Schiller Instituttets webcast med Helga Zepp-LaRouche den 3. august 2025
HARLEY SCHLANGER: Goddag, og velkommen til vores ugentlige dialog med Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Hun er grundlægger og leder af Schiller Instituttet. I dag er det onsdag den 3. september 2025: Jeg hedder Harley Schlanger, og jeg er jeres vært. Du kan sende dine spørgsmål og kommentarer til fru Zepp-LaRouche på questions@schillerinstitute.org eller skrive dem på chat-siden.
Helga, som du understregede i sidste uge, befinder vi os midt i en intens diplomatisk aktivitet, som den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping har karakteriseret som »Vi indleder en ny æra«, og dette er en afgørende forandring, der har været under opsejling i nogen tid. Du og din mand, Lyndon LaRouche, har været med siden begyndelsen; I forudsagde, at dette ville komme, og I fremsatte alle mulige ideer til det. Så jeg synes, det er bedst at starte med din sammenfatning af, hvad der skete på topmødet i Shanghai Cooperation Organization, og derefter gå videre til de andre begivenheder, der kommer.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Folk bør være meget, meget glade, for der er en ny verdensøkonomisk og verdensorden under opsejling, og den er faktisk allerede opstået, hvilket vil betyde en udvej for alle dele af verden, inklusive USA og Europa, selvom folk måske ikke er klar over det endnu. Det som er opstået fra topmødet i Shanghai Cooperation Organization og i morges, faktisk militærparaden i Beijing: Jeg vil gerne starte med det.
Jeg så ikke det hele, som varede mange timer, men jeg så de vigtigste dele, og jeg må sige, at det var den største militærparade i historien nogensinde. Den var så stor, at Xi Jinping for eksempel kørte i sin åbne bil og stod langs de forskellige troppeformationer og de forskellige våbensystemer i omkring 20 minutter, tror jeg, med en hastighed på 20 km, så man kan forestille sig, hvor stor den var. Og hvis man ser på troppernes militærparade, var det mere som en ballet, koreograferet ned til mindste detalje! Og jeg må virkelig rose tv-holdet, for de filmede det hele live med en nøjagtighed, der svarede til en ballet. Jeg ved, at der vil være mange mennesker, der bliver helt hysteriske og siger: »Hvad er det for en største militærparade? Xi Jinping siger, at han er for fred, og så holder han sådan en stor militærparade.«
Men jeg tror, at budskabet er, at det er for at beskytte freden, og hvis man ser på det sammen med den nye økonomiske orden, der er ved at opstå med SCO-mødet, som repræsenterede næsten halvdelen af verdens befolkning, og som er helt åben for samarbejde med de vestlige lande: Det er bevidst ikke ment som en blok. Jeg synes, det er ekstremt vigtigt, fordi det faktisk er realiseringen af et nyt system for internationale relationer. Præsident Xi Jinping har netop tilføjet en fjerde til sine tre globale initiativer, nemlig et Globalt Ledelsesinitiativ, der skal arbejde på at forbedre det globale forvaltningssystem. Og samarbejdet mellem de forskellige lande er nu også ved at etablere en ny bankfacilitet til at udstede kredit til infrastrukturudvikling i udviklingslandene.
Dette er et absolut gennembrud, og jeg kan kun opfordre jer, mine seere, til ikke at se på det gennem mainstream-mediernes briller og fortidens propaganda. Dette er virkelig en ny æra for menneskeheden. Og jeg tror, at hvis vi indtager en positiv holdning til det og stopper geopolitikken og bare siger, at vi vil samarbejde som ligeværdige med dette nye system, kan vi løse faren for krig; vi kan løse den økonomiske krise, vi kan endog løse det fallerede finanssystem i Vesten, vi kan løse situationen i Mellemøsten og i Ukraine. Og jeg kan kun sige: Dette er en dag, hvor alle mennesker med
god vilje ikke kun kan være glade, men også jublende. Dette er et gennembrud for hele menneskeheden, og det er virkelig gode nyheder! Det er min indledende kommentar.
SCHLANGER: Paraden selv var for at fejre afslutningen for 80 år siden på kampene i Anden Verdenskrig i Asien. Altså, USA var allieret med Kina i denne krig, og der var invitationer til USA om at deltage i paraden. Har du nogen oplysninger om, hvorvidt der var officielle amerikanske repræsentanter i Beijing til paraden?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Det ved jeg ikke. Desværre tog præsident Trump ikke af sted, selvom vi førte en stor kampagne, hvor vi indsamlede underskrifter, der appellerede til ham og til præsident Xi Jinping om at invitere Trump, men han tog ikke af sted – ligesom han ikke tog til fejringen af afslutningen på Anden Verdenskrig i Moskva i maj.
Jeg synes, det ville have været fantastisk, hvis Trump var taget derhen. Han udsendte en erklæring på sin Truth Social-konto, hvor de første par linjer var ret forfærdelige, fordi de sagde, at i betragtning af at man havde præsident Xi Jinping med præsident Putin som æresgæst på den ene side og formand Kim Jong Un fra Nordkorea på den anden side, så var Trumps oprindelige indlæg, at disse tre konspirerer mod USA. Men når man læser hele teksten, udtrykte han faktisk meget gode ønsker og lykønskninger til Xi Jinping og også til Putin. Så jeg tror, det stadig er helt uafklaret, hvordan præsident Trump vil forholde sig til alt dette.
Og jeg må sige, at det er meget vigtigt, at russerne gør en meget klar indsats for at trække USA ind i denne udvikling: Der var en erklæring fra Kirill Dmitriev, der var med i delegationen på topmødet i Anchorage sammen med Trump, hvor han grundlæggende sagde, at de ønsker, at Rusland, Kina og USA samarbejder om at udvikle energi og andre ressourcer i Arktis. Og i betragtning af det enorme potentiale i udviklingen af Arktis, tror jeg, at dette er noget, der har meget gode chancer for at ske.
I dag starter også Vladivostok East Economic Summit, som jeg endnu ikke har nogen rapporter om, men mere end 6.000 virksomheder fra 35 eller flere lande vil være til stede, og jeg ved, at der vil være mange amerikanske delegationer. Jeg kan kun sige, at hvis USA reagerer positivt på dette tilbud om fælles udviklingsprojekter mellem USA, Kina og Rusland i Fjernøsten, vil det være det bedste grundlag for fred. Og det ville ganske enkelt betyde, at alle, der stadig tilhører »gårsdagen for altid«-fraktionen – og desværre må jeg henvise til en person i Tyskland, der helt klart tilhører den – ville indse, at de er fuldstændig isolerede og selvisolerede, hvis de ikke tilslutter sig det.
Jeg forventer, at der vil ske meget på mødet i Vladivostok, fordi dette er en slags naturlig opfølgning på mødet i Anchorage, og jeg synes, I alle bør følge med: For det, vi oplever lige nu, er fremkomsten af en ny æra for menneskeheden. Dette skaber muligheder for at løse alle problemer, herunder økonomiske problemer i USA og Europa, og det kræver, at mange mennesker hjælper til, for at det nye system kan blive en realitet, så det også påvirker de vestlige lande.
SCHLANGER: Helga, du nævnte den potentielle optimisme, der kommer fra dette, så hvis man har 20 eller 30 statschefer, der var til stede ved SCO-mødet, man har virksomheder fra hele verden i Vladivostok, og alligevel er mediedækningen i Vesten så storsnudet og nedværdigende, hvor for eksempel BBC og {Financial Times} siger, at militærparaden i Beijing er en »advarsel til Vesten«.” Altså, de siger dette på et tidspunkt, hvor lederne af de store europæiske lande løber rundt og hepper på en krigsoprustning mod Rusland. Ser de ikke ironien i dette, og tror de, at folk er for dumme til at forstå det?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Jeg tror ikke, det vil vare længe, for virkeligheden er, at denne nye globale majoritet går i en helt anden retning, fredelig, baseret på de fem principper for fredelig sameksistens og FN-pagten, udtrykkeligt ikke baseret på blokdannelse – de bygger ikke en modblok til Vesten, men de siger, at de er åbne for samarbejde med alle, der ønsker at slutte sig til dem.
Og i betragtning af, at denne models tiltrækningskraft naturligvis i høj grad hviler på Kinas fremgang, det faktum, at Kina nu de facto, i mange statistikker og også efter mine personlige observationer, er nummer et: For hvis man ser på den utrolige modernisering af alle aspekter, af byer, af infrastruktur, af gennembrud i lederskabet, af Kina inden for mange moderne, avancerede teknologier, har Kina naturligvis tilbudt den slags udvikling til alle lande, der deltager i Bælte- og Vej-Initiativet. Og det system har simpelthen vist sig at være mere attraktivt end de intervenerende krige, som NATO har ført! Hvis man sammenligner det momentum, der er på vej mod dette nye BRIKS, SCO, dette nye system, og sammenligner det med den elendighed, som de intervenerende krige i Afghanistan, Irak, Syrien, Libanon og Libyen har spredt, er det så åbenlyst, hvilken model der har vundet! Og det er en sandhed, som ikke kan undertrykkes.
Se på det faktum, at der takket være præsident Trumps indsats nu er en tilnærmelse mellem Indien og Kina; premierminister Modi var i Tianjin til SCO-mødet og havde meget gode drøftelser med Xi Jinping. Og de to ledere udtrykte vigtigheden af, at Kina og Indien arbejder sammen: Det var jo netop det, der ikke skulle ske! Og også præsident Putin og premierminister Modi var med – man kunne se dem i samtale, mens de holdt hinanden i hånden! Og de vestlige medier fik hyperventilationskriser, den ene efter den anden, og sagde: »De holdt hinanden i hånden!«
Nu finder jeg det hele meget morsomt og meget underholdende, og det er faktisk godt! Hvorfor skulle nogen med fornuft ikke være glad, hvis de to største lande på kloden – Kina og Indien – som tilsammen repræsenterer 35 % af verdens befolkning – bare to lande, 35 % af verdens befolkning – hvis de kommer godt ud af det med hinanden! Jeg mener, det burde være grund til glæde. Hvis man så tilføjer Rusland til den kombination, har man en ganske betydelig magt i form af militær styrke, økonomisk magt, befolkning og ressourcer. Så hvis disse lande tilbyder Vesten at samarbejde, tror jeg, at rygtet vil sprede sig. Og allerede har Slovakiets premierminister Robert Fico deltaget i paraden i Beijing, og han sagde, at europæerne er som tudsen, frøen, der sidder i bunden af brønden, og når de kigger op, kan de kun se lidt lys, men de kan ikke se, hvad der foregår. Og han sammenlignede europæerne med sådan en frø. Og det er præcis, hvad det er.
Og jeg vil ikke være overdrevent euforisk, men jeg er helt sikker på, at nyheden ikke kan undertrykkes. Og jeg hørte for første gang i morges på Deutschland Radio en ekspert, der er en berømt Kina-ekspert og så videre, og han sagde for første gang, at det, der sker med denne nye orden, er en realitet, som Vesten i sidste ende bliver nødt til at tilpasse sig. Og jeg tror, at det vil være den kommende vind, og så hvis den »for altid gårsdagen«-fraktion, som BBC, endnu ikke er med på vognen, er det synd for dem.
Resten følger på engelsk:
SCHLANGER: There’s a question from a former elected official from an Eastern European country, who’s been following what you’ve been writing and doing with your mobilization. And what she asked is: “What could you say to someone like Macron, if you have a chance to talk to him, about how silly it is that they’re operating from the standpoint that Putin is about to attack Europe? How could you convince someone like Macron that this is foolishness?”
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I would tell Macron to listen to some of his own military, because many of the French military have stated—and including German military and other military like Italian military, that there is absolutely not motive for Russia to attack Europe. I have said this in the past, but Russia is a huge country, with 11 time zones. They have a population which is, really, a little bit small to occupy and secure such a huge territory. They have no motive; they have all the resources in their own country. What would be the reason why they would occupy countries in Europe, where they would have to assume that the population would be hostile to them, that all they would earn is run-down economies—it just does not make sense! They don’t have the military force to occupy more—you see how the argumentation of the West is not even logical. Because, on the one side, they say: “See, Russia is not capable of winning the war in Ukraine. It took them three years to just gain such a small part of Ukraine.” Now, why would you assume that Russia would have the forces to occupy more European countries, when the entire military expenditures of NATO are in an order of magnitude higher than that of Russia; when they don’t have the manpower to do so. And Putin, just the other day, stated again—just for the record—that Russia has no other objectives other than to defend its own interest, from a security standpoint.
And I think that is exactly what the situation is, and Macron probably should listen to the people who are competent military experts, and not go to Great Britain and listen to the Starmer and the British, because there, the advice will be a very bad one.
SCHLANGER: Now the other aspect of diplomatic activity is focussed on Southwest Asia, with the convening of the UN General Assembly in New York: There’s a motion to adopt a “Uniting for Peace resolution (377)” to end the fighting outside of the Security Council, to avoid the veto from the U.S. So, several people raised the question: “Does the UN actually have the power to stop Israel from committing genocide?” And related to that is the question: “Why would Trump meet with Tony Blair, given Blair’s record?”
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Because he has a problematic son-in-law named Jared Kushner, who is of the same mindset as Blair. And that’s really the worst that could happen, and the reemerging of this absolutely disgusting and cynical “Riviera Gaza” plan, which is—it’s like adding the worst kind of insult to injury of a genocide going on now for almost two years. This is just totally disgusting! I think Blair, eventually these people should be put on trial for what they are doing, and not have the right to run around like that and propose such totally disgusting plans.
I think the Uniting for Peace resolution has a good chance to be adopted by the UN General Assembly. I think the only way how it could function is, the vast majority of all countries in the world is already absolutely disgusted with what has happened in Gaza. And if you had such a motion right now, where the UN General Assembly would adopt a combination of different measures: weapons embargo; trade cutoff; isolating any financial dealings with Israel; putting Blue Helmet troops in there; I think the combination of all of that would make clear to the population inside Israel, that Israel is completely isolated in the whole world, with very, very few pockets of exception. And I think that would tilt the situation, because Israel has to consider, if they surround themselves with countries and people who are their mortal enemies, it may last for months, it may even last for a year, but it puts into harsh question the existence of Israel by their own doing!
And on the other side, if there is a solution of what we are trying to do, to make the Uniting for Peace resolution not only a two-state solution; naturally, immediate humanitarian aid, without any hindering; but at the same time, developing the entire region: Not only the reconstruction of Gaza, but as part of the entire region, with the Oasis Plan: that is, the idea to create large amounts of new, fresh water to green the desserts, you could shift the whole situation.
Now, obviously, Blue Helmets cannot start fighting against the IDF, and they may not be able to stop the IDF this way, but I think one could create an international awareness of the situation there through such a motion. Because if 190 countries would all make clear that they completely disagree with what Israel is doing, and that would be on all the TV channels and all the news programs, I think you could change the situation.
SCHLANGER: There’s a question from a regular viewer from Canada, who said—and we can take this for her own view—but she says: “We don’t really have a deep state in Canada. We’re just a puppet of the City of London.” But she goes on to say: “I haven’t heard much from Gabbard recently. Is she still on the case? Is there still an investigation going on into the Russiagate?” because this is necessary if you’re going to outflank the pro-war faction in Washington.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes, she did some follow-up. I think there is a criminal investigation now on the basis of documents she released. I agree, one could hear more of it, but I think so far—or at least I don’t have any indication, that she is lessening her efforts.
SCHLANGER: And of course, we wrote a white paper, that goes through how the investigation should proceed beyond the obvious suspects, like Brennan and Clapper, and look at the British impetus for the Russiagate in the beginning. You can get that through The LaRouche Organization website.
Helga, there are two more questions. One is more philosophical, so I’ll save that, but there’s another on the economic crisis. Someone wrote in and said: “The LaRouche Organization is known for its economic analysis. What is your sense today: Do you really think that the tariff policy is going to bring in enough money to solve the deficit? Or is this just more politicking to try and stay in power and keep the money flowing to the banks?”
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think the tariff policy is a bomb, it’s a fuse, lighting the entire bankrupt financial system with $2 quadrillion in derivatives and debt, which is a bubble. And the tariffs could cause, in the short term, a whole series of bankruptcies, of involuntary insolvencies, and in combination with the crypto policy, I think President Trump is very ill-advised with this crypto currency. Because obviously, he’s concerned about the de-dollarization. But there is no bigger de-dollarization than the crypto! It’s the creation of a gigantic new liquidity bubble, obviously, in the hope to bail out the system this way.
But there is a very important new article by our EIR Editor for Latin America, and I could also say Economics, Dennis Small. It is a very important article which you should read: “How Should the BRICS Respond to Trump’s Crypto-Tariffs?” And I can say, they are actually doing it, to a very large extent, because they have now created the New Development Bank, which for the first time is issuing credit in non-dollar denominations, simply based on the national currencies of the participating countries. And that may actually become an anchor of safety, because the biggest Damocles’ Sword hanging over civilization is this bubble. And if it would come to an uncontrolled collapse, that could really blow the whole world into a catastrophe, including ending up in World War III. So, I think the measures which Dennis Small repeats, which are really the original ideas of Lyndon LaRouche and his Four Laws. That needs to be absolutely put on the agenda, so please look at this article.
SCHLANGER: Here’s the philosophical question, from someone who grew up in South Africa, and now lives in the Cameroons, and has been following us very closely. She said she has a question for you about how to achieve reconciliation. She said: “We’re finding it’s very difficult to get this concept accepted in South Africa, even with the examples set by Mandela. There’s just so much division and hatred, and no simple solutions. So here’s my question for you: Which comes first? Should you fight for the philosophical acceptance of the ideas about human beings, that are in your fundamental principles paper. Or, should you deliver the goods, first? That is, the economic benefits from cooperation? Or, can they be done together in this world?”
So there’s the question for you.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think the key to this is the concept of peace through development. Obviously, if you have hard-core criminals, there needs to be a system of justice, where you need to punish those who committed these crimes. But I think the only model is really that you have to bridge conflict through development, and in the recent period, I think there was only one country which successfully approached crisis in this way, and that was China. They have been able to mediate the conflicts between the Sunnis and Shi’ites, or Saudi Arabi and Iran, archenemies for a very long time, that are now cooperating. The more recent example, is that through the idea of economic development, they were able to at least lessen the conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan, through economic development, through the potential extension of the CPEC [China-Pakistan Economic Corridor] to Afghanistan and linking it up with the other Central Asian countries.
And whatever you do, there always has to be the perspective of joint development for the benefit of all participating countries and parties, because you have to change the environment. You have to have a perspective to the future. And while sometimes, you have to look at the past, you have to think what is the just battling of conflict, but if you only stay in the past, and you only say “You did this to me, and therefore, I did this to you. And this has to be balanced and we have to live with that,” there is no way out! You have to always have a perspective of future generations: You have to always start with how would you want to have humanity live in 100 years from now, or the next generation? Do you want them to have in a perpetual guilt, and punishment, and guilt and punishment…? I think we have to look at the one humanity. And the reason why I’m so really optimistic about what happened in Tianjin, in China, and the whole process going on with the BRICS and the SCO, and the emergence of this new era, is because, you have, for the first time, the idea of the shared humanity: This is a conception by Xi Jinping. He said, we have to have a shared community of the one humanity, or the one future of humanity.
And that is the mental jump we have to make. Because, if you start with the fact that we are one humankind, and that we have more in common, and more common interests, than what divides us—namely that we are the creative species, the only one known in the universe so far, and that we can relate to the creative identity of each other. And if we work on that, and actualize that creativity, we can produce anything! There is no limits in terms of what mankind can do, in terms of composition of music, poetry, economics, science, conquering space through space research and travel, thermonuclear fusion: There is no limit!
Just think that the present condition of mankind is the result of only a few thousand years, when we started to really get serious about development. Now, I hope that mankind will be around forever! We are the immortal species! And wouldn’t you think that when we perfect every science, that we improve medicine so that longevity becomes longer, that we will be healthy, getting much older, that we can study much longer, that we can devote our lives and efforts to improving, self-perfection, self-cultivation, aesthetic education. I think we are really only—maybe we are toddlers, or maybe we are still in the baby age—but we are far from being adult as a human species.
So, I think we have to start with a positive image, where mankind can go, and then try to sort out conflicts from that standpoint of the future, in the present. And therefore, I think that is also the approach one has to take to overcome all problems in the present, including things which were really very, very bad.
SCHLANGER: Well, you’ve certainly played a role in providing a perspective for the future, based on the work you did, first with your husband, and now since his passing, you’ve continued. And that’s reflected in the work of the International Peace Coalition, which will be meeting again this week. What can you tell us about the plans for this Friday’s meeting?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: We will have several speakers, from Southwest Asia, because obviously the month of September will be the UN General Assembly, and we want to mobilize everything, every country, every force for the UN Resolution Uniting for Peace (377). So we will have several speakers there on that topic, from Israel, from Palestine, from the region. And, naturally, we will hopefully have some major Chinese speaker commenting on the result of the SCO and the present new situation. So you absolutely have to participate in it: Because the IPC meeting has become the place where every week, you find from top experts, from the relevant regions, what you will not hear from the radio or the TV of the mainstream media. So, please participate, and help us to make the IPC larger and larger, until we become the dominant force, fighting for peace.
SCHLANGER: And you can register for this week’s session at the Schiller Institute website, and it’s going to be at 11 a.m. Eastern Time on Friday.
Any final thoughts, Helga? I know this is quite an emotionally charged week, with these developments: How are you handling it?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I have been fighting for my whole life, or almost my whole life, but starting very young, for this to happen: A new world economic order which would allow every country on the planet to fulfill their potential. And I think we have made a major breakthrough. I think this is really a new era! It’s a break! Because it was building up as a potential for a very long time. But now it’s there, and it can only be increased. So, I think it’s something for people who have not been working on that for as long as I have and you have, Harley, I think it’s important to keep an open mind and make yourself familiar with it, and don’t go by prejudices you may have accumulated from whatever sources. Look at it! Because this is the ray of hope for all of humanity. And we have to make sure it reaches into Europe, and the United States, and that they participate.
SCHLANGER: We definitely need a ray of hope in Europe! OK, well, Helga, thanks for joining us today, and we’ll see you on Friday.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes, till Friday.
