger stressed, created with a unique quality of creativity, by being the image of that creator. However, because of the gross cultural decadence, many of us lost that knowledge of innate creativity and the universality of humanity.

Now it is the time to completely put aside and discard any laws or axioms that were arbitrarily formed from some “authority”. Instead, the State has to respect and follow provable universal laws that can be applied to humanity as a whole. Unless it follows that criteria, and serves the general welfare of the people, the state is illegitimate.

Therefore, we need a liberation struggle – a Third American Revolution – to liberate the American people from their status as herded cattle, who are slowly walking into butchery by the oligarchy. Harley posed the challenge for us, the harbingers of a new Renaissance, to revive humanity and move us away from mass slaughter.

He then showed a video of Lyndon LaRouche, on how he created the Youth Movements of the 1970s and the 2000s, and a caution on how cultures are destroyed by Dark Ages, and the necessity of creating a new Youth Movement.

In the era of the New Silk Road, which the Schiller Institute supports Western integration into, Helena Chang from SINOpress brought up a critical point of the Old Silk Road: The most important aspect of the Old Silk Road was not the fact that it facilitated trade of goods between civilizations, but its importance for the transfer of ideas and technologies. If the Old Silk Road proved to be a vector of ideas and technology from East to West, what could a New Silk Road with paved roads for motorized vehicles, rail lines, sea ports, new airports be like in that regard, at the current level of technology we enjoy today?

We have to break from the current lattice of endless wars and geopolitics to move to a new and less familiar system, where harmony between the Civilizations can easily be fostered. She brought up the problem of persisting Western bias towards the non-western parts of the World. But the natural inclination between human civilizations is to interact, rather than to clash. The insistence towards “The Clash of Civilizations” is artificial, and predicated on a top-down intellectual canonization of geopolitics.

Then, Maurizio Abbate, President of the National Institute for Cultural Activities (ENAC), Italy, brought to light, in passionate terms, the problem with the ubiquity of war on our planet, as well as the systemic economic and financial crisis that, to this day, has remained unresolved. Governments have cut funding to hospitals, schools and programs that are supposed to help people, instead have decided to commit more resources to war. The institutions established for the purpose of mediation, such as the United Nations, are now dead, and we must move beyond them and adopt alternatives to a dead, or necrotic system.

Jens Jorgen Nielsen, of the Russian-Danish Dialog organization talked about the importance of dialogue with Russia, with lines of dialogue between heads of state of the two nations. He also gave an overview of the religions of Russia, focusing on Orthodox Christianity and a view that is more critical of the Renaissance.

… and the Role of Young People in Shaping the Earth’s Next 50 Years

The final part of this panel brought a number of representatives of the youth to the podium, to add their take on what is needed to create a future for all of humanity.

Pianist Martin Kaptein gave a presentation on how the piano in particular plays a key role in uplifting the mind. He gave an interesting presentation on the melody and the harmony from the piano, and that a competently composed piano piece is like a well-designed architecture, and not merely a collection of notes. The piano is key in helping a free people find their balance and organize their thoughts.

Anastasia Battle, editor of the Leonore cultural magazine and co-initiator of the International Peace Coalition, gave a presentation on how to educate a moral citizenry. Starting out by a quote from Lyndon LaRouche’s article “The Death-Agony of Olympus”, she explained why an understanding of Classical tragedy is key to the transformation of the population, from a mere rough existence to being shaped into citizens that can contribute to republican society. Beethoven’s opera, Fidelio, was used as an example. At the end of the opera, Florestan, despite his hardships, found his strength and continued to persist.

Carolina Dominguez reported on her organizing with the LaRouche Youth Movement on University Campuses in Mexico, and their interventions and the proposals they have made at BRICS events. She ended her segment with the statement: “If we are part of something really big, DO THE WORK, become a magnet.”

Kynan Thistlethwaite posed the question: “Why do people get suckered into believing the lies that lead nations into catastrophes, such as wars based on lies?” As an answer, he pointed to the importance for the citizenry to improve their capacity of imagination, as opposed to acting upon sense perception. He used the example of the “Muse of Fire” prologue from the Life of King Henry the Fifth”, as well as excerp

the problem of Venetian Society in that play and how Portia demonstrated the principle negating sense perception through the lead casket, was able to bring to light the quality of mercy in the play to Shylock in the court scene.

Ashley Tran discussed the problems facing Germany: the lackluster, or even absence of recognition, toward Germany’s classical cultural heritage, particularly of Friedrich Schiller. She asked: “Where did Schiller’s Germany go?” She described how Schiller was forbidden, by the Duke of Württemberg, to write any more theater plays, and decided to rather leave Württemberg than his calling as an author. She then discussed Schiller’s famous “Ode to Joy”, which was was inspired by the inception of the American Republic after the Revolution and would later be used to invoke the same American revolutionary spirit in the European people.

Cherine Sultan from France then had an enticing segment titled “Schiller, a non-academic teacher”, where Cherine tears into the academia and reported how the obligation in French schools, to read Balzac, Moliere, and Madame de Lafayette, stymied free inquiry into books or authors that may be more interesting to a young mind. But with a little curiosity and patience, one can find non-academic teachers. As an example for that, she chose Friedrich Schiller, who at 30 gave his inaugural lecture as a professor of history. Schiller had a very unique style. He did not allow himself to be shackled by “facts” and the opinions of academia of his style. She then called on the youth who are to build the next 50 years, “to nourish themselves with the great authors, to pursue great historical and philosophical research. Like Schiller, as long as you draw on the impatient gaze of future generations, no academician or other expert will be able to tarnish your enthusiasm with their ‘benevolent’ corrections of your ‘errors’ and ‘ approximations’.

Daniel Burke gave the final speech, on where he identified Vox Populi, or “The Voice of the People”, or more accurately, manipulation of public opinion through mass psychology to control the population to achieve the oligarchs’ aims and desires. Daniel then posed the question: “Will we transform and uplift the world, or abandon our powers of discovery, thereby becoming a shrunken people, so easily devoured by the seemingly giant and mighty green oligarchs? Or as human cattle being led to genocidal slaughter through the designs the oligarchs have for us?

This will be an effort for all of humanity. Helga ended the conference with this statement. Germany alone will not solve the crisis, and I do not believe the U.S. alone will either. But they are centers of the crisis, and it will take an effort for all of humanity to avert it, and turn the crisis into opportunity.

(Contributions to this report came from Alexander Hartmann, Rainer Apel, Christine Bierre, Christine Schier, Ulf Sandmark, Claudio Celani and Harrison Elfrink.)

Her er linket til artiklen i Times of Indias netversion den 18. juli 2025.

Times of India er det tredjestørste avis i Indien målt på oplag og det mest solgte engelsksprogede dagblad i verden.

af Mrutyuanjai Mishra
(Forfatteren kom til Schiller Instituttets konference i Berlin den 12.-13. juli 2025. Han er fra Indien, men bosat i Danmark. See mere under artiklen.)

The 18th of July holds deep significance for human rights activists across the world. It is Nelson Mandela International Day: his birthday. Had he been alive today, Mandela would have turned 107. He passed away at the age of 95, but his legacy continues to inspire global conversations about justice, dignity, and reconciliation.

Mandela was the first black head of state in South Africa and the first to be elected through a fully democratic process, after spending 27 years in prison for opposing apartheid. He was deeply inspired by Mahatma Gandhi. South Africa’s long, painful journey toward freedom mirrors India’s own decades-long struggle for independence, finally achieved in 1947.

Mandela once urged each of us, regardless of nationality, race, or background, to dedicate at least one hour on this day to doing something meaningful for someone else or for a community in need.

Those who admire his values and wish to honor his legacy can always find a way to help, even in small acts of kindness. These gestures, however modest, reflect a deeper commitment to our shared humanity. And yet, today, that very humanity is under increasing strain.

After attending a peace conference in Berlin on July 12–13, I left with a sobering realisation: Europe is in urgent need of clarity, courage, and political sanity.

Participants from across the globe had gathered to voice growing concern about the escalating political and military tensions in Europe and beyond. The conference brought together peace activists, academics, students, former diplomats, politicians, military officials, economists, musicians, and other professionals. Hundreds more joined virtually.

The opening session bore a striking title: “Man Is Not a Wolf to Man: For a New Paradigm in International Relations.”

In her keynote address, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, traced the historical forces that have led us to this dangerous precipice. She warned that we are at a “punctum saliens”, a critical inflection point in history, comparable to the years preceding the First and Second World Wars.

The message is clear: we must act. We can draw strength from the South African philosophy of Ubuntu, which teaches: “I am because you are.” This simple but profound truth reminds us that our fates are intertwined. Peace in one region fosters peace everywhere. Conflict in one region sends tremors throughout the entire world.

It was deeply moving to see American peace activists standing shoulder to shoulder with others from around the world, united by the conviction that a more cooperative and just global order is still within reach.

One of the most powerful voices at the conference was Ray McGovern, former senior CIA analyst and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). Now in his eighties, McGovern spoke with the authority of someone who has witnessed generations of geopolitical shifts. He asserted that the United States had fundamentally betrayed Russia after the Cold War.

Recalling a conversation with Mikhail Gorbachev’s secretary, McGovern recounted asking, “Why didn’t you get it in writing from U.S. Secretary of State James Baker that NATO wouldn’t expand an inch?” The response was tragic in its naivety: “We trusted you all.”

Mandela Day reminds us that trust, once broken, is extraordinarily hard to rebuild. Today, Russia views American military intentions with profound suspicion. One emerging flashpoint is Denmark. The Danish government has invited the US to build military bases on its territory, without holding a referendum or even consulting the public.

Many Danes now fear that their country could be compelled to accept nuclear weapons and relinquish control over what the U.S. military does on Danish soil.

Who would have imagined, just a few years ago, that Denmark could be transformed into a frontline state in a major war, one that might spiral into a third world war? Critics argue that Danish politicians have all but surrendered their national sovereignty.

This brings us to one of Russia’s leading strategic thinkers: Dmitri Trenin, Academic Leader at the Institute for Military World Economy and Strategy, Higher School of Economics, Moscow. Speaking from Russia at the Berlin conference, Trenin delivered a stark warning about the direction into which Europe is heading.

“Europe is intent on becoming the frontline of the military battlefield against Russia,” he said.

Trenin argued that this confrontation is being used to create a new cohesion in Europe, positioning the continent as a replacement for the United States in the strategic standoff with Russia, while Washington shifts its focus to containing China. According to Trenin, the justification for this military escalation is built on a false premise: that Russia is preparing to attack NATO.

He warned that this narrative is being used to rationalize a long-term military buildup, including long-range weapons systems and the deployment of troops to the Ukrainian front, based on the dangerously misguided assumption that Russia will not retaliate.

“The current situation,” he said, “is even more dangerous than during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. But there is still a narrow window of hope, if meaningful action is taken at this eleventh hour.”

So, what can we do for humanity on this Mandela Day?

Perhaps we can begin by urging more Europeans to choose dialogue over confrontation, cooperation over coercion, and peace over militarization. Europe must not allow itself to become a vassal state of the United States, nor should it attempt to pressure nations like India, China, or Brazil into adopting a unipolar vision of world order.

Instead, Europe should reclaim its independent voice, one rooted in diplomacy, dignity, and balance. It must help shape a multilateral world where all nations are heard and respected, and where the Global South is finally given the space and justice it needs to heal from centuries of colonialism, exploitation, and racism.
—————
Times of Indias beskrivelse af forfatteren:
Mrutyuanjai Mishra is a commentator with Politiken, Denmark’s largest newspaper. He also comments on Asia on Danish TV and radio channels. He has authored many analytical articles on Asia and India in several Danish newspapers. He has studied anthropology at Copenhagen University and has specialized in human rights and democratization. Mrutyuanjai Mishra has spent half of his life in India and the other half in the Scandinavian countries Denmark and Sweden. Mrutyuanjai Mishra is also a consultant lecturer on issues related to India and Asia at institutions of higher education. He is currently working on a book on India to be used for higher educational purposes in Scandinavian countries.

Schiller Instituttets grundlægger og leder Helga Zepp-LaRouche holdt åbningstalen ved instituttets to-dages internationale konference i Berlin, Tyskland, den 12.-13. juli 2025. Det første panel havde titlen »Samarbejdet mellem BRIKS og Europa om at gennemføre Oase-planen og Agenda 2063 for Afrika.«

Kære konferencedeltagere, kære venner af Schiller Instituttet, her på stedet og overalt i verden, hvor I end måtte se med, kære venner af menneskeheden!

Vi er samlet her, fordi vi ønsker at vise en vej ud af en meget truende strategisk situation og modvirke den udbredte pessimisme – ja, fatalisme. Det er faktisk muligt at gribe ind i historien, forudsat at man har en god plan og kan mobilisere tilstrækkelige kræfter til at gennemføre den! Jeg vil derfor gerne indlede vores konference med dette citat fra Friedrich Schillers værk om »Historien om det nederlandske oprør«:

“Stor og trøstende er tanken om, at der trods fyrsternes trodsige formodninger stadig findes et middel, at deres mest beregnede planer vil blive gjort til skamme af menneskets frihed, at hjertelig modstand kan bøje selv en despots udstrakte arm, at heroisk udholdenhed til sidst kan udtømme hans frygtelige ressourcer.” Lad os give et ”nyt og ubestrideligt eksempel på, hvad mennesker kan vove for en god sag, og hvad de kan opnå gennem enhed.”

For at gøre dette må vi imidlertid først vække vores samtidige fra deres tilsyneladende søvngang, som de synes at være faldet i, især her i Tyskland. Verden har aldrig været tættere på et punkt, hvor der ikke er nogen vej tilbage, på et potentielt slutpunkt i historien, hvor den endelige katastrofe i form af en global atomkrig bliver uundgåelig.

I mange af sine værker brugte Friedrich Schiller udtrykket punctum saliens, som i drama og historie beskriver det øjeblik, hvor alt begynder at bevæge sig ubønhørligt. I sit »Fjerde brev om Don Carlos« skriver han: »Enhver handling har sit punctum saliens, hvor den springer fra mulighed til virkelighed.« I relation til historien kan vi udpege disse punkter, hvor der ikke er nogen vej tilbage – f.eks. da det var for sent at forhindre 1. og 2. verdenskrig. I relation til den nærmeste fremtid er denne indsigt imidlertid overskygget af mange usikkerhedsfaktorer – når det bliver sikkert, at en tredje og denne gang endelige verdenskrig, denne gang en atomkrig, vil bryde ud, vil det være for sent. Menneskeheden og dermed vores historie vil blive udslettet.

Sammenbruddet af verdensordenen

Vi er i øjeblikket vidne til sammenbruddet af den verdensorden, der opstod efter Anden Verdenskrig og derefter igen i en modificeret form efter afslutningen af Den kolde Krig. En af de mest betydningsfulde

milepæle i denne udvikling var den 15. august 1971, da den amerikanske præsident [Richard] Nixon indledte den fatale vej mod dereguleret monetarisme med indførelsen af fleksible valutakurser, hvis konsekvenser Lyndon LaRouche profetisk forudsagde ville føre til en ny depression, en ny fascisme og en ny verdenskrig, medmindre der i tide blev skabt et helt nyt verdensøkonomisk system. Det er præcis, hvor vi står i dag!

For at forstå, hvordan vi kunne nå hertil kun 35 år efter den tyske genforening, skal vi se tilbage! I en kort periode mellem Berlin-murens fald og genforeningen oplevede vi en guldalder for menneskeheden, et af de sjældne øjeblikke i historien, hvor kursen kan nulstilles fuldstændigt: Den tidligere amerikanske ambassadør i Moskva, Jack Matlock, understregede på en nylig konference i Schiller Instituttet, at Sovjetunionen allerede før sin opløsning i 1991 ikke længere udgjorde en trussel, så der var ikke længere nogen fjende. Det ville derfor have været fuldstændig muligt at etablere en ny fredsorden for det 21. århundrede med afslutningen af Den kolde Krig. Lyndon LaRouche foreslog oprindeligt det økonomiske grundlag for denne fredsorden med sit program: »Den produktive trekant Paris-Berlin-Wien« og derefter med Eurasian Land Bridge (den Eurasiske Landbro). Dengang kæmpede vi for vores ret til suverænitet, som også er nedfældet i To plus Fire-aftalen om [Tysklands genforening], men vi er blevet fuldstændig snydt for denne suverænitet, ikke kun i de nye delstater, men i hele Tyskland!

Amerikanske, russiske, tyske, britiske og franske dokumenter, der siden er blevet frigivet og nu er tilgængelige i de amerikanske nationalarkiver, i udenrigsministeriet, Pentagon, præsidentbiblioteker og forskellige nationale arkiver og universitetsbiblioteker, beviser ikke blot én, men en veritabel strøm af sikkerhedsløfter mod NATO’s udvidelse mod øst, som blev givet til [Sovjetunionens præsident Mikhail] Gorbatjov og [sovjetisk udenrigsminister Eduard] Shevardnadze af [amerikansk udenrigsminister James] Baker , [amerikansk præsident George H.W.] Bush, [tysk udenrigsminister Hans-Dietrich] Genscher, [tysk kansler Helmut] Kohl, [fransk præsident François] Mitterand, [den britiske premierminister Margaret] Thatcher, [den britiske udenrigsminister Douglas] Hurd, [den britiske premierminister John] Major og [NATO’s generalsekretær Manfred] Wörner.

Disse dokumenter viser klart, at løftet om ikke at udvide NATO en tomme mod øst var så centralt, at de russiske klager over at være blevet bedraget er helt berettigede.

Udenrigsminister Hans-Dietrich Genschers hovedtale på en konference i det protestantiske akademi i Tutzing den 31. januar 1990 spillede en afgørende rolle. Genscher understregede: “Vi ønsker ikke enhed på bekostning af tredjeparter … Det er NATO’s ansvar at gøre det klart: Uanset hvad der sker i Warszawa-pagten, vil der ikke ske nogen udvidelse af NATO’s territorium mod øst, dvs. tættere på Sovjetunionens grænser. Disse sikkerhedsgarantier er vigtige for Sovjetunionen og dets adfærd.” Det er bemærkelsesværdigt, at Genschers tale stort set er forsvundet fra internettet og kun kan findes med en vis teknisk indsats.

»Tutzing-formlen« udløste en storm af vigtige diplomatiske forhandlinger i de følgende ti dage, der kulminerede i det afgørende møde mellem Kohl og Gorbatjov den 10. februar, hvor Gorbatjov gav sin principielle tilslutning til den tyske genforening.

I betragtning af omfanget af disse løfter kan der ikke være tvivl om, at de spillede en afgørende rolle i at overbevise den russiske ledelse på det tidspunkt om at udvise enorm generøsitet i forbindelse med den tyske genforening – og det var kun 45 år efter afslutningen af Anden Verdenskrig! Det gør det desto mere forståeligt, at Rusland betragtede Vestens efterfølgende politik som et enormt tillidsbrud.

Neokonservative sejrer

Motivet for denne kursændring lå i, at neokonservative og deres Wolfowitz-doktrin sejrede i USA, som havde til formål at konsolidere USA’s førende rolle i en ny unipolær verdensorden. Ifølge denne doktrin forbeholder USA sig retten til alene at beslutte, hvornår og hvor der skal interveneres militært, herunder forebyggende angreb mod opfattede trusler. På trods af skiftende regeringer fastlagde de politikken som et udtryk for et permanent bureaukrati. Det, der fulgte, var [den britiske premierminister Tony] Blairs afvisning af det westfalske fredssystem i sin tale i Chicago i 1999, erstattet af politikken om »ansvar for at beskytte«, de »humanitære interventionistiske krige«, der fandt sted efter 11. september 2001 – som LaRouche profetisk havde forudsagt som den kommende Rigsdagsbrand den 3. januar – der blev ført under banneret »krigen mod terror« i Afghanistan, Irak, Libyen, Syrien samt farverevolutioner og regimeskift sammen med NATO’s udvidelse mod øst, ledsaget af ensidig ophævelse af alle våbenkontrol- og nedrustningsaftaler: ABM, INF, Open Skies og KSE [traktaten om konventionelle væbnede styrker i Europa].

Mens de amerikanske regeringer ikke havde noget problem med [den russiske præsident Boris] Jeltsin, der villigt underkastede sig IMF’s chokterapi og dermed tillod, at Ruslands industrielle kapacitet blev reduceret til kun 30 % mellem 1991 og 1994, stod [den russiske præsident Vladimir] Putins bestræbelser på at genoprette Ruslands status som verdensmagt i vejen for visionen om en unipolær verdensorden. Maidan-kuppet i 2014 [i Ukraine], hvor [assisterende udenrigsminister] Victoria Nuland spillede en uforglemmelig rolle, markerede den alvorlige begyndelse på en stedfortræderkrig fra NATO mod Rusland. Tysklands forbundskansler Angela Merkel og den franske præsident François Hollandes indrømmelse af, at Minsk-aftalen kun havde tjent til at [give tid til] at træne ukrainske styrker efter NATO-standarder, har bidraget væsentligt til det nu totale tab af tillid.

Vestlige militæreksperter har påpeget, at den relativt lille russiske troppeudstationering i februar 2022 beviser, at Putin ikke havde til hensigt at angribe hele Ukraine, men ønskede at komme den russisktalende befolkning i det østlige Ukraine til undsætning. Den 31. marts i år offentliggjorde New York Times en 13.000 ord lang artikel, der præsenterede resultaterne af en etårig undersøgelse baseret på 300 interviews, som dokumenterede, at USA havde ledet krigen i Ukraine direkte fra Clay Barracks i Wiesbaden [Tyskland] siden mindst midten af april 2022 – praktisk talt samtidig med [den britiske premierminister] Boris Johnsons intervention i Kiev, der saboterede den diplomatiske løsning, der var nået i Istanbul mellem Rusland og Ukraine.

Mens den officielle fortælling om en »uprovokeret aggressionskrig« fortsat er det dogme, som selv NATO-kritiske politikere føler sig forpligtet til at indlede deres taler med, er NATO’s fulde involvering i denne konflikt overvældende dokumenteret. David Ignatius, det berygtede talerør for det permanente bureaukrati i USA, afslørede allerede i 2022 i en række artikler i Washington Post, hvor overbevisningen kommer fra hos politikere, der trods alle beviser på slagmarken og i økonomien uophørligt gentager, at »Rusland vil blive ødelagt« eller, som den tyske kansler [Friedrich] Merz siger, »Putin må tabe«. Bag dette ligger troen på, at den nye revolution inden for krigsførelse, der har fundet sted i Ukraine, hvor skyttegravskrigen fra 1. verdenskrig kombineres med »de mest moderne våben i det 21. århundrede«, nemlig brugen af AI til at spionere på fjenden, har sat Rusland skakmat.

Alex Karp, administrerende direktør for Palantir, ser det sådan: “Kraften i de mest avancerede algoritmiske krigsføringssystemer er nu så stor, at det svarer til at have taktiske atomvåben mod en fjende, der kun har konventionelle våben. Den brede offentlighed undervurderer dette. Det gør vores fjender ikke længere.» Og den amerikanske general Mark Milley, formand for Joint Chiefs of Staff, sagde

i slutningen af 2022: «Vi er i øjeblikket vidne til, hvordan krige vil blive udkæmpet og vundet i mange år fremover.”

Er Tyskland undværlig?

Vi er en del af en militæralliance med NATO, hvor Tysklands overlevelse ikke er en prioritet. Den 20. november 2024 erklærede admiral Thomas Buchanan fra det amerikanske STRATCOM ved en begivenhed i Washington med titlen »Report Launch: Project Atom 2024«, arrangeret af Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), at USA ville være parat til at indlede en atomkrig, hvis USA’s globale lederskab stod på spil. Hans eneste forbehold var, at USA skulle sikre, at det beholdt nok atomvåben til at opretholde USA’s overherredømme bagefter.

Admiral Buchanans bemærkninger var ikke en fejl i talen; de blev bakket op af »Nuclear Posture Review« (NPR) 2022, hvor præsident Biden (eller den, der havde ansvaret i de sidste år af Biden-administrationen) forbeholder sig retten til at bruge atomvåben præventivt, hvis USA’s eller dets allieredes »vitale interesser« trues, selv om anerkendte eksperter som Dr. Ted Postol [professor emeritus i videnskab, Teknologi og International Sikkerhed ved MIT], samt deltagere i NATO-manøvrer, påpeger, at Tysklands overlevelse ikke ville blive taget i betragtning i en nødsituation.

Ellers er Buchanans opfattelse om, at taktiske atomkrige kan finde sted og vindes, ren fantasi. Postol har overbevisende påvist, hvorfor en sådan »begrænset« brug ville føre til brug af alle atomvåben. I øvrigt, kun en dag efter Buchanans foredrag, demonstrerede Putin med opsendelsen af det første Oreshnik-hypersoniske missil i Dnipro [Ukraine], at Rusland nu har et ikke-atomart atomvåben – der udelukkende bruger kinetisk energi på grund af sin høje hastighed (op til Mach 10-11) – som der ikke findes noget forsvarssystem imod, mens Karp og Milleys forudsigelser på det tidspunkt ikke var blevet bekræftet på slagmarken.

Det er utænkeligt: Kun 80 år efter nationalsocialismens sammenbrud i Tyskland og afslutningen af Anden Verdenskrig, og under indtryk af ruinerne og det dengang ganske alvorlige slogan »Aldrig mere!«, skal dette land igen gøres »krigslignende« på alle niveauer i samfundet. Og det mest skræmmende ved dette er, at en stor del af det tyske samfund enten synes at have accepteret den fortælling, som mainstream-medierne har spredt om årsagerne til dette, eller føler sig lammet. Mellem EU’s »ReArm Europe«-program og den såkaldte »forsvars- og modstandsdygtighedsklausul« (også kendt som »sikkerheds- og forsvarsundtagelser«), som er en slags bemyndigelseslov, er vi nu på vej mod et våbenkapløb, der tillader ubegrænset låntagning til forsvarsudgifter.

Dermed ofres det tyske folks eksistensinteresser, som alle regeringsmedlemmer har svoret i embedsed at beskytte mod skade, fuldstændigt på alteret for transatlantisk underdanighed.

Formålet med vores konference er at vise en vej ud af denne blindgyde. Vi må i god tid sætte en ny global sikkerheds- og udviklingsarkitektur på dagsordenen, som tager hensyn til alle staters sikkerheds- og økonomiske interesser på denne planet.

Og det er absolut muligt, for den geopolitiske opfattelse, at man absolut har brug for en fjende, har for længst fundet et alternativ. Forsøget på at etablere en unipolær verdensorden har i nogen tid lidt et alvorligt tilbageslag, fordi nationerne i det Globale Syd efter 500 års kolonialisme på ingen måde var parate til at underkaste sig en unipolær verdensorden. Erfaringerne med ensidige sanktioner mod mange stater, brugen af dollaren som våben, kredit- og handelsvilkår, der opfattes som uretfærdige, og meget mere har alt sammen bidraget til at aktivere Bandung-ånden, en milepæl i historien om Den Alliancefrie Bevægelse.

Kinas hidtil usete økonomiske fremgang, der har løftet 850 millioner af landets borgere ud af fattigdom på omkring 40 år og udryddet ekstrem fattigdom inden udgangen af 2021 – hvilket betragtes som uden fortilfælde i historien om global fattigdomsbekæmpelse – samt Kinas kometagtige fremgang inden for videnskab og teknologi – som ifølge den australske tænketank ASPI har gjort landet til verdens førende inden for 57 af 64 banebrydende teknologier – har gjort det til den største trussel i øjnene hos de angloamerikanske neokonservative, men har vist sig at være en sand velsignelse for landene i det Globale Syd.

Siden præsident Xi Jinping i 2013 erklærede Den Nye Silkevej for at være Kinas officielle politik, et program, der havde stor affinitet med vores Eurasiske Landbro fra 1991 og i stigende grad konvergerer med vores Verdenslandbro-program fra 2014, arbejder Kina nu sammen med næsten 150 nationer om Bælte- og Vej-Initiativet. Kina havde en samhandel med landene i det Globale Syd på ca. 2,5 billioner euro i 2023, og selv det er kun en brøkdel af potentialet i de projekter, der er iværksat.

BRIKS’ fremkomst

BRIKS, som nu omfatter ti medlemsstater og ti partnere, der repræsenterer mere end halvdelen af menneskeheden, har netop afsluttet [den 7. juli] sit årlige topmøde i Rio de Janeiro, Brasilien. Og alle talere, herunder mange fra gæstelande, udtrykte entusiastisk og fast deres intention om at opbygge et retfærdigt økonomisk system, der giver alle deltagende nationer udsigt til endelig at overvinde fattigdom, opbygge deres økonomier og udvikle sundheds- og uddannelsessystemer samt deltage i menneskehedens videnskabelige og teknologiske fremskridt på grundlag af arbejdsdeling og lighed. BRIKS-landene ser udtrykkeligt ikke sig selv som et alternativ til NATO og bestemt ikke som en blok; de er åbne for samarbejde med alle lande i verden. Præsident Trump tager derfor fejl, når han hævder, at BRIKS blev grundlagt for at skade USA; de blev grundlagt for at overvinde den Globale Majoritets underudvikling!

Tro ikke et ord af det man læser i de vestlige medier om BRIKS! Angiveligt er de splittede, fordi Xi og Putin ikke deltog i det seneste topmøde, og at momentum er gået tabt. Det modsatte er tilfældet: Selvom alle BRIKS-landene er under enormt pres og reagerer på dette pres på meget forskellige måder, er tendensen mod en ny æra for menneskeheden uafvendelig. Nationerne i det Globale Syd er fast besluttede på at realisere deres ret til lige økonomisk udvikling, ikke længere at være leverandører af råvarer, men at opbygge værdikæden i deres egne lande, udvikle industri og landbrug og blive mellemindkomstlande i den nærmeste fremtid.

Schiller Instituttet har udarbejdet en undersøgelse til denne konference, som er under udarbejdelse, om, hvordan Europa sammen med Kina og andre BRIKS-lande kan støtte landene i Afrika og Sydvestasien, især gennem joint ventures i denne udvikling. Vi har i første omgang fokuseret på de tre nøglelande, Tyskland, Frankrig og Italien, og de øvrige lande vil følge efter, for at vise, at et sådant samarbejde ikke kun hjælper Afrika og Mellemøsten, men at disse joint ventures også kan blive drivkraften til at overvinde den dybe økonomiske krise, som Europas økonomi i øjeblikket befinder sig i.

I stedet for at hælde billioner af euro i oprustning, som ødelægger produktionskapaciteten set ud fra realøkonomiens synspunkt, bør vi gå sammen med Kina om at investere i områder, der altid har været i front med en vellykket industrialisering: udbredt energiproduktion og -distribution, grundlæggende kontinental infrastruktur og derudover investeringer i nogle såkaldte »game changer«-projekter, såsom Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, som er et udstillingsvindue for samarbejdet mellem Afrika, Europa og Kina, der tager fat på to af de mest presserende problemer – vand og elektricitet. Desuden er der Transaqua-projektet, der muliggør vandforvaltning, vandkraft, transport og agroindustrielle udviklingsprojekter for 12 lande i hjertet af Afrika, og endelig Grand Inga-vandkraftprojektet, der vil generere mere end en tredjedel af den elektricitet, der i øjeblikket produceres i hele Afrika.

Trods den økonomiske krise har de europæiske lande stadig den videnskabelige og teknologiske knowhow, som der er så stort behov for i Afrika. Europa vinder stadig flere markeder med stadig mere velhavende kunder og løser flygtningekrisen på den eneste humane måde, nemlig ved at skabe gode grunde til, at især unge mennesker bliver i deres egne lande i stedet for at drukne i Middelhavet eller vegetere i lejre, som pave Frans har beskrevet som koncentrationslejre. For Sydvestasien foreslår vi Oase-planen, der begynder med kanaler mellem Middelhavet, Det Røde Hav og Det Døde Hav, afsaltning af store mængder havvand til kunstvanding i ørkenen, og i sidste ende en grøn omstilling og økonomisk udvikling af hele Sydvestasien som centrum for den gamle Silkevej mellem Asien, Afrika og Europa. Også her kan samarbejde mellem Kina og andre BRIKS-lande med Europa og landene i regionen gennemføre pave Paul VI’s mandat: »Det nye navn for fred er udvikling.« Pave Leo taler også om »udvikling som et våben« for varig fred i regionen.

Dagens konference i Schiller Instituttet er starten på en kampagne i hele Europa, Afrika og Asien for at gennemføre dette program for joint ventures som en motor til at overvinde den økonomiske krise og som et perspektiv for fred. Og jeg er særlig glad for, at vi har fået samarbejde med det kinesiske akademi for studier af det moderne Kina og verden (ACCWS), hvis vicepræsident, Daqi Fan, vil tale til os i en videobesked.

Denne form for samarbejde om at løse de mest presserende problemer, som menneskeheden står over for, svarer også til den tankegang, vi er nødt til at lægge til grund for en ny global sikkerheds- og udviklingsarkitektur, der tager hensyn til alle landes interesser på Jorden. Kun ved at realisere et sådant nyt paradigme i de internationale relationer kan vi undslippe konsekvenserne af det vidtrækkende sammenbrud i folkeretten og de internationale relationer, som er resultatet af tolerancen over for folkedrab i Gaza og de nylige angreb på Iran, nemlig en generel nedsynken i anarki.

Et Punctum Saliens i historien

Vi er nået til et punctum saliens i historien, men intet kunne være længere fra Schillers tankegang end at forstå dette udtryk fatalistisk; tværtimod. Meget tidligt, i sine Filosofiske breve, »Julius til Raphael«, skrev han i 1786: »Der er et vist punctum saliens i fornuften, hvor alle planer vendes på hovedet, hvor sjælen flyver ud over sansernes data …« Det er overgangen fra frygt til frihed.

Jeg, og sikkert mange andre, har ofte spurgt mig selv, hvordan det tyske folk, der har frembragt så mange fremragende digtere, tænkere og opfindere, kunne tillade sig at blive frataget sin suverænitet på denne måde. Schiller viste vejen ud med sin plan om det »sublime«. I »Om det sublime« (1793) skriver han: »Der er et kritisk punkt, hvor naturens kraft undertrykker ånden lige netop nok til, at den redder sig selv med et pludseligt spring ind i frihedens sfære.« Dette øjeblik er punctum saliens, hvor mennesket kæmper sig ud af lammende frygt til moralsk selvhævdelse.

Gennem hele sit liv beskæftigede Schiller sig med dette spørgsmål om det sublime, om hvordan mennesket gennem æstetisk uddannelse lærer at agere større, end omstændighederne synes at tillade det. I et brev til Goethe den 7. januar 1795 skrev han: »Der er et punctum saliens i enhver kunst, hvor det mekaniske forvandles til det frie, og dette punkt skal findes af geniet«. Og i »Om nåde og værdighed« siger han, at mennesker viser værdighed, når de finder det afgørende øjeblik af selvkontrol i konflikten mellem pligt og tilbøjelighed. Punctum saliens er det revolutionære øjeblik i historien, hvor vi erkender vores menneskelighed.

Vi vil derfor gøre alt, hvad der står i vores magt, for at ære vores navnebror og vise os værdige til det smukke billede, han havde af menneskeheden: Jeg vil gerne afslutte med et par linjer fra hans fragment kaldet »Tysk storhed«:

Det er ikke den tyske storhed

At erobre med sværdet

At trænge ind i åndens rige

At kæmpe mandigt mod vildfarelse

Det er hans iver værdig.

…

Han har opnået en større sejr

Han, der svingede sandhedens lyn

Han, der befriede ånderne selv.

At kæmpe for fornuftens frihed

Betyder at kæmpe for alle folkeslag

Værdigt for evigheden.

Min uundgåelige konklusion er blevet, at Israel begår folkedrab på det palæstinensiske folk. Da jeg er vokset op i et zionistisk hjem, har boet den første halvdel af mit liv i Israel, har tjent i IDF som soldat og officer og har brugt det meste af min karriere på at forske i og skrive om krigsforbrydelser og Holocaust, var det en smertefuld konklusion at nå frem til, og en konklusion, som jeg modsatte mig så længe jeg kunne. Men jeg har undervist i folkedrab i et kvart århundrede. Jeg kan genkende det, når jeg ser det.

Schiller Instituttets Berlin konferencen har titlen:

»Mennesket er ikke en ulv for mennesket«
For et nyt paradigme i internationale relationer!

Se Schiller Instituttets Berlin konference live eller senere her på vores danske hjemmeside: link

eller her på Schiller Instituttets engelske YouTube kanal: link