Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 27. juni, 2017 – I juli 2016 sagde kandidat Donald Trump i en pressekonference, at »jeg kan ikke komme i tanker om noget, jeg hellere vil, end at Rusland er venlig, i modsætning til, hvordan de nu er, så vi kan gå ud og slå ISIS ud sammen med andre folk«. Næste dag spurgte han sine støtter ved et kampagnemøde: »Ville det ikke være storartet, hvis vi kom godt ud af det med Rusland?« Han fik entusiastisk støtte. I hele landet væmmedes især arbejdere, der led under de hjemlige, økonomiske vanskeligheder, ligeledes ved Nobels Fredsprisvinder Barack Obamas evindelige krige, der ødelagde nationer og dræbte hundreder af tusinder i processen, i nationer, der ikke udgjorde nogen trussel mod USA, og som i realiteten voldsomt konfronterede terroristiske oprørere i deres egne nationer. Deres forbrydelse: At de var venner med Rusland og nægtede at være Imperiets undersåtter; Imperiet, der er centreret omkring City of London og Wall Street.

Den 7. juni er der en forsøgsvis plan om, at præsident Trump skal mødes med den russiske præsident Putin for første gang. Der er en mulighed for, at han vil etablere en stærk arbejdsrelation med lederen af den anden atomsupermagt. Blot én uge tidligere havde han til den ledende, kinesiske statsmand for udenrigspolitik, Yang Jiechi, sagt, at han var rede til at bringe USA ind i den Nye Silkevej, gennem en stærk arbejdsrelation med præsident Xi Jinping. Mandag i denne uge etablerede han en stærk arbejdsrelation med den indiske premierminister, Narendra Modi.

Det er dette, der slår de håbefulde guder af det døende, vestlige imperium med rædsel.

Den 10. oktober, 2009, sagde Lyndon LaRouche i en tale til det Offentlige Verdensforum for Dialog mellem Civilisationer, på den græske ø Rhodos:

»Hvis Rusland, USA, Kina og Indien, som en gruppe af lande, aftaler at indlede og gennemføre en reorganisering af det globale finans- og kreditsystem, under disse betingelser, med langfristede aftaler, af samme type, som Franklin Roosevelt havde udtalt før sin død i 1944, under hovednationer, kunne Roosevelts plan alle disse år senere have været virkeliggjort; og vi kunne gøre dette i dag.«

Tiden er nu kommet til at gøre dette. De »Fire Magter« er næsten på linje på en måde, der endelig, én gang for alle, kunne skaffe menneskeracen af med den Imperiets forbandelse, krigens svøbe og fattigdommens elendighed.

Krigsherrerne vil ikke sky noget middel for at forhindre ødelæggelsen af deres Helvedesimperium. Krav om Trumps impeachment eller mord optræder nu i medierne, i en perverteret version af Shakespeares »Julius Cæsar« i New Yorks Central Park, og ved rockkoncerter i Storbritannien. Forrædere internt i USA, og endda internt i Trumps egen kreds, skaber falske nyheder for at trække Trump ind i krig i Syrien, der hastigt ville føre til krig med Rusland – atomkrig.

Men det bliver i stigende grad klart, at den amerikanske befolkning, og endda mange, der ikke støttede valget af Trump, væmmes ved og er dødtrætte af den hysteriske russofobi og dæmoniseringen af Trump og Putin og giver udtryk for denne væmmelse i de nylige valg, i de sociale medier og, hvad der er meget vigtigt, i voksende støtte til LaRouche-bevægelsen i hele landet.

Den 7. juli vil landbrugseksperter fra Kina, USA og andre samles på en konference, der er ko-sponsoreret af LaRouches Schiller Institut. De kinesiske eksperter har i flere tilfælde været centrum for den udvikling, der løftede 600 millioner kinesere ud af fattigdom, og som er forpligtende engageret til at arbejde sammen med USA og andre for at lindre global fattigdom. Dette er virkelig muligt under forudsætning af, at USA og Europa vender det sammenbrud af de vestlige økonomier under det brutale monetaristiske system, der har ødelagt ideen om fremskridt i vore nationer. En genindførelse af vore forfædres politikker i Hamiltons tradition sådan, som det forklares i LaRouches Fire Love, kan og må blive fundamentet for globalt samarbejde inden for det nye paradigme.

Alt andet end dette er, i dette historiske mulighedernes øjeblik, sindssygt og utåleligt. I Percys Shellys digt fra 1821, »Forsvar for poesien«, beskrives historiske perioder med intens kamp, som den nuværende, således:

»I sådanne perioder er der en akkumulering af evnen til at kommunikere og modtage dybtgående og passionerede begreber om menneske og natur. De personer, i hvem denne evne bor, kan meget ofte, med hensyn til mange dele af deres natur, synes at have liden overensstemmelse med denne godhedens ånd, for hvilken de er tjenere. Men selv, mens de fornægter og afsværger, er de dog tvunget til at tjene denne evne, der sidder på deres egen sjæls trone.«

Menneskeheden oplever et øjeblik med historisk faseskifte, på godt og ondt. Tiden er inde til poetisk handling.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump og Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin. [Trump photo flickr/Michael Vadon] [Putin photo en.kremlin.ru]           

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 26. juni, 2017 – Ud fra rapporter fra det Demokratiske Parti at dømme, er »charmen« ved det britiske spil med at fjerne amerikanske præsidenter, der promoverer det Amerikanske Økonomiske System snarere end imperiets verdensorden, ved at falme. At spille »Russia-gate« mod præsident Donald Trump – McCarthy-isme for æsler – finder ingen støtte hos Demokraternes arbejdervælgere. Og, det udgør en dødbringende trussel, inklusive truslen om verdenskrig, mod USA.

Kina har, i fuldt samarbejde med Rusland, sat Bælte & Vej Initiativet for store infrastrukturprojekter i højeste gear og i realiteten lanceret en ny, økonomisk orden for »win-win«-vækst og udvikling. Skulle USA tilslutte sig Bælte & Vej, ville det ikke kunne standses, og ville også »Gøre Amerika stort igen«.

Præsidenten er blevet udsat for forsøg på afsættelse og endda potentielt mord, fordi han er for netop dette samarbejde og gentagent har udtalt dette.

For at standse dette farlige kupforsøg, bør fokus for indsats ligge på to rækker af møder, der finder sted 10 dage fra i dag, og som vil være med til at afgøre denne nye orden for samarbejde mellem nationer inden for økonomi, videnskab og rumfart.

Alle rapporter går ud på, at præsident Trump ser frem til at holde et fuldt, bilateralt møde – og ikke blot et ’møde på sidelinjen’, men et reelt topmøde – med den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin i forbindelse med G20-topmødet i Hamborg, den 7.-8. juli – og ligeledes holde et tilsvarende møde dér med Kinas præsident Xi Jinping. Medier som Independent og Daily Telegraph er ganske oprørte over disse rapporter (der oprindeligt kommer fra Associated Press) og frygter, at Trump og Putin kunne træffe beslutninger angående samarbejde, som Trump og Xi gjorde på Mar-a-Lago.

Schiller Instituttet og China Energy Fund Committee og Fonden for Genoplivelse af Klassisk Kultur afholder samme dag en stor, »Mad for Fred«-konference i New York, med en fremadrettet tanke på Bælte & Vej Initiativet; denne konference vil have fokus på fremskridt inden for fødevareproduktion. Det bliver et betydningsfuldt samarbejde for at bringe Amerika ind i den Nye Silkevej, genoplive Amerikas egen økonomi, teknologi og eget landbrug; landbrugseksperter fra begge lande vil optræde på denne konference.

Disse begivenheders afgørende betydning er, at præsident Trump ikke kan besejre det britiskansporede fremstød for at tvinge ham ud af embedet alene. Det er op til det amerikanske folk at tilbagevise og besejre »Russia-gate«, standse kupforsøget og støtte præsidenten i hans samarbejde med Rusland og Kina for fred og økonomisk udvikling i USA, og i verden.

En succesrig Schiller Institut-konference er lige så afgørende, som præsident Trumps forventede topmøder. Schiller Instituttets stifter og internationale formand, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, og EIR’s stiftende redaktør, Lyndon LaRouche, var, for mere end 30 år siden, ophavsmændene til konceptet med den »Eurasiske Landbro«, der nu, gennem Kinas Bælte & ej Initiativ, er i færd med at blive til »Verdenslandbroen«. Dette omfatter en genopbygning af en ny, økonomisk infrastruktur for USA; men for at gøre dette, er Lyndon LaRouches »Fire Love til at redde nationen« afgørende. Disse love omfatter en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-loven, en ny nationalbank og statslig kreditinstitution i Hamiltons tradition og en genoplivelse af at lægge vægt på rumforskning og den fremskudte grænse for fusionskraft.

Dette er det Amerikanske Økonomiske System, og det er vejen til menneskehedens fælles mål.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump, 21. juni, 2017. (Whitehouse photo)

25. juni, 2017 – Netop ankommet fra sit 12. besøg i Afrika, besøgte den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yi Jordan og Libanon den 22.-23. juni for at diskutere med begge landes ledere midler til endelig at sikre fred for deres område, med særlig fokus på en løsning af krisen i Palæstina og Syrien.

Kina har klart gjort sig til en vigtig »spiller« i området og tilbyder samarbejde om økonomisk udvikling og tilføjer sin vægt til bestræbelser for at afslutte krige og terrorisme, der har skabt elendighed og umenneskelig flygtningekrise.

Eksterne interventioner og modstridende, geopolitiske interesser optrapper spændinger; det internationale samfund må dedikere mere opmærksomhed og bestræbelser til at støtte udvikling i Mellemøsten for mere effektivt at adressere truslen om terrorisme, sagde Wang ved en pressekonference i Jordan efter sine møder med Kong Abdullah II og andre regeringsfolk den 22. juni, rapporterede Jordan Times.

Blandt de mest interessante områder for øget økonomisk samarbejde med Jordan, der rapporteres, er etableringen af et jordansk-kinesisk, teknisk universitet.

I Libanon, hvor Wang mødtes med præsident Michel Aoun, premierminister Saad Hariri, udenrigsminister Gebran Bassil, samt andre, var det store Bælte & Vej Initiativ diskussionens centrum. Xinhua rapporterer, at Aoun roste Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ og sagde, at Libanon var parat til at deltage aktivt. Aoun takkede Kina for, hvad det har gjort for stabiliteten i Libanon og Mellemøsten, og hilste mere investering i området fra Kina velkommen. Wang på sin side kaldte Libanon for »en vigtig station på den gamle Silkevej« og sagde, »vi hilser Libanons støtte og deltagelse i Bælte & Vej Initiativet velkommen«. Wang påpegede Libanons politik for at bevare national enhed og for at bevare sikkerhed og stabilitet gennem dialog og forhandlinger, som »at give nyttige erfaringer i, hvordan forskellige civilisationer kan have fredelig sameksistens«.

I sin Beirut-pressekonference sammen med Libanons udenrigsminister Bassil adresserede Wang flygtningekrisen for både palæstinensere og syrere.

»I takt med, at situationen i Syrien gradvist bliver stabil, bør syriske flygtninge, der var tvunget til at flygte til forskellige steder, tage tilbage til deres hjemland, hvilket er alle flygtninges dybeste ønske … Kina vil arbejde hårdt sammen med Libanon og alle lande for at spille en konstruktiv rolle i denne retning«, citerer CGTN, Kinas Tv-netværk, Wang for at sige. »En gennemgribende løsning af flygtningekrisen kræver udvikling og forbedring af folks levebrød, for at skabe de nødvendige omstændigheder for, at flygtningene kan komme af med fattigdom«, fremførte han.

Foto: Kinas udenrigsminister Wang Yi (bagest) lytter til sin libanesiske modpart Gibran Bassil under en briefing i Beirut, 23. juni, 2017. Wang var i Libanon for at mødes med libanesiske regeringsfolk som en del af sit besøg i Mellemøsten.

23. juni, 2017 – Den 12. juni meddelte den kinesiske skibstransport- og havnegigant COSCO, at de stod for at købe en majoritetspost på 51 % i Noatum Ports, et spansk selskab, der i øjeblikket driver Valencias havn (den største havn i Middelhavet), dybvandshavnen i Bilbao på Spaniens nordkyst og et halvt dusin øvrige havnefaciliteter i landet. Handlen til €203 million har mange lighedspunkter med COSCO’s tidligere handel til €360 million, der involverede den græske havn i Piræus, derved, at de omfatter førsterangs-omdrejningspunkter for Bæltet og den Maritime Silkevej.

Meddelelsen kom mindre end en måned efter Bælte & Vej Forum for Internationalt Samarbejde i Beijing den 14.-15. maj, hvor den spanske premierminister Mariano Rajoy deltog blandt de 29 statsoverhoveder og 1500 delegerede fra regeringer, erhvervsliv og tænketanke. Ifølge Pedro Nuevo, en spanier, der er leder af Kina-Europa Internationale Erhvervsskole i Shanghai, »fik Rajoy på BRF-topmødet at vide, at det [Bælte & Vej] ikke slutter i Spanien, men går videre til Latinamerika. Det betyder, at kinesiske selskaber skal flytte ud, og yderligere, at Spanien er en bro til Latinamerika og Afrika. Det bør ikke anses for at være et logistisk projekt, men snarere et begrebsmæssigt projekt … Man må forstå, at Vejen går ud over infrastruktur«.

Spaniens økonomi- og handelsattaché i Kina, Javier Serra Guevara, understregede sidste år en lignende pointe: Spanien bør ikke se sig selv som blot den vestlige endestation for Bælte & Vej, »men bør foreslå sig selv som et omdrejningspunkt for at forbinde denne korridor med Nordafrika og Latinamerika«.

Dette fokus på Spaniens bredere rolle i BRI er en parallel til det, som EIR foreslog i 2012 i sin Specialrapport, »Et økonomisk mirakel for Sydeuropa, Middelhavsområdet og det afrikanske kontinent«, der omfatter et kapitel om »Spanien: Verdenslandbroens Bro til afrikansk udvikling«.

Foto: Fra havnen i Valencia, Spanien.

v/ Tom Gillesberg.

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/vil-trump-xi-jinping-og-putin-sammen-forandre-verden-ved-g20-topmodet-i-hamburg-den-7-8-juli

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 25. juni, 2017 – På nogle få årtier har Kina udført nogle økonomiske bedrifter, der har efterladt verden i en tilstand af lykkelig forbløffelse: de har bragt 700 millioner kinesere ud af fattigdom; hævet den forventede, gennemsnitlige levealder fra 35 år til 76 år i dag; lanceret videnskabeligt arbejde i verdensklasse omkring udforskning af rummet og udvikling af nuklear fusionskraft.

Men Kina hviler ikke på sine laurbær. Præsident Xi Jinpings regering planlægger at fjerne fattigdom i Kina – og der findes stadig 40 millioner mennesker i denne kategori – frem til år 2020. For nylig mødtes Xi med ledere af Kommunistpartiet i Kinas nordlige Shanxi-provins, hvor han sagde til dem:

»Så længe, vi gør os umage, tænker korrekt, træffer effektive forholdsregler og arbejder fornuftigt og nede på jorden, så kan arg fattigdom absolut besejres.«

Kina begrænser heller ikke sin ambitiøse plan til Kina alene. Udenrigsminister Wang Yi deltog den 21.-22. juni i en todages konference med den Afrikanske Union i Addis Abeba, hvor han erklærede, at »tæt ved 400 millioner mennesker i Afrika lever under fattigdomsgrænsen, og flere end 40 millioner kinesere har behov for at blive løftet ud af fattigdom. Kina og Afrika må gå sammen i kampen mod fattigdom og om at opnå fælles udvikling. Dette er vores ansvar over for de kommende generationer, det kinesiske og afrikanske folks fælles mål og en iboende del af menneskeligt fremskridt.«

Wang Yi rejste fra Etiopien til Libanon, hvor han understregede, at »Kina er fortaler for flere handlinger til at bremse en forværring af flygtningekrisen i Mellemøsten og finde en løsning så snart som muligt«, og tilføjede, at Kina er villig til at forstærke samarbejdet inden for rammerne af Bælte & Vej Initiativet.

Som Schiller Instituttets stifter og internationale formand, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, i de seneste uger gentagent har understreget, så var Bælte & Vej Forum for Internationalt Samarbejde, der fandt sted i sidste måned, 14.-15. maj, i Beijing, – og hvor hun selv var en fremtrædende deltager – et vendepunkt i moderne historie i retning af at gøre denne plan til en global realitet. Med den forgangne uges vigtige indikationer på USA’s voksende involvering i Bælte & Vej-projektet, står vi nu på tærsklen til denne globale forandring.

EIR’s stiftende redaktør, Lyndon LaRouche, og hans hustru, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, har været frontkæmpere for mange af disse udviklinger, længe før de indtraf. Det var Lyndon LaRouche, der først erklærede, at USA’s tilslutning til Bælte & Vej Initiativet var nøglen til den strategiske krise, og til dette formål skabte han det programmatiske grundlag med sine Fire Love. Og det var Helga Zepp-LaRouche, der, i en tale i Chongqing i 2015, først opfordrede Kina til at være med til at løse krisen med krige og emigration i Mellemøsten og Afrika, ved at bringe Bælte & Vej, eller den Nye Silkevej, ind i dette område. Det er Schiller Instituttet, der har været pionerer inden for udbredelsen af klassisk musik og kultur som grundlaget for en dialog mellem civilisationer, med det formål at begrave britisk geopolitik, én gang for alle.

Vi står nu mindre end to uger fra begyndelsen af G20-topmødet i Hamborg, Tyskland, den 7.-8. juli, hvor historiske topmøder mellem og blandt Donald Trump, Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Shinzo Abe, samt andre, vil finde sted. Men, uanset resultatet af disse møder, understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag, er hele planeten nu i bevægelse under Bælte & Vej Initiativets overvældende dynamik. Et succesrigt resultat af dette initiativ er, som det har været tilfældet fra dets begyndelse, afhængigt af det enestående, strategiske og politikskabende, begrebsmæssige input, som LaRouche-bevægelsen leverer. Og det er denne bevægelses særlige ansvar, erklærede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at bruge sin organiseringsindsats til at introducere skønhed i den politiske debat.

Som Lyndon LaRouche har haft for vane at sige i årtier, så er tiden nu inde til at have det sjovt.

Foto: Præsident Xi Jinping mødes med repræsentanter, der deltager i Kinas Unge Pionerers 7. Nationale Kongres, i Folkets Store Hal i Beijing, 1. juni, 2015. (Photo Xinhua/Ma Zhancheng)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 23. juni, 2017 – Fire begivenheder i løbet af de seneste par dage har vist, at USA nu responderer til det krav, Lyndon og Helga LaRouche fremsatte for tre år siden: USA tilslutter sig den Nye Silkevej.

* Den 22. juni mødtes Kinas udenrigspolitiske top-regeringsperson Yang Jiechi med præsident Trump, der sagde, at USA er villig til at samarbejde om projekter relateret til Bælte & Vej Initiativet;

* Den »9. Amerikansk-kinesiske Dialog mellem virksomhedsledere og tidligere seniorregeringsfolk«, sponsoreret i fællesskab af USA’s Handelskammer og Kinas Center for Internationale Økonomiske Udvekslinger, mødtes i Beijing den 20.-21. juni og erklærede i en fælleserklæring, at »begge sider aftalte, at de to lande kan indlede fuldt samarbejde under ’Bælte & Vej’ initiativet og gennem flere andre midler«. De aftalte at holde en fælles konference om Bælte & Vej inden for de næste 12 måneder;

* i San Francisco mødtes 200 kinesiske og amerikanske regeringsfolk og repræsentanter for infrastrukturselskaber i »Forum 2017 for Amerikansk-kinesisk Transportsamarbejde«, hvor den kinesiske konsul sagde, at »Kinesisk og amerikansk samarbejde på infrastrukturfronten er klar til at blive det nye fokus i de to landes handelsengagement«;

* i Detroit Michigan var 3000 mennesker proppet sammen i Cobo Center den 20.-21. juni til en konference, sponsoreret af Ali Baba-direktør Jack Ma. Michigans viceguvernør Brian Calley, der talte ved arrangementet, sagde om handel med Kina: »Det er den traditionelle win-win-situation.« Ma sagde til forsamlingen: »Hvis I går glip af Kina, går I glip af fremtiden.«

Under en diskussion af disse historiske begivenheder i dag bemærkede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at vores organisation har kæmpet for, at USA gik med i den Nye Silkevej, i mindst tre år, siden udgivelsen af EIR-rapporten, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«. »Først var vi de eneste«, sagde Helga, »men nu er det blevet almindeligt. Vi bør høste anerkendelsen – tænk på, hvor mange arrangementer, vi sponsorerede, i hele verden, for denne idé. Dette viser, at ideer virker!«

»Folk bør bestemt være optimistiske«, understregede hun. »Hvis dette udvikles yderligere, så kan alle problemer løses. Gå ud med en optimistisk rapport til befolkningen – vores politik virker!«

Foto: USA’s præsident Donald Trump møder Kinas statsrådgiver Yang Jiechi i Det Hvide Hus torsdag. (Photo @ChinaDailyUSA / twitter)

… Ifølge det Kinesiske Udenrigsministeriums rapport om mødet, responderede præsident Trump til denne udtalelse fra rådgiver Yang ved at sige, at han – præsident Trump – ville være åben over for at samarbejde med Kina om Bælte & Vej Initiativet og hermed relaterede projekter. Han sagde, han er tilfreds med de positive fremskridt, der er sket i de kinesisk-amerikanske relationer, siden sit møde med præsident Xi i Mar-a-Lago. Og han meddelte, at han planlægger at besøge Kina inden for det næste (nuværende) år.

Matthew Ogden: Med mig i studiet i dag har jeg Paul Gallagher, redaktør for EIR’s økonomiske stof, og som har været meget aktiv i Washington, D.C., i den eskalerede kamp for genindførelsen af Glass/Steagall og resten af hr. LaRouches Fire Økonomiske Love i Hamiltons tradition. Han har mange opdateringer til os på denne front. Og via video har vi Diane Sare, LaRouche PAC Policy koordinator for New York, med os fra Manhattan. Hun har netop skrevet en artikel med titlen, »Gullivers rejse til Manhattan! Kun LaRouches Fire Love og Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ kan løse Manhattans infrastrukturkrise.« (EIR, 23. juni). Som vi alle ved, venter »Helvedessommeren« forude i New York City, mht. transportinfrastruktur.

Jeg vil straks begynde med nogle meget signifikante udviklinger i kampen for at bringe USA ind i den Nye Silkevej, ind i Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ. For det første vil jeg rapportere direkte, at Xinhua, et kinesisk nyhedsmedie, rapporterer, at præsident Donald Trump i går mødtes med Kinas statsrådgiver Yang Jiechi i Det Hvide Hus, og til statsrådgiveren Yang sagde, at USA er villig til at samarbejde om projekter relateret til det kinesiske Bælte & Vej Initiativ. De to havde dette møde i Det Hvide Hus som en del af statsrådgiver Yangs besøg til Washington; dette var et møde på højt niveau. Og, iflg. nyhedsrapporter, sagde Yang til præsident Trump, at Kina var meget tilfreds med, meget glad over og satte meget stor pris på det faktum, at Trump-administrationen havde besluttet at sende en repræsentant på højt plan – Matthew Pottinger – til at deltage i Bælte & Vej Forum i Beijing i sidste måned. Vi har rapporteret, at denne repræsentant for USA var en beslutning i sidste sekund fra Trumps side, og at det var en meget god beslutning. Rådgiver Yang sagde også til Donald Trump, at Kina ville være villig til at arbejde sammen med USA om Bælte & Vej Initiativet. Ifølge det Kinesiske Udenrigsministeriums rapport om mødet, responderede præsident Trump til denne udtalelse fra rådgiver Yang ved at sige, at han – præsident Trump – ville være åben over for at samarbejde med Kina om Bælte & Vej Initiativet og hermed relaterede projekter. Han sagde, han er tilfreds med de positive fremskridt, der er sket i de kinesisk-amerikanske relationer, siden sit møde med præsident Xi i Mar-a-Lago. Og han meddelte, at han planlægger at besøge Kina inden for det næste (nuværende) år. Dette blev bekræftet af udenrigsminister Rex Tillerson i en pressekonference, han holdt onsdag. Præsident Trump rapporterede ligeledes, at han ser frem til igen at mødes med præsident Xi Jinping ved G20-topmødet i Hamborg, Tyskland, i juli måned. Det var første punkt, og det er naturligvis en meget signifikant udvikling.

Det andet punkt er, at der samtidig, dagen før dette møde mellem præsident Trump og statsrådgiver Yang, var en møde på højt niveau mellem tidligere kinesiske regeringsfolk og amerikanske erhvervsledere på højt niveau, i regi af et bilateralt eller fælles møde, der fandt sted mellem USA’s Handelskammer – der repræsenterer førende, amerikanske erhvervsinteresser – og Kinas Center for Internationale Økonomiske Udvekslinger, der er en regeringstilknyttet tænketank med base i Beijing. Under dette møde udstedte disse to grupper et fælleskommunike, der promoverede fælles samarbejde mellem USA og Kina.

Her følger resten af webcastet på engelsk:

So, I’m going to put on the screen here a picture of this
meeting that occurred [Fig. 1].  As you can see, it’s the 9th
U.S.-China CEO and Former Senior Officials Dialogue; jointly
sponsored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the China Center
for International Economic Exchanges.  What the joint communiqué
reports is that not only would the U.S. businessmen be interested
in joint cooperation on the Belt and Road, but they would also be
interested in cooperation on building U.S. infrastructure here
domestically.  So you can see here a direct quote from their
communiqué.  This is under the subtitle “Strengthening Investment
Cooperation Under the Framework of Belt and Road Initiative and
Through Other Means.”  So, here’s what it says:
“Investment is an important driver of China-U.S. trade
relations and the growth of the two economies.  There is great
potential for the two sides to further expand mutual investment.
China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which has spurred investment in
infrastructure building, will considerably broaden the space for
Chinese and U.S. investment and open many opportunities for
Chinese and U.S. companies to cooperate in third countries.
Significant participation by U.S. companies, including in
partnership with Chinese companies, can make new contributions to
the furtherance of China-U.S. economic and trade relations.  In
certain areas, U.S. companies can offer the world’s best
technology and management capability, thereby helping to insure
smooth and efficient completion of Belt and Road projects.
Infrastructure building in the U.S. will generate an enormous
need for investment, and the new U.S. administration has
indicated that this is a major priority.  China has strong
capabilities and cost advantages in infrastructure building,
including the building of urban roads, expressways, fly-overs,
high-speed rail, and ports.”
It goes on to say: “Chinese companies and financial
institutions are ready to contribute to this effort through
financing and through the provision of goods and services.
Chinese investment in certain areas of U.S. infrastructure
development has the potential to help strengthen business
relations between the two sides, and in some cases, speed up
completion of the needed projects at lower cost and with greater
efficiency.  Both sides agreed that the two countries can engage
in full cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative and
through a number of other means, including the Asia
Infrastructure Investment Bank, the World Bank, and other
multilateral investment and financing institutions.”
Then it has a subtitle:  “Agreed Action”
“Within the next twelve months, the CCIEE and the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce will organize a conference on the Belt and
Road in China or in the United States; which will allow the
Chinese side to brief the U.S. side on the Belt and Road plans,
including initiative content, current progress and projects that
might be appropriate for U.S. company participation, including in
partnership with the Chinese companies.  The U.S. side will brief
the Chinese side on the latest infrastructure developments in the
United States and share reflections on pathways for Chinese
companies to participate in U.S. infrastructure revitalization
initiatives.”
So, this is a very important development.  And now, third,
here’s an article from {China Daily} which reports on a rather
extraordinary forum that happened in San Francisco yesterday,
which was titled “2017: U.S.-China Transportation Cooperation
Forum.”  Before I get to the next slide, just see here, the
beginning of the article.  It’s titled “Chinese Builders Wanted
in the U.S..”  The beginning of the article says, “Chinese
infrastructure techniques are urgently needed to rehabilitate
America’s poorly maintained and in some cases dilapidated bridges
and road system, industry experts from both countries agree.  The
fact that the U.S., the world’s most economically and
technologically powerful country, should import fast-train
know-how from a developing China, reflects a new normal for
China-U.S. cooperation and communication.”  Then, the article
quotes Chinese Consul-General to San Francisco Luo Linquan, who
gave the keynote.  He said, “China and the U.S. cooperation on
the infrastructure front is posed to become the new highlight in
the trade engagement between the two countries.  California along
with its neighboring states has especially close trade relations
with China,” he added. “The import and export volume between this
region and China has mounted to more than $201 billion in 2016.
The One Belt, One Road Initiative was conceived in China,” he
added, “but it provides a global platform for economic
development for all the countries participating.”
So clearly, all three of these are extraordinary
developments, highlighted by this meeting in the White House,
where Donald Trump said — according to Chinese reports — that
the United States would be happy to participate in the Belt and
Road Initiative.  This is clearly coming along very rapidly; and
as Helga LaRouche said when she was briefed on these developments
earlier today, she said “Remember, it was only three years ago,
in 2014, that the LaRouche movement put out the call for the
United States to join the Silk Road.”  I think you can remember
the pamphlet that was printed by the LaRouche Political Action
Committee that was called “A Hamiltonian Vision for the Future of
the United States:  The United States Joins the New Silk Road.”
But Helga LaRouche said, at that point — 2014 — this idea was
almost unheard of.  But now, as you can see from these
developments and otherwise, this initiative has really gained
prominence and is becoming a dominant reality.  It is very
urgently needed.  “We’ve seen a very significant victory,” she
said, “on this front; and we should recognize it as such.”  She
said, “I think an appropriate for this is ‘Ideas Matter; Ideas
Shape History’.”
I think you can really expect the consolidation of this with
the meeting between Trump and Xi at the G20 summit in July.  And
I think we can also see some dramatic developments between the
potential for a bilateral meeting — and this is becoming more
solid as the days go on — between Trump and Putin.  But, as the
lead article on the LaRouche PAC website states very clearly
today, although it’s widely expected that President Trump and
President Putin will meet for the first time on the sidelines of
this G20 summit, it’s very clear that the opponents of this
world-changing event of the United States-Russia-China
cooperation, are doing everything they can in an hysterical
fashion, to try to undermine this before it ever happens, to
force the cancellation, to cause it to become totally hostile, or
to cause there to be no positive progress that can be made out of
such a summit.  You see this crazy Russian sanctions bill that
was rammed through the Senate 98-2; you can see the efforts by
the U.S. forces shooting down this Syrian jet over Syrian
territory, which has the potential to develop very rapidly.  This
forced the Russians to again terminate the non-confliction
hotline between the United States and Russia.  You can see Steve
Mnuchin’s efforts to levy new sanctions against 38 Russian and
Ukrainian firms and individuals.  Then you can see this F-16 that
buzzed the military aircraft that was carrying Russian Defense
Minister Shoigu.  All of these are very dangerous, and are
obviously planned to try to derail any potential for a positive
relationship between the United States and Russia.
One only has to read this hysterical article in the
{Washington Post} today, “Obama’s Secret Struggle to Punish
Russia for Putin’s Election Assault,” which only continues this
false narrative.

PAUL GALLAGHER:  Not so secret.

OGDEN:  Not so secret.  So, that gives you a picture of
where we stand, but a very optimistic picture, as Helga LaRouche
underlined; if we see in terms of the potential for this United
States New Silk Road, New Paradigm consolidation.  But it’s very
urgent that this happen as well.  That was why I asked both Paul
and Diane to join me on the show today.
First, I’d like to ask Diane to go through a little bit of
what you have in this article.  As I said, it’s titled “Gulliver
Travels to Manhattan! Only LaRouche’s Four Laws and the Belt and
Road Can Save Manhattan Infrastructure Crisis.”  So Diane.

DIANE SARE:  Sure.  I was inspired, if one can call it that,
by my attendance at a Cranes, New York real estate conference,
where they had three panels.  The way it was billed was that —
and they had the CEO of the Port Authority, and the building
trades union, and Staten Island and Brooklyn.  And given what’s
about to happen here, which people may or may not be aware of,
basically we are at a total breakdown point in the greater
Manhattan area.  During the day in Manhattan, you have about 3.1
million people; at night, it’s about 1.8 million.  There’s
something between 1.5 million and 1.8 million who commute into
the city to the island of Manhattan on a daily basis.  That’s a
very large traffic flow.  Penn Station handles about 650,000
people a day; I think that’s triple what it was built for.
Similarly, every other major transit point, whether it’s coming
in from Long Island and Brooklyn across the East River, or coming
in from New Jersey on the western side, everything is completely
overloaded; at or well above capacity.  So now, the system itself
is anywhere from 70 to 100 years old, and very little maintenance
or repair or upgrading has been done.  We’re using switching
systems which were built before World War II largely; I think
they’ve modernized one line so far, and another one will be done
in a few years.  It really is insane.
So, I went to this conference, because starting on July 10,
since there were two train derailments in early April in Penn
Station on the tracks there, they’ve decided they cannot put off
repairing those tracks.  But of course, to repair tracks, then
you cannot use them while you’re repairing them.  They’re saying
they’re going to have to reduce the traffic coming in from Long
Island by 20%; I don’t know what the percentage is from New
Jersey, but it’s probably something similar or greater.  I know
the commuter routes from Essex and Morris Counties, which include
commuters coming in from Pennsylvania who go to various places
and then take a train into Penn Station, that’s all going to be
rerouted into Hoboken; the PATH system which is also overloaded.
At any rate, these repairs start on the 10th of July, and they’re
going to be going on for at least six weeks or longer.  Who
really knows, frankly?
There’s no redundancy.  This is a system that any section of
it that you shut down, if you’re talking about transit points
that are already functioning or not functioning I should say, at
over capacity.  And you’re going to add 20% more traffic, or 30%
more traffic, or 50% more traffic to it; you could have a total
breakdown of everything.  None of the plans I’ve seen so far
really are adequate.  I don’t know what they’re going to do as
they get closer; maybe they’re going to have to have people come
into work on rotating shifts, people’s hours are going to change,
I don’t know.  But at any rate, I was hoping that this conference
might address it.  What I heard there — and it’s not as though
these speakers were completely incompetent or were not aware of
the crisis in some way — but what you saw was that people’s
thinking has been so warped.  One, as I said in the article, by
this Bertrand Russell legacy that there’s no such thing as a
creative idea, or a new idea; but that everything is an algebraic
system of linear deduction.  Of course, from that standpoint, you
could never conceptualize where this region should be in 50 or
100 years.
So, the things that they were proposing be done, like
turning Rikers Island into a part of LaGuardia Airport —
LaGuardia Airport, as people may know who have travelled into New
York, is very much overloaded.  They don’t have the space for the
number of flights that are coming in, and they’re projecting that
by 2030 there will be another 30 million people per year trying
to fly into the city.  So, how do you handle this?  They said,
well we need 75 more flight operations per hour.  Taking over all
of Rikers Island for this and a new wastewater treatment plant,
only gives you an increase of 30 more flight operations per hour.
So, why would you do that?  What is the point of investing in
something that doesn’t even meet either the current needs or what
you are projecting?  It’s really insane.  So, you have that
factor; and the other factor is the funding, which I think Paul
may deal with more; but the idea that everything can only be done
through public-private partnerships.  As people know, my
colleague Bill Roberts has an article in the same issue of {EIR}
about the Soo Locks, where of course they figured out in 1986
that this is a key transshipment point for coal and other things
in the United States; and they really needed to be repaired and
modernized.  So, this was approved in 1986, but they concluded
that you’d only make back 75 cents on the dollar of what was
invested.  Clearly by Bertrand Russell-type methods, where it’s
all linear, because if you cause 11 million people to be
unemployed, which is what would happen if this thing wasn’t done,
that’s not taken into account.
Similarly, the speaker at this conference from Brooklyn,
showed pictures of the damage from Hurricane Sandy, which were
horrific; I was here in New Jersey when that occurred.  We didn’t
have electricity for about two weeks; it was very damaging, very
devastating.  There were several proposals made in 2009 at a
conference in Manhattan for storm surge barriers.  My favorite
was a five-mile one that went from Sandy Hook in New Jersey to
the Rockaways.  So you go across the whole area before you even
get to Staten Island, and it would have an underground tunnel and
it would have gates that came up; but normally the ocean would be
flowing through.  I think that would cost something like $6
billion.  I can see these silly accountants with their
mathematical methods saying $6 billion, what’s the profit?  Well,
how about saving $80 billion?  $6 billion versus $80 billion in
damage when you get one of these storms.  But nonetheless, they
decided not to build it, and we got what we got with Hurricane
Sandy.  So, because of the way people think in terms of
worshipping money, as opposed to seeing money as a means of
credit generation, or as a means of figuring out how to measure
the cost of an improvement that you need; which will lead
ultimately to the increase in the productivity of your
population.
What does it mean when you say we want our standard of
living to be higher?  Well, that doesn’t mean having seven
television sets in every room as opposed to one, or something
like that.  When you say the standard of living, we mean things
like life expectancy, being free from disease, being better
educated.  How many Americans speak only one language, and maybe
that’s an exaggeration to say that Americans even speak a
language.  Many people now do not have a very good command of the
English language, which is our language in this country.  In
other words, how many Americans know how to read music?  How many
Americans have conducted basic scientific experiments in school;
have ever tried to make a painting or a work of art or write a
poem?  In other words, by standard of living you mean that
there’s a life expectancy which allows for a young person to be
educated to the age of 22, 25, 28; and then that person has an
adult lifespan in which they’re still developing and learning.
You can get human beings developing a quality of genius which
contributes to the future for all mankind.
The only reason for money, is to create a situation where
you can think in those terms.  That the people living 100 and 200
years from now will live longer, be healthier, be better
educated, and be better; which is what you would want.  Who
really wants to be the best of all time?  That means, in effect,
that your life is meaningless, if everything coming after you is
going to be worse than you.  So, that’s the point of economy; but
none of these people was thinking that way at all.  It really
struck me that here we are sitting on potential complete chaos;
you already had two weeks ago, there was a subway that got stuck,
and it didn’t have air conditioning because the power was out.
So you had people packed in this car, and the temperatures were
getting to 100 degrees, it was like a sauna in there.  No one
could move for 45 minutes and they were on the brink — as you
might imagine — of getting completely panicked.  Happily, no one
had a heart attack or other medical disaster, but it does make
people nervous.  A few days ago, another subway car was stalled
out, so people went out the back exit and got down on the track
and started walking to the station.  That’s extremely dangerous.
What happens if you lose all order because people just panic
because they don’t know if they’re going to reach their
destination?  They don’t want to be stuck in a subway for hours
on end.  We’re really on the brink of a situation like that.
People would be prepared to tolerate hardship if they knew that
there was a plan to actually address it.
For example, if President Trump, as a result of his
dialogues with Xi Jinping and President Putin, were to say “Look,
we actually think the Bering Strait tunnel should be built within
the next decade; and we’re going to launch a crash program with
China and Russia to develop high-speed rail corridors across the
United States.  So that Manhattan really should be connected with
Paris; and that’s something that will happen.  I’m going to
initiate that in my Presidency, and it’s something that will be
completed during a future administration.”  Now knowing Trump,
he’d probably say “Well, it has to be done within my first term.”
But at any rate, what would that mean for Manhattan?  What kind
of infrastructure would you want to have in place?  If you had
high-speed rail connecting Washington D.C., Philadelphia,
Manhattan, New York City, and Boston, then you would know that
you might have a free flow of people in the entire northeastern
coastline — this huge metropolitan area — because you’re
talking about taking an hour to travel from D.C. to New York.
So, what does that mean?  What do you want New York City to look
like under those circumstances?  Maybe we have to consider taking
advantage of this massive 22% of New Jersey’s land areas in the
Pine Barrens, and convert part of that into a large city where
part of the population of New York City could be relocated, while
you build something which is actually appropriate.  But no one is
thinking in this way.
Apparently, plans have been made, as we know with the Soo
Locks, plans have been made.  There are engineers who are highly
competent who are aware of these things, who know that there are
limits on the life expectancy of cast iron and things like that.
They may have long life expectancies, but there is a point at
which things begin to corrode and things like that.  So, plans
have been made, plans exist.  But where do you get the funding to
implement it?  What is the magnitude of these plans?  If the
population were aware that such a thing existed, that is was
going to be set into motion, then people would be prepared to put
up with a certain amount of hardship; probably very happily,
knowing that their children were going to live in a much more
beautiful and functioning location than we currently do now.
So, this is the battle.  And I think Matt, what you reported
just at the beginning of this show, in terms of the commitment of
President Trump to work with the Chinese, the commitment of the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce explicitly to collaborate with the Belt
and Road Initiative; this is extremely promising, and should
absolutely be promoted.

OGDEN:  Well, I think those scare stories you have from New
York City should probably encourage people that this is a rather
urgent initiative.  I know from talking to Paul, that you have a
few more scare stories that you might want to share with us.  I’m
going to just let you go through a few of those also.

GALLAGHER:  Well, I’m going to come back to this.  I wanted
to just briefly sketch the fight around Glass-Steagall; but I’m
going to come back to this in particular on the character of the
PPPs — public-private partnerships — as actually “poison pill
policy,” which is really threatening this entire potential for
collaboration, China-U.S. collaboration both on the Belt and
Road, and also starting with the Bering Strait Tunnel.  Also in
regard to infrastructure in North America and infrastructure in
the United States.
But on Glass-Steagall, let me just indicate, you have a very
stark comparison in terms of infrastructure investment between
the United States and China.  In the United States, about $300
billion is invested in infrastructure every year, and that is,
every school, every hospital, every road job, every subdivision’s
new sewer and water and optical fiber, and so forth — that is
absolutely everything, public, private, local, Federal, amounts
to about that much investment.  In China, the four major state
banks which provide the credit for the infrastructure
breakthroughs that have been made in China, those four banks
issue about $140 billion worth of credit annually for high-speed
rail in China alone.  And just that form of advanced
infrastructure and just that public investment by those four
national banks:  the Exim Bank, the China Development Bank, the
other China policy banks, as they’re called.  That investment in
just high-speed rail is half of the total investment made by the
United States — public, private, in every form, on every kind of
infrastructure and every public band-aide that’s put on, and
claimed as infrastructure, every year.
In addition, those banks in China have invested and
committed $300 billion just in the three years since the Belt and
Road Initiative of President Xi began to take off, and that $300
billion invested and committed by those banks is outside China.
So that’s going on simultaneously with the large-scale
investments in completely frontier, including things like maglev
subways, in the major cities of China, and there are many, many,
many major cities in China as people know.
So this is widely in the financial press in the United
States and Europe, the old imperial liberal order defends itself
by saying, “This credit issuance of China can’t possibly be
sustained.  There will be a tremendous, earthshattering collapse
of all of this infrastructure credit, because the banks — it has
dwarfed even what the Federal Reserve has done for the banks
here, and for a good purpose, and it can be sustained; it’ll all
blow up.”  There is a very fundamental difference here, though,
in that China, for the last 20 years has had bank separation; it
has many shadow banks, it has a lot of investment companies
involved in broker-dealers, but they are completely separated
from the both private commercial banking system, which they want
to build up further, and also from this kind of public banking.
So that these banks are not involved in the $550 trillion
derivatives exposure of the banks in London and New York.  These
banks are not involved in securities speculation.  They are able
to handle bankruptcies; they’re able to handle non-performing
loans when they appear in various sectors as the economy
develops.  So, Glass-Steagall, although they don’t call that law
“Glass-Steagall” in China, that bank separation is important to
what they are able to do and the fact that they’ve been doing it
now for 20 years on a level of spending nearly 9% of their GDP on
new infrastructure every year, for more than 20 years.  Compare
that to the United States, which spends about 1.3% of its GDP now
on infrastructure annually. They’ve been able to do that, and
keep it up.
Now, we’ve been fighting for Glass-Steagall in Washington.
It’s really taken on much more of the characteristics of a good
brawl, in the recent weeks.  It’s become a big public fight, for
one thing, where you have on the one hand, especially for the
last two months, three months,  — on the one hand, you have all
the financial press and the major national {Wall Street Journal,
Washington Post, New York Times}, running all kinds of editorials
and op-eds on why Glass-Steagall is not necessary, why it’s
terrible, why it’s completely outdated;  it was only repealed 20
years ago, but it’s completely outdated, practically a relic of
the Middle Ages, why it didn’t have anything to do with the crash
in 2008, and so on and so forth.  You have that going on, you
have think tanks in Washington, like Heritage Foundation and
American Enterprise Institute running whole events which consist
of nothing but examining Glass-Steagall.  I went to one recently,
at the American Enterprise Institute, where six different
speakers were attacking Glass-Steagall.  The only person in the
room who was fighting for Glass-Steagall was me, and I was not
one of the speakers.
So you have these kinds of attacks on it, but also the
sponsors.  The main sponsors of the House bill, Marcy Kaptur (D)
of Ohio, Walter Jones (R) of North Carolina, the Republican main
sponsor, have started to really fight publicly.  They had a
public press conference when they introduced the bill three and a
half months ago with 25 sponsors.  They now have about 55
sponsors as a result of fighting for it publicly since then.
This is a much faster rate of getting sponsors onto the bill than
was the case in the last session, where eventually there were
about 85 sponsors after two years of work.  But in this case, the
week before last they had a congressional briefing for the staffs
of Congressmen throughout the House, about somewhere between 35
and 40 other Congressmen sent their staffs to this briefing, so
it was really quite a packed event in one of the office
buildings, to take notes and report back to their Members of
Congress.  And not only Kaptur and Jones, but also experts from
the AFL-CIO, from the Americans for Financial Reform, from Public
Citizen; Nomi Prins, an independent, former investment banker and
author on banking, independent expert — they all testified.  And
this is causing a tremendous amount of discussion throughout the
House in particular.
On the Senate side, the leading sponsors have all made it a
point to draw out the Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, and make
it clear that what he was advising Donald Trump to do during the
campaign essentially, was not the real Glass-Steagall or anything
like it; but rather Mnuchin’s advice to Trump during his
campaign, was to talk about Glass-Steagall while Mnuchin
privately was designing something which was really Wall Street
deregulation like the bill that recently passed the House.
So the fact that they have really broken Mnuchin down on
this and made him say “No, no, no, I don’t believe in anything
like separating commercial and investment banking.”  This has
also dramatically clarified issues for people in both the Senate
and the House.  And secondly, we have begun to get close to the
mobilization of large organizations, large trade unions,
coalition organizations like Public Citizen, and in this I don’t
mean them endorsing Glass-Steagall, I mean them mobilizing their
hundreds and hundreds of thousands of members to demand this from
Congress.  We’ve come very close to getting to that stage, and in
particular you saw last week a broadcast that Public Citizen ran
on their Facebook page with Rep. Marcy Kaptur, in which they were
motivating and calling on their reportedly 400,000 members to go
after Congress to get this.
So the objective is to get from the 55 sponsors now to 100
— fast.  Because it’s not so important in the Senate, to pile up
a lot of sponsors — there are only a 100 Senators. It’s very
important in the House, when the leadership of both parties is
against Glass-Steagall, which they are: Both the Republican and
the Democratic leadership do not want to see it; the Democratic
leadership wants to cling onto this failed Dodd-Frank Bill, and
pretend that Obama came up with something nice there.  And the
Republican leadership wants to give Wall Street every kind of
deregulation that they’ve ever asked for.
So in that situation, it is crucial to get to 100 sponsors.
This is the stated objective of the major sponsors in the House
and when they do that, then they really want to go public and
start to hold the kind of press conferences and press bugging of
other Members which will get widely covered in the media and
really  make this into a bigger brawl.
So that’s just an indication of some of the things we have
been getting going.  And one of the arguments that Jones and
Kaptur have started to use, for example when they — I didn’t
mention this, but they also went to the Rules Committee when it
was marking up this crazy Republican deregulation bill called the
“Financial CHOICE Act.”  They went to the Rules Committee with an
amendment that said, strike CHOICE Act, take it away, and put
Glass-Steagall reinstatement in its place, and that’s our
amendment.” So they got to make a fight in front of the Rules
Committee on that.
But they’ve begun to make the very coherent argument that
not only did Glass-Steagall’s elimination lead directly to the
crash in 2008; there’s no need to go over this now, it’s the most
obvious thing in the world to most thinking Americans.  It’s like
the guy who ate nothing but McDonalds food for four months and
after four or five months his organs were failing, he was
catastrophically obese, he was near death!  And this is like
saying “there was no connection, there were other factors that
brought this guy into this condition.  It wasn’t the McDonald’s
Big Macs that he was eating.”  That’s what it amounts to to tell
Americans that less than 10 years after getting rid of
Glass-Steagall, the whole banking system blew up simultaneously,
which has never, for all of the major banks to be bankrupt at the
same time, as Ben Bernanke admitted they were, has never happened
in the entire history of the United States.  It took less than 10
years without Glass-Steagall to bring that about.
So they also are now arguing that the period in which
Glass-Steagall was in effect, which is also the period in which
the biggest infrastructure investments in new infrastructure in
the United States were being made, from the ’20s, up through the
end of the ’60s and into the ’70s, that that was a golden era of
productivity in the United States.  We had a banking system then,
which concentrated not only on loaning to  — but you see it in
many examples of the history of that period — concentrating on
making commercial and industrial loans to businesses for
expansion and for participation in major projects.  You don’t
have that kind of a banking system without Glass-Steagall;
instead, you have a banking system which wants to underwrite bond
issues for only the biggest corporations, with which they can
play around with their stock prices and so on.  And it brings the
entire economy down.
It gets us right back — and they’re making now the right
argument and very powerful argument, that if we want to rebuild
the United States, and particularly build new, frontier new
infrastructure in the United States, we have to have a commercial
banking system which is separated from securities broker-dealing
and speculation in the derivatives markets; and which is
concentrating on household lending and commercial and industrial
lending to the companies participating in these great projects.
Now, public-private partnership is, again, back to Treasury
Secretary Mnuchin, the conference that was held in Washington
last week, SelectUSA, which was a conference trying to get
foreign investment in the United States.  So this is the Treasury
Department; you’ve already given the context for this, along with
what Diane reported, in terms of the imminent potential,
absolutely imminent potential for large-scale investment,
particularly from China in an infrastructure build in the United
States.  instead, what the Treasury Secretary went there and
offered was, he said:  We want this kind of investment and
public-private partnerships are critical.
Suffice it to say, never in the United States has a major
infrastructure project or major new element of the infrastructure
of the United States, {never} has such a thing been constructed
with a public-private partnership, let alone by private
investment alone.  The Transcontinental Railroad was by no means
a public-private partnership.  And these things simply don’t
work.  The investors in them want their capital back in 10 years,
and they want 10-12% rates of interest in their invested capital
during that 10 years.  Well, that means they want it back, if
it’s anything major, while the thing is still not finished, and
still not being used to a full extent; and they want to
absolutely rob the public taxpayers whose money is going into
such a project.  It simply cannot work, and it will sabotage
foreign investment in new infrastructure building in the United
States if this method is used.
We have a threadbare public investment in infrastructure
now.  What President Trump has spoken about, the time has run out
for him and for the Congress to implement it.  They have to now
create, immediately, a National Bank on the order of $1-2
trillion in capital, in the way that Alexander Hamilton and his
successors in the American System built such National Banks
starting in 1790, through the 19th century.  They have to create
such a bank {now}, so that there is a credit institution here, to
cooperate with the credit institutions like those in China that I
was discussing earlier.
Otherwise, we are really facing disaster.  I’ll give you an
example:  I went to  a Congressional hearing yesterday and talked
to some of the witnesses who were involved in exactly trying to
organize some of the infrastructure developments that Diane
indicated are so needed in the New York area.  One of them is a
bridge over the Hackensack River near Secaucus, New Jersey,
called the Portal Bridge, which is 108 years old.  It was
designed in the 19th century, completed in 1910.  It has ships go
under it by splitting the bridge, but opening as a drawbridge.
All of the rail traffic, freight and passenger, between Florida
and Massachusetts goes over that bridge — all of it!  And that
bridge, when they open it to get a ship go through, when they try
to close it now, 9 times out 10, according to the fellow who
spoke to me there, 9 times out of 10 it doesn’t close properly,
so that rails don’t align.  And they then send workers out on the
concrete abutment of the bridge with sledgehammers, and they
hammer at the iron trusses of the bridge to get the rails to
align.
All that it would take is for them to be able to unable to
get them to align, once, and as he estimated, that would be a
single-point loss of potentially 10% of U.S. gross domestic
product.  Right there.
And then you have, in the Poe Lock, the potential failure of
the Poe Lock between Lake Superior into Lake Huron, and the whole
Mesabi Iron Range, and all of the ships which are carrying all of
the strategic metals, the iron, the coal coming out of Northern
Minnesota, Ontario, the Mesabi Range, all of that would be
stopped:  another 10% of the gross domestic product of the United
States would be frozen and they estimated up to 11 million jobs
would be lost.
So you say, “well of course, they’re replacing this bridge
at Hackensack,” but actually, they’re not!  They don’t have the
funds!  They have a plan, it’s all worked out, it’s engineered,
but the replacement is not under way.
So you have here, the makings of a movie you could call it,
a suspense thriller: “The Bridge over the Hackensack River.”  But
with 10% of the U.S. economy hanging on the guys banging those
rails back into place, but there is not any funding arranged to
replace that bridge.  And you can multiply that for all the other
things that have to be done.
We’re very far from the frontier, national high-speed rail
network, nuclear desalination plants, the Western water
management systems,  — we’re very far from the frontiers in
space infrastructure that we have to be building. We’re actually
threadbare in terms of just continuing to use, and have an
economy, what we already have.
So there’s no time at all left, for these wonderful
prospects by the discussions with the Chinese now at the highest
level, between President Trump and one of the tope people in the
Chinese government, State Councilor Yang Jiechi, for these
wonderful prospects to be backed up by the institution which
issues credit for the United States, a Hamiltonian bank for
investment.  It must be formed.  It must come out of the Congress
with the drive from the White House in order to get it done.

OGDEN:  As you said, time is running out: We’re five months
now into the Trump administration, and you highlighted the role
of Steve Mnuchin:  I think this continues to be a very bad
element in the Trump administration.  And the kind of support
that Trump gained from his support for Glass-Steagall during the
Presidential election campaign, is something that has now — that
has to become visible.  That has to become a visible, vocal, sort
of element from the population, from the constituency.  And I
just want to put on the screen the URL that we have for the
mobilization that we have for H.R.790: That’s the bill that’s in
the House, the “Return to Prudent Banking Act” —

GALLAGHER:  The Glass-Steagall bill.

OGDEN:  Which was introduced by Marcy Kaptur and Walter
Jones.  This is the return to Glass-Steagall.  As you can see,
this is the website:  http://lpac.co/hr790  And I think that this
goal of reaching 100 cosponsors in a very short amount of time,
is a very tangible goal that we can mobilize for, along with this
vision of, the United States joining the New Silk Road.  But
Paul, as I think you just laid out very clearly, that is
impossible without Glass-Steagall.  You cannot set up the kind of
national credit institutions, the national banking credit
institutions that would channel that kind of joint investment
into this infrastructure in the United States, without this
critical first step of the return to Glass-Steagall.
One thing I wanted to ask you about, Paul, is just the
prognosis on how close we could be to another disastrous blowout
of the trans-Atlantic banking system.  I know Nomi Prins did an
interview a few months ago with you, where she highlighted a few
of these things with the corporate debt bubble.  But that’s
something that Marcy Kaptur cited in her testimony to the Rules
Committee, and I think that element of urgency is also necessary
to put in here.
[https://larouchepac.com/20170319/interview-nomi-prins]

GALLAGHER:  We don’t know how much time, because it’s
impossible to put a finger on a date when a really huge and
increasing unproductive debt bubble, in this case, as
Representative Kaptur identified, the corporate debt bubble in
the United States, when it’s going to blow up.  But, the size of
corporate debt in the United States has doubled in seven years,
from about $7 to about $14 trillion, with really the great
majority of that tremendous debt expansion being used for what
they call “financial engineering” by large companies: Meaning
buying back their own stock, mergers and acquisitions, finding
ways to increase the dividends they give to their stockholders,
increasing their own executive compensation — all of this kind
of financial engineering has used in various years up to 80-85%
of this new corporate debt.
What has really suffered in the process has been business
capital investment and the commercial and industrial lending,
which it depends on. So that that tremendously expanding bubble
has stopped expanding.  And this has been noted  rather suddenly,
by everybody from the IMF to individual bank research teams,
since April of this year, that suddenly that tremendous expansion
has stopped; as happens with an immense bubble that’s about to
explode, and it started to shrink.  And there was a report put
out by UBS bank in Switzerland about two weeks ago which caused a
certain amount of alarm, because they found that what they call
the “credit impulse,” had gone negative in the last six months —
they’re talking globally now — meaning that the second
derivative, the rate of the rate of growth of business lending
around the world had suddenly in the last six months become
negative.  And that is something which virtually always points to
a bubble about to collapse.
This is a very huge one, indeed.  The IMF estimated that if
interest rates were to go up sharply in the United States, 20% of
all the companies in the United States would default.  That’s way
above the rate of defaults on mortgages even at the worst 10
years ago; and the whole thing would come crashing down.
So we need the reorganization of the banking system,
urgently, for that reason, also in order to make the commercial
banking side of it proof against this kind of a blowout.  And so
you don’t have, again, a situation in which the bankruptcy of any
investment bank, let’s say, becomes, almost overnight, the
bankruptcy of every major U.S. based bank as happened in late
September 2008.

OGDEN:  I would say, this is real policy.  This is what
anybody who’s serious is discussing right now.  And the failed
decision by the Democratic Party, for example, to just be the
party of resistance, is increasingly proven to be an increasingly
proven to be very ill-advised policy.  And I think even Sen.
Chris Murphy made some headlines this week where he said:  Look,
none of my constituents are talking about “Russia,” when I go
home.  They’re talking about jobs, drugs, poverty.  They’re
talking about exactly what we’re discussing here!  Hmm, gee,
maybe we shouldn’t be pumping anti-Putin propaganda all day every
day.
So, I wanted to ask Diane, you know, we’ve had some
surprising reports — or surprising for some — from the streets
of Manhattan, where you would assume because of the 24-hour-a-day
anti-Putin propaganda that people are being inundated with, that
this would be the only thing that’s on people’s minds.  But as we
saw, the reality on the ground in New York is the collapsing
infrastructure.  This is what people are actually interested in
talking about.  And we’ve had some rather surprising readings
from the population there in New York and northern New Jersey, in
the recent weeks.

SARE:  Sure.  We’ve had numbers of teams set up by the
roadside in New Jersey or right in the middle of the large
sidewalks in Manhattan, with giant signs saying “Defend Trump.
Stop Here.  Donald can’t do it alone, join LaRouche PAC.  The
U.S. must join the Belt and Road.  Russia-Gate Is a Comey Plot!”
And many people are coming up to our tables and we’re actually
getting a very hot response, much more intense than at any period
since the election, with people coming over saying, “You know, I
thought I was the only one.  The propaganda is so intense, I
don’t dare to say that I supported Trump at my workplace.”
We had a very strong response also in Connecticut, Long
Island, Jersey and Manhattan per se, where we are getting this
type of response.
And I also just wanted to add, in light of this crazy
continuing of the story about the alleged Russian hacking which
somehow caused people to change their mind on how they were
voting.  Remember we did just did have the special election for
Congress, in South Carolina and Georgia, where the Democratic
candidates, one of whom I think spent $33 million or some
absolutely obscene amount of money, and still lost the election.
And it’s not because the Republican candidates were so brilliant;
it’s because the population has really had it and this is where,
if President Trump moves in a very big way, very public way to
embrace the Chinese offer, to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act so
we can have a sane banking system, and to launch some of these
infrastructure projects on a Federal basis, you would just see an
incredible upsurge of support.  And most of this vicious,
including assassination threats and so forth, these attacks on
the President, would simply evaporate and the people that persist
would be shown for the paid agents of the British Empire and
George Soros that they are.

OGDEN:  I think it was clearly said by Helga LaRouche:  We
have a very significant victory to claim, I think both in terms
of the further consolidation of this idea that the United States
should join the New Silk Road, and the fact that these
discussions are now going on at the very highest level between
the United States and China.  But also in terms of this fight for
Glass-Steagall and as Paul said, this is something that LaRouche
PAC has been directly involved in, on the forefront of leading
for year — 2008, 2009?  Lyndon LaRouche’s call at that time was
for a complete bankruptcy reorganization of the economy.  It was
initially the Homeowners and Bank Protection Act and that became
this idea of the Four Laws.

GALLAGHER: August 2007 was the Homeowners and Bank
Protection Act.

OGDEN:  That’s right. So now we’re coming up on 10 years!  I
think that’s widely recognized, the leadership that the LaRouche
movement has played, including on Capitol Hill from the sponsors
of this legislation.  So this decision now to mobilize and to
really enter into a brawl, the fight is on on that front and we
have a responsibility to pour as much as we can, from around the
country, in mobilizing on that front, too.
I think that’s a good conclusion for our webcast here,
today.  Thank you Diane, for joining us from New York, and thank
you very much Paul for joining me here.

GALLAGHER: A pleasure.

OGDEN:  Stay tuned to larouchepac.com and we’ll talk to you
soon.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter og formand for Schiller Instituttet, indspillede denne videotale den 16. juni til en Schiller Institut-konference i Detroit, USA, den 17. juni, 2017.

Vi befinder os stadigvæk i den menneskelige races udviklings barndom. Jeg mener, vi er meget heldige at leve og kunne forme fremtiden på dette tidspunkt; men jeg mener, at det mest afgørende aspekt for, at hele dette perspektiv skal lykkes, er: Få det amerikansk-kinesiske samarbejde om de Nye Silkevej til at fungere i den umiddelbart forestående periode.  

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Rusland og Kina er i færd med at optrappe deres indsats for at udvikle en af Jordens sidste, fremskudte grænser for menneskeheden – Arktis’ udstrakte vidder med et rigt resursegrundlag. … Vil USA, under præsident Trump, gå med i denne proces? Svaret på dette spørgsmål vil spille en afgørende rolle i det større spørgsmål, der i betydelig grad vil afgøre menneskehedens skæbne – nemlig, om Trump fuldt ud vil integrere USA i Bælte & Vej Initiativet (BVI); den Nye Silkevejsproces, der først blev fremmet af Lyndon og Helga LaRouche i 1990’erne, og som nu er blevet fuldt ud vedtaget og implementeret af Kinas præsident Xi Jinping, på vegne af alle Jordens nationer.

Af Mike Billington, EIR. 

12. juni, 2017 – Rusland og Kina er i færd med at optrappe deres indsats for at udvikle en af Jordens sidste, fremskudte grænser for menneskeheden – Arktis’ udstrakte vidder med et rigt resursegrundlag. Alt imens Ruslands enorme kystlinje langs det Arktiske Hav er den primære base for deres operationer, så er Kina stærkt engageret i byggeriet af den infrastruktur, der er nødvendig for at gøre udnyttelsen af disse resurser mulig.

Vil USA, under præsident Trump, gå med i denne proces? Svaret på dette spørgsmål vil spille en afgørende rolle i det større spørgsmål, der i betydelig grad vil afgøre menneskehedens skæbne – nemlig, om Trump fuldt ud vil integrere USA i Bælte & Vej Initiativet (BVI); den Nye Silkevejsproces, der først blev fremmet af Lyndon og Helga LaRouche i 1990’erne, og som nu er blevet fuldt ud vedtaget og implementeret af Kinas præsident Xi Jinping, på vegne af alle Jordens nationer.

En betydelig, fysisk drivkraft bag dette initiativ er den kendsgerning, at Nordøstpassagen – ruten fra Asien til Europa via det Arktiske Hav – i stigende grad er blevet sejlbar på grund af den arktiske iskappes tilbagetrækning. Alt imens den ’grønne’ bevægelse er hurtig til at proklamere, at (ikkeeksisterende) menneskeskabt klimaforandring er ansvarlig for denne, de arktiske iskappes vigen, så har den russiske regering og russiske videnskabsfolk (blandt andre) bevist, at dette er et cyklisk fænomen uden forbindelse til kulstof – og som faktisk er til stor fordel for menneskeheden. Ikke alene fremmes handel af iskappens tilbagetrækning, men resurserne i Arktis gøres også mere tilgængelige – hvis verden vælger at drage fordel af de nye omstændigheder.

Ét Bælte; én Vej; én Cirkel

Hu Angang, en førende, kinesisk økonom ved Tsinghua Universitet, opfandt begrebet, »Én Cirkel« – hvorved refereres til indkredsningen af hele den eurasiske landmasse gennem at fuldstændiggøre Nordøstpassagen – som føjes til politikken med »Ét Bælte, én Vej, som initieredes af præsident Xi Jinping i 2013. Det Nye, Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte, der forbinder Asien, Europa og Afrika over land, og det 21. Århundredes Maritime Silkevej, der forbinder Eurasien, Afrika og de amerikanske kontinenter over hav, kan nu få tilslutning af »Én Cirkel«, den arktiske rute, der reducerer sejltiden fra Østasien til Europa med mere end 30 %.

Ud over sejltiden, så omfatter de resurser, der venter på at blive udnyttet – blot venter på, at menneskeracen skal udvikler teknologierne, der skal til for at muliggøre denne udnyttelse i et barsk miljø, på en måde, der er acceptabel for menneskelig beboelse – enorme aflejringer af guld og andre mineraler, så vel som også skønsmæssigt 30 % af verdens endnu ikke-opdaget naturgas og 13 % af ikke-opdaget olie, iflg. U.S. Geological Survey.

Alt imens spørgsmålene om suverænitet er relevante for resurserne nær grænserne af de arktiske nationer (Rusland, USA, Norge, Finland, Sverige og Danmark), så er det udstrakte, arktiske territorium uden for territoriale farvande og er således udelukkende underkastet FN’s Havretskonvention (UNCLOS), der kun giver mulighed for fælles udvikling af resurserne under konsensusaftaler. Arktisk Råd med de seks arktiske nationer, og med andre til stede som observatører, inkl. Kina, styrer denne proces. Kina anser sig selv for at være en »nær-arktisk« stat og påpeger, at området har »den af hele menneskeheden arvede rigdom«. Det seneste topmøde i Arktisk Råd, som finder sted hvert andet år, var i Juneau, Alaska, i marts, hvor Finland overtog formandsskabet for den nuværende toårs-periode.

På vejen til at besøge præsident Trump i Florida i april stoppede præsident Xi Jinping op i Finland for at diskutere Finlands rolle i Bælte & Vej, men han arrangerede også, at Finland repræsenterede Kina i Arktisk Råds møder.

Alt imens Rådets overvejelser hidtil har undgået bestræbelser på at introducere geopolitiske konflikter, så har nogle medlemmer af USA’s Kongres brugt den kendsgerning, at Rusland har sikkerhedsinteresser langs sin udstrakte arktiske grænse, til at kræve, at USA udarbejder militære kapaciteter til at udfordre russisk dominans i området. Dette er absurd i betragtning af, at USA alt i alt har én fungerende isbryder, mens Rusland har 40 og er i færd med at bygge eller bestille (primært fra Sydkorea) byggeriet af yderligere flere dusin.

Netop i denne uge overværede præsident Putin navngivningen af verdens største isbryder-fragtskib til flydende naturgas (LNG) i Skt. Petersborg, bygget til Rusland af Sydkoreas Daewoo Skibsbygger- og Havingeniørselskab. Tydeligvis ikke tiltænkt militære formål, vil skibet blive anvendt i Yamal-projektet på den arktiske Yamal-halvø, ved Uralbjergenes nordlige ende. Dette område har enorme naturgasdepoter, der udvindes af et konsortium, som omfatter Ruslands Novatek, Frankrigs Total og Kinas Nationale Olieselskab. Skibet er det mest moderne af højklasse-isbrydere (dvs. forstærket) og vil blive flagskibet i en flåde af 15 lignende skibe. Yamal-projektet tilsigter at producere 16,5 million tons LNG om året.

Ved skibsdåben sagde Putin:

»Yamal-projektet banede vejen for den arktiske rute. Det vil bidrage til udviklingen af energiindustrien i hele verden, udover Rusland og Europa … Yamal-LNG spiller en vigtig rolle i udviklingen af den Nordlige Sejlrute og i den yderligere undersøgelse og udforskning af Arktis. Jeg regner med den succesfulde lancering af nye, lovende, storstilede projekter sammen med vore franske, kinesiske og udenlandske partnere, så vel som også vores voksende samarbejde i det ekstremt rige, arktiske område.«

Rusland er også i færd med at bygge en Nordlig Breddegrads-jernbane, der forbinder Yamal med Ural-områderne mod syd og nationens transportårer, der vil sikre, at områdets mineralresurser kan transporteres hele året rundt.

I en anden, stor udviklingszone, nemlig Arkhangelsk-regionen syd for Murmansk nær ved den norske og finske grænse, planlægger Kinas Poly Group Corp. et udviklingsprojekt til $5,5 mia., og som omfatter en ny dybvandshavn og en jernbaneforbindelse mod syd. Det er planen at udskibe kul, gødning, olie og andre råvarer fra Sibirien og Ural-området via Arktis, og dernæst mod syd via jernbane. Igor Orlov, Arkhangelsks guvernør, skønner, at projektet vil skabe 40.000 jobs, når det står færdigt i 2023.

En langfristet plan for den russiske udvikling af arktiske faciliteter er at afprøve strukturer, der kræves for menneskelige forposter på Månen og Mars.

Amerikansk samarbejde

Et møde på ministerplan i Arktisk Råd i Fairbanks, Alaska, den 11. maj, forudsås at blive omstridt af dem, der forsøger at sabotere præsident Trumps bestræbelser på at etablere samarbejdende og venligtsindede relationer med Rusland. Disse forudsigelser viste sig at være forgæves. Blandt resultaterne af mødet, som USA præsiderede, var underskrivelsen af en bindende aftale om at fremme samarbejde omkring videnskabelig forskning i området, og som vil sikre, at videnskabsfolk og deres udstyr og data kan strømme mere frit hen over internationale grænser inden for Arktis. En Arktisk Skibstrafik Database er blevet oprettet, mens et nyt Arktisk Økonomisk Råd og en Specialstyrke for Forbedret Forbundethed er i færd med at blive operationelle.

David Balton, USA’s viceassisterende udenrigsminister for hav og fiskeri, og som repræsenterede USA ved mødet, modgik de neokonservatives drømme om konfrontation med Rusland og sagde, at Arktis forbliver stabilt og fredeligt.

»I Arktisk Råd har vi et mødested, der har gjort det godt mht. at promovere internationalt samarbejde blandt alle otte nationer, inklusive Rusland«, sagde Balton og tilføjede, at »Uanset, hvilke andre vanskeligheder, der måtte eksistere mellem USA, Rusland og andre medlemmer af Arktisk Råd, og mellem Rusland i relation til andre dele af verden, så manifesterer de sig ikke i Arktisk Råds verden. Det er fortsat en meget samarbejdende organisation.«

Wilson-centrets Arktisk Cirkel Forum er vært for en konference i Washington 21.-22. juni, med titlen, »USA og Rusland i Arktis«. Balton vil være taler sammen med mange andre fra USA, Rusland og andre nationer i Arktisk Råd. Det er netop denne form for samarbejde – hvor vi forcerer udviklingens fremskudte grænser og den menneskelige videns fremskudte grænser – der, ligesom den Nye Silkevej, er i færd med at bevæge verden ind i et nyt paradigme for fred gennem udvikling.

Denne artikel publiceredes første gang i EIR, 16. juni, 2017. Artiklen er ikke tidligere udgivet på dansk.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 19. juni, 2017 – I løbet af den seneste uge har korrupte senatorer banket nye sanktioner igennem mod Rusland (og Iran), der i realiteten var rettet imod at fjerne præsident Trumps forrettighed til at afslutte de ulovlige sanktioner, der blev gennemtvunget af Barack Obama gennem en eksekutiv ordre, baseret på løgne mht. russisk indblanding i de amerikanske valg. Søndag nedskød dernæst amerikanske styrker, der (ulovligt) er deployeret i Syrien, et syrisk kampbombefly, der var engageret i et angreb på ISIS, hvilket fremprovokerede en barsk respons fra Rusland, der gik ud på, at alle yderligere sådanne ulovlige, udenlandske angreb på den suveræne stat Syriens styrker ville løbe risikoen for russiske forsvarsoperationer.

Hvem gav ordre til dette angreb? Det Russiske Forsvarsministerium har erklæret, at aftalen med USA mht. dekonfliktion i militære operationer, er suspenderet, og de har krævet, at »USA’s Kommando gennemfører en omhyggelig efterforskning og rapporterer om sine resultater og de trufne forholdsregler«.

Sådanne handlinger, der udgør en krigstrussel mellem verdens to, førende atommagter, er sindssyge, rent militært. Man erindre sig, at det amerikanske missilangreb på den syriske luftbase i april var baseret på de falske efterretningsrapporter om, at den syriske regering havde brugt kemiske våben, uden noget militært eller strategisk formål, mod sine egne borgere.

Den farvede revolution, der nu udspilles imod præsident Trump, og som involverer falsk britisk efterretning, der kanaliseres via britiske aktiver i de amerikanske efterretningstjenester, Kongressen, massemedierne og elementer i det amerikanske militær, må standses. I modsat fald vil verden blive kastet tilbage til det økonomiske kaos og den strategiske katastrofe, der blev orkestreret under præsidenterne Bush og Obama.

I UK er Imperiets magt udsat for en alvorlig prøve i sin hjembase, og amerikanere gør klogt i at følge det nøje. Tory-premierminister Theresa May og de faktiske Tory’er i Tony Blairs »Nye Labour«-fraktion af Labour-partiet trues med at blive droppet i kølvandet på Mays chokerende tab af et flertal i de nylige valg, som dernæst efterfulgtes af den forfærdelige brand i et socialt højhus-boligbyggeri, der kan have kostet så mange som 100 uskyldige menneskeliv. Kilder i UK fortæller EIR, at May-regeringen lyver om dødstallet i håb om, at raseriet vil lægge sig, men også, fordi enhver hændelse med flere end 100 døde iflg. loven skal efterforskes som en kriminalsag. Den »gamle« Labour-kandidat, Jeremy Corbyn – hvis program omfatter en afslutning af krigsførelse for regimeskifte, en infrastrukturfond for at kickstarte økonomien, en afslutning af de russiske og iranske sanktioner, udvikling af atomkraft og deltagelse i den Nye Silkevej – ses i stigende grad som en sandsynlig vinder i ethvert nyt valg, alt imens Tory’ernes skrumpning i stigende grad indikerer, at de vil blive nødt til at udskrive et nyvalg.

Husk, at det var Tony Blair, der skabte det første »uærlige dossier«, der opfandt falske efterretninger om, at Irak havde masseødelæggelsesvåben, og som lancerede Irakkrigen, spredningen af terrorisme og flygtningekatastrofen. Det aktuelle kupforsøg imod Trump blev lanceret af »uærlige dossier nr. 2«, som blev forfattet af MI6-agent Christopher Steele, der opfandt historier om Trump og Rusland, som skulle spredes via deres netværk i USA, en operation, der nu har nået niveauet for ’ansporing til mord’.

Hidtil har Putin-regeringen nægtet at lade sig provokere ind i en konfrontationspolitik med den nye administration i Washington, hverken som respons til sanktionerne eller til angrebene i Syrien. Udenrigsminister Lavrov refererede, efter nedskydningen af det syriske fly, til »deeskaleringszonerne« implementeret af Rusland, Iran og Tyrkiet i Syrien, som »en af mulighederne for i fællesskab at gå fremefter« og tilføjede: »Vi opfordrer alle til at undgå ensidige handlinger, respektere syrisk suverænitet og gå med i vores fælles arbejde, der er aftalt med regeringen for den Syriske Arabiske Republik.«

Det er USA’s borgeres ansvar at erkende og identificere de kriminelle personer og institutioner, der forsøger at ødelægge regeringen og vor nations suverænitet. Kina har udsendt førende politiske ledere og industriledere til USA i denne uge, efter invitation fra Trump-administrationen, for at drøfte samarbejde om Bælte & Vej Initiativet – den Nye Silkevej – omkring byggeri af infrastruktur, investering i industri og landbrug og samarbejde med amerikansk industri om udviklingsnationer i Asien, Afrika og Sydamerika. Det er denne, USA’s deltagelse i det nye paradigme for fremskridt og samarbejde for alle nationer og folkeslag, der nu er på plads under kinesisk og russiske lederskab, som det henfaldne Britiske Imperiums og dets Wall Street-aktivers dinosaurer er desperate for at ødelægge. Deres dødbringende kupforsøg må stoppes, og det amerikanske folk befriet til at bidrage til menneskehedens fremtid.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump, 9. juni, 2017. (Whitehouse Photo)

19. juni, 2017 – I en åbningstale ved BRIKS-konferencen for udenrigsministre i dag, understregede den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping, at samarbejde mellem BRIKS-nationerne »er en innovation, der transcenderer det gamle mønster med politiske og militære alliancer og forfølger partnerskaber snarere end alliancer«. BRIKS-organisationen overgår »den gamle tankegang med nulsumsspil« og »praktiserer i stedet et nyt koncept for gensidig fordel og win-win-samarbejde«. Han understreger, at BRIKS-mekanismerne for samarbejde meget godt imødekommer de fem medlemsnationers behov.

Den kinesiske leder understregede også, at »BRIKS-samarbejdsmekanismen har eksisteret i ti år, og BRIKS-medlemmer har fokuseret på udvikling, som ikke alene kommer befolkningerne i de fem lande til gode, men også giver verden en opskrift på at adressere fødevare- og sikkerhedsproblemer … BRIKS-lande er et fællesskab for fælles interesser og fremtid«. Han opfordrede medlemsnationerne til at »udvikle win-win-ånden mest muligt« og arbejde sammen for at bidrage til organisationens udvikling. Han opfordrede dem til at prioritere udvikling og til at »følge multilateralisme og de grundlæggende normer for internationale relationer. Når vi blot tænker og arbejder hen imod det samme mål, vil BRIKS-samarbejdet blive mere produktivt og indvarsle et nyt, gyldent årti«, forudsagde han.

I sine bemærkninger ved det samme møde sagde den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yi, at Kina »er rede til at lægge skulder til den vigtige mission med at åbne op for BRIKS-samarbejdets andet årti. Kina er klar til at diskutere BRIKS-Plus samarbejdsmønstre og former«. Forespurgt om dem, der giver udtryk for tvivl om BRIKS’ fremtid, svarede Wang, »der er nogle tvivlende røster. Jeg tror, dette viser, at det internationale samfund er opmærksomt på BRIKS. Med hensyn til, om BRIKS er ved at svinde eller ikke spiller en vigtigt rolle, så mener Kina, at den vigtige tilgang er den, at se er at tro«. Han sagde, at alle lande burde erkende, at BRIKS yder et betydeligt bidrag til global, økonomisk udvikling, og at landenes økonomier viser stærkt »momentum og stærk vitalitet«.

Foto: Kinas præsident holdt åbningstalen ved BRIKS-topmødet for udenrigsministre.      

Nyhedsorientering maj/juni 2017

18. juni, 2017 – Schiller Instituttets 4 mand store delegation fik skabt en del opmærksomhed ved at synge tostemmig kanons, som fik mange mennesker til at stoppe op, og vi uddelte Schiller Instituttets Nyhedsorientering, der handler om den historiske konference i Beijing, “Bælte & Vej Forum”. På vores plakat stod der, »Fremtiden ligger i Kinas Bælte & Vej«, med et billede af infrastruktur, der binder verden sammen.

Vi deltog i debatmøder, hvor vi kunne stille relevante spørgsmål. Vi uddelte over 900 eksemplarer af Nyhedsorientering og kom i samtale direkte på stedet med mere end halvdelen af de mennesker, der tog vores materiale. Vi har bl.a. talt med folk, der har været i Kina og er meget begejstret for den udvikling, der er i gang dér. Mange af de mennesker, vi talte med, kunne huske os fra før. En dame kom op til os og sagde, »Det er jo jer, der har talt om Silkevejen, før det blev til Kinas politik«. Hun var meget imponeret over, at Kina har vedtaget den Nye Silkevej, og hun tog vores materiale med stor interesse. En bornholmer stoppede op, da han kendte os fra før og i mange år havde støttet os. Han var glad over at se, at hans støtte har båret frugt.

Vores sang fik mange mennesker til at komme op til os. Mange stoppede op for at lytte, fordi, som nogle sagde, det varmede deres hjerte. Flere klappede og andre kom op til os for at rose os for at synge så dejligt.

Den første dag var det hovedsaglig sang og uddeling; de andre dage deltog vi i flere debatter og blandede os med spørgsmål.

På Folkemødets anden dag deltog Schiller Instituttets repræsentanter i et politisk møde, der fandt sted i Akademikernes Hus, organiseret af DJØF’erne. Emnet var »Verdensordenen efter Trump og Brexit«, hvor Mogens Lykketoft (S), Storbritanniens ambassadør til Danmark Dominic Schroeder og USA’s fungerende ambassadør Laura Lochman talte.
Diskussionen var meget baseret på den forandring, der er i gang omkring den kendsgerning, at Donald Trump er blevet valgt til præsident, hvilket Mogens Lykketoft ikke var så glad for. Mogens udtrykte mest sin bekymring for, at USA har trukket sig ud af Paris-klimaaftalen, og at Trump ikke vil samarbejde med Kina. Vi benyttede muligheden for at stille nogle spørgsmål.

Feride på Folkemødet 2017

Feride I. Gillesberg fik stillet første spørgsmål, hvor hun bl.a. sagde:

»For en måned siden var der ’Bælte & Vej Forummet’ i Beijing, hvor USA havde en særlig udsending, Matthew Pottinger.  Konferencen skulle konsolidere Kinas politik for Bælte & Vej, der omfatter hele verden; ikke kun Kina. Bælte & Vej er allerede nu omkring 30 gange større en Marshallplanen (for Europa efter krigen). Den amerikanske præsident er åben over for samarbejde omkring det. Det andet, vigtige spørgsmål er samarbejdet med Rusland … De amerikanske medier har kørt en kampagne for at begå karaktermord på præsidenten, lige siden han blev valgt, i bl.a. New York Times, og med et teaterstykke, ’Julius Cæsar’, der spilles i New York Central Park, og som går ud på at myrde den amerikanske præsident. Der er et billede i omløb, hvor præsidenten har fået skåret hovedet af … Scenen er sat til at myrde præsidenten. Det gamle paradigme med Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, briterne, MI6 og de britiske imperialister vil have en unipolær verden. Den nye præsident er åben over for en multipolær verden … Medierne skulle jo netop dække, at det, præsidenten vil, er en positiv, og ikke en negativ ting.«

Derefter blev der taget tre andre spørgsmål, hvor Lissie Brobjerg fra Schiller Instituttet kom til som den sidste. Hun understregede følgende i sit indlæg:
»Lyndon LaRouche siger, at kuppet mod Trump vil føre til generel krig; hvad skal vi gøre for at forhindre det, således at Trump kan opbygge USA og skabe samarbejde med Rusland og forhindre en verdenskrig og skabe fred?«.

Lissie Folkemødet 2017

Ordstyrerne prøvede at underspille de to kontroversielle kommentarer. Den fungerende britiske ambassadør sagde straks, at han ikke har tænkt sig at svare på 90 % af de ting, der blev taget op i diskussionen.
Mogens Lykketoft, der stod og sagde, han er bekymret over Trumps forhold til Kina, ignorerede totalt, hvad der blev taget op; han skiftede emnet tilbage til den gamle verden med Paris-aftalen og klimaforandring.
Vi delte på dette debatmøde vores Nyhedsorientering ud til flere deltagere, der gerne vil læse vores materiale.

Kort efter fik vi mulighed for at tale på »speakers corner«, der er et åbent forum til korte taler, som Bornholms Tidende organiserer, så andre holdninger end de officielle også kan komme til udtryk.
Feride I. Gillesberg fik ordet og benyttede chancen til at fortælle om den historiske konference, »Bælte & Vej Forum«, der fandt sted i Beijing.

»Vesten burde deltage i det paradigmeskifte, som »Bælte & Vej Initiativet« repræsenterer for udvikling af hele verden. Det er kampen mellem på den ene side dem, der vil have en unipolær verden og dem, der er for en multipolær verden. Obama, Hillary, MI6 og det Britiske Imperium kæmper for at bevare den gamle, unipolære verdensorden. Det er årsagen til angrebene på den amerikanske præsident, som skal stoppes. I stedet skal vi tilslutte os det nye paradigme.«
Feride sluttede talen med at synge den kinesiske sang, »Kangding Lovesong«. Flere af tilhørerne ville gerne læse Nyhedsorientering om Bælte & Vej Forum, og en mand kom senere op til os for at sige, hvor bevægende den kinesiske sang var.

Schiller Instituttet fik mulighed for at deltage i en anden debat med Rasmus Jarlov (Konservativ; formand for Folketingets Forsvarsudvalg), Nick Hækkerup (næstformand, Socialdemokratiet) og Marie Krarup (Dansk Folkeparti) om »Truslen fra Øst«. Der var 80 mennesker til stede. De to førstnævnte mente, at Ruslands Putin var en trussel, og at han havde manipuleret det amerikanske valg, hvilket sidstnævnte ikke mente. Alle mente dog, at der var brug for øget forsvar.

Lissie Brobjerg fik det første spørgsmål:

»Hej, jeg er Lissie fra Schiller Instituttet. Trump siger, at han vil samarbejde med Rusland, da han ønsker at forhindre en atomkrig, og han sagde til et NATO-møde, at han ikke betragter Rusland som sin nummer 1 fjende; skulle vi ikke hellere samarbejde med Rusland i stedet for at opspinde historier om, at de vil erobre verden? Det var jo faktisk Obama, som støttede neonazister i Ukraine og væltede regeringen«.

Dette skabte tumult, hvorefter Lissie refererede til Stepan Bandera-folkene (i Ukraine). Marie Krarup tog Lissies spørgsmål op. Bagefter uddelte vi vores Nyhedsorientering til deltagerne, der var interesseret i at læse vores materiale.

Christian Folkemøde 2017

Christian Olesen fra Schiller Instituttet talte efter debatten med Rasmus Jarlov, der under debatten havde beskrevet begivenhederne i Ukraine fra en meget propagandistisk vinkel. Christian sagde til Jarlov, at han havde et meget unuanceret syn på Ukraine, hvortil han svarede, »Det kan man altid sige, når man ikke har nogen argumenter«! Til det svarede Christian, at de søde og venlige demonstranter, Jarlov havde beskrevet, havde brændt folk levende i Odessa. Det fik Jarlov til at vende ryggen til og skynde sig væk.

Til en debat ved Femerns venner, hvor man diskuterede fremtidsperspektiverne for tunnelen (Femern Bælt-forbindelsen), fik Lissie Brobjerg det første spørgsmål:

»Hvad tænker I om ideen om, at Danmark går med i Kinas Nye Silkevej? De vil forbinde hele verden med store infrastrukturprojekter, højhastighedstog, tunneller og broer, og projektet er nu 30 gange større end Marshallplanen.«

Responsen fra den ene taler var, at hvis Kina havde stået for tunnellen, havde den allerede været færdig i går, men at, i Danmark har vi dog en demokratisk proces, hvilket han foretrækker. Flere mennesker kom bagefter op til Lissie for at få en Nyhedsorientering, inklusive ordstyreren og den anden taler, der glad modtog en Nyhedsorientering.

Feride diskuterer

Den tredje dag på Folkemødet begyndte med et debatmøde, der fandt sted i Enhedslistens telt over emnet, »Russerne kommer«. Talerne var lektor ved Forsvarsakademiet Peter Viggo Mortensen, forfatter Jens Jørgen Nielsen og Nikolaj Villumsen (Enhedslisten). Man diskuterede faren for krig med russerne. Jens Jørgen forsøgte at give deltagerne en idé om, hvordan russerne tænker, mens de andre analyserede Rusland baseret på, at Rusland agerer ud fra stormagtspolitiske interesser.

Feride intervenerede blandt andet ved kort at fortælle om den historiske konference, der fandt sted i Beijing, og om, at Europa ikke ’skyder sig selv i foden’. Rusland har tilsluttet sig et samarbejde med Kina omkring Bælte & Vej Initiativet, som Vesten aktivt burde være en del af. Feride tog spørgsmålet om NATO’s rolle op, om det ikke er en forældet institution, og at man skal forstå, at Rusland har set, hvad der er sket med de nationer, hvor man har lavet regimeskifte, der har efterladt lande i kaos og elendighed; og at russerne ser Vestens politik, med regimeskifte i Ukraine og udvidelsen af NATO, i denne sammenhæng.

Lissie fik nummer to spørgsmål og sagde:

»Trump har gjort det klart, at han vil samarbejde med Rusland, og der har allerede været en koordinering med russerne. Effekten har dog været, at New York Times og britiske medier skriver om en mulig afsættelse af eller mord på Trump, og flere Hollywood-skuespillere har været ude og fremvise Trump med et afskåret hoved eller er kommet med voldelige udtalelser imod ham. Ligger faren for 3. Verdenskrig ikke nærmere i faren for, at briterne/ Obama/ Hillary og FBI skal lykkes med at få ham afsat, da de ønsker krig med Rusland?«

Den sidste del af debatten handlede om, hvordan man kunne løse konflikten mellem Rusland og Vesten. Peter Viggo Mortensen indrømmede blandt andet, at politikken for regimeskifte har slået fejl, og at den Nye Silkevej er en naturlig udvikling, som lande vil gå med til. Den anden del af diskussion handlede om løsninger. Da fik Christian det sidste spørgsmål og pointerede blandt andet, at en del af løsningen ligger i, at man begynder at tale ærligt omkring, hvad Rusland er og gør, bekyndende med, at Rusland ikke invaderede Ukraine.

I en debat hos Informationen, »Will Trump Last the Entire Presidential 4 Year Period?«, talte den tidligere amerikanske ambassadør til Danmark, Rufus Gifford, om sandsynligheden for, at Trump kunne blive afsat gennem en rigsretssag (impeachment) gennem det 25. Forfatningstillæg, eller evt. selv gå af. Han mente ikke, at det var sandsynligt, omend han ønskede det. Hvis en rigsretssag skal være mulig, kunne det være pga. ’forhindring af udøvelse af retten’ (obstruction of Justice), men ellers skulle man bruge kræfterne på demokraternes mærkesager. 300 mennesker deltog, det foregik i centrum og den generelle konsensus var, at Trump er forrykt. Lissie kom op til ambassadøren bagefter og sagde, at Lyndon LaRouche havde sagt, at, hvis Comey og Co. lykkedes med et kup mod Trump, ville det føre til generel krig, og at briterne var efter Trump, fordi han vil samarbejde med Rusland, medens Obama derimod forsøgte at starte en atomkrig med Rusland. Han skyndte sig blot væk efter at han blev noget chokeret over det, Lissie sagde.

Vi intervenerede også i et andet møde med titlen »Atomkraft, ja tak! Hvor skal fremtidens energi komme fra?« i Dansk Erhvervs telt. I panelet deltog en repræsentant for Greenpeace, en repræsentant for Århus Universitet og Villumsen fra Liberal Alliance. Kun hr. Villumsen mente, at man måtte søge nye energikilder inden for nye teknologier og understregede, at vindmølle-fanatikerne var religiøse og foruden ræsonnement. Én fra publikum spurgte ind til thorium-reaktorer, hvor Villumsen havde en god respons, mens ham fra Greenpeace ævlede om, at det var dyrt og tog lang tid. Lissie stillede det sidste spørgsmål, hvor hun sagde:

»Nu har vi en situation i verden, hvor man, siden Kinas Bælte & Vej og BRIKS-projektet, er begyndt at bygge en masse atomkraftværker; i Sydafrika har man planlagt 11, Bolivia skal have et atomkraftværk, Kina planlægger at udvinde helium-3 på Månen til fusionsbrændsel, så verdens fremtid er faktisk atomkraft. Skal vi ikke hellere gå med dér, da energigennemstrømningstætheden er meget højere, og med 30 tønder olie har man, hvad der svarer til få gram fusionskraft. Desuden har Henrik Svensmark (astrofysiker) lavet forskning, som viser, at solpletter og kosmisk stråling skaber klimaforandring.«

Repræsentanten fra Greenpeace sagde blot, at ingen tager Svensmark seriøst, og at 97 % af alle klimaforskere er enige. Villumsen svarede positivt og udtrykte respekt for, at nogen tør tage diskussionen op i et sådant forum.
Bagefter delte vi ud til alle, og mange var interesserede.

Alt i alt var vores tilstedeværelse på Folkemødet på Bornholm en fantastisk mulighed for at nå ud til så mange borgere, politikere, akademikere og eksperter med vores ideer, der dækker politik og fremtidens verden med Bælte & Vej Initiativet.

– Feride I. Gillesberg; Lissie Brobjerg; Christian Olesen.

Titelfoto: Feride I. Gillesberg i diskussion med en borger på Folkemødet. På plakaten står der, »Fremtiden ligger i Kinas Bælte & Vej«.

14. juni, 2017 – I en debatartikel i Xinhua i dag, med titlen, »Bælte & Vej åbner mere rum for at skabe et Kina-Latinamerika/Caribien-fællesskab for en fælles skæbne«, minder forfatterne Liu Lianxiang og Zhao Hui om, at den gamle Maritime Silkevej omfattede en rute fra Asien til den mexicanske havn Acapulco, via de berømte Manila-galleons-søfarere, eller Nao.

I dag, bemærker de, »udstrækker Kinas foreslåede 21. Århundredes Maritime Silkevej sig til Latinamerika og Caribien«, et område, der er ivrig efter at deltage i projektet. Handel mellem de to områder er vokset, tilføjer de, og efterlader meget lidt tvivl om, at Kina og Latinamerika »er naturlige partnere«. Latinamerika er ivrig efter at komme væk fra at være eksportør af råmaterialer, og Kina kan bidrage mere aktivt til dette, siger forfatterne, »idet de ikke alene kan være formidler af den fælles udviklingsfilosofi … men også formidle sine avancerede teknologiske og finansielle resurser«. De påpeger, at de infrastrukturprojekter, Kina foreslår – jernbaner, flytransport, hovedveje, vandveje, kommunikation, osv., – »langt overgår de kinesiske nao-søfareres forestillinger, der begrænsede sig til den maritime forbindelse«.

Forfatterne understreger, at, hvis den spanske munk og søfarer, Andres de Urdaneta, der opdagede Manila-Acapulco-ruten i 1565, »havde opgivet over for det voldsomme hav og uforudsigeligheden af denne lange og anstrengende ekspedition«, ville handelsruten, der blomstrede i 250 år mellem Asien og Latinamerika, »aldrig have fået fremgang … I dag må Kina og Latinamerika udvise samme mod og hengivenhed som de opdagelsesrejsende fra det 16. århundrede« for at overvinde de protektionistiske vinde, der blæser visse steder, »og således holde kursen på vejen til global udvikling«.

Foto: Manila-Acapulco Galleons-mindesmærket på Plaza Mexico i Intramuros, Manila.

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/kinas-nye-silkevej-larouches-nye-okonomiske-verdensorden-vil-vi-fa-larouchenomics

v/ formand Tom Gillesberg.

Video og lydfil.

Velkommen til dette fortsatte drama, som vi forhåbentlig vil se tilbage på om et par år og sige:

»Det var dengang, verden var på kanten af at udrydde og udradere sig selv; men lige pludselig, så lyttede menneskeheden til de fantastiske mennesker, de ikke ville lytte til før; så lyttede man til de vise ord fra Lyndon LaRouche og Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Schiller Instituttet og Tom Gillesberg og Jacques Cheminade. Det her er folk, som igennem årtier havde kæmpet for at få vendt udviklingen og få verden sat på ret kurs. Og vi troede aldrig, det ville ske. Og lige pludselig, så begyndte man at lytte; og ikke nok med, at man lyttede til det her, man begyndte faktisk at gøre det.

Det var først kineserne, der for alvor så lyset og begyndte at gøre noget ved det. Men da først Kina satte sig i spidsen for dette udviklingstog, for den Nye Silkevej, så gik der ikke lang tid, så kom resten af menneskeheden med om bord, og så skete der noget. Og selv i de tidligere håbløse områder, som f.eks. New York City, hvor det var et mareridt, hvor man knap nok kunne bevæge sig fra A til B, fordi der var så mange folk, der skulle transporteres, og hele infrastrukturen var 100 år gammel; jamen, så i løbet af bare ganske få år med kinesisk hjælp, så lykkedes det faktisk at bygge en helt ny, fantastisk infrastruktur.

Og Donald Trump, som man forsøgte at gøre grin med, som man forsøgte at få afsat, som man forsøgte at få fjernet med alle midler; jamen, det viste sig, at han faktisk indgik et strategisk partnerskab med Kina, med Rusland og blev til en af USA’s rigtig store præsidenter.«

Og det er det, vi må håbe er fortællingen om ganske kort, for det er det potentiale, der er i tiden. Igen, man forsøger ved hjælp af ’fake news’, dvs., de veletablerede mediekanaler i den vestlige verden, hele tiden at have en pseudodagsorden; hele tiden at få folk fikseret på det ting, der ikke er de store spørgsmål, mens de virkelige, revolutionerende, afgørende begivenheder, der sker i verden rundt omkring, jamen, dem forsøger man ikke at snakke om.

Altså, hvor mange har læst i danske medier, en udførlig rapport fra Bælte & Vej Forummet, 14.-15. maj, (i Beijing); denne verdenshistoriske begivenhed, hvor 130 nationer var til stede, og hvor Bælte & Vej Initiativet så at sige gik ind i næste fase, og hvor sågar USA, som under Obama havde gjort alt for at sabotere dette udviklingsmomentum, faktisk gik med om bord; at man havde Pottinger som Trumps repræsentant; at man nu har etableret en samarbejdsgruppe, USA’s Bælte & Vej Samarbejdsgruppe, som skal få integreret USA i Bælte & Vej politikken.

Tilmed i Danmark; Karen Ellemann blev sendt som Lars Løkkes personlige repræsentant: Hvor mange danskere tror I ved det? At Danmark var med på Bælte & Vej Forummet? 1 procent; 1 promille? 5 Mennesker ud af fem millioner? Det er meget få, for der har ikke været en lyd om det. Intet. Og det er ligesom måden, man forsøger at behandle det her på; man forsøger ligesom fanatisk at sige, i den gamle optik, i den gamle verden, at der ikke er sket noget; verden er, som den altid har været. …

Det vigtigste aspekt af ideen om USA’s tilslutning til Bælte & Vej-initiativet vil imidlertid være at inspirere hele befolkningen med håb for fremtiden, en bedre fremtid for de kommende generationer, noget, der er gået tabt i løbet af de seneste fem årtier. Det ville ligeledes demonstrere, at præsident Trumps løfte om atter at gøre Amerika stort ikke står i modsætning til andre landes interesser, men at et sådant win-win-samarbejde tværtimod kan bevæge hele verden ind i en ny æra af menneskelig civilisation. Hvis de to største økonomier i verden ville samarbejde på denne måde, vil der ikke være noget problem på planeten, der ikke kunne løses.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

5. juni, 2017 – Kina udskiber mere end 2.821,75 tons ris til FN’s Verdensfødevareprogram (VFP) i Somalia via den Maritime Silkevej, rapporterede Sixi Qu, Kinas VFP-repræsentant, den 2. juni. Xinhua kalder denne beslutning for »et konkret resultat i kølvandet på Kinas forpligtende engagement over for fødevarehjælp under Bælte & Vej Forum, der afholdtes i maj i år«.

Halvdelen af Somalias befolkning, inklusive 363.000 akut underernærede børn under fem år, har behov for akut fødevarehjælp. Risen vil give fødevarehjælp til 18 regioner i Somalia, der er ramt af tørke. Sammen med Kinas bidrag af ris, durra (sorghum) og Plumpy Sup (en næringsrig puré) er der tilstrækkeligt med mad til at ernære henved 223.500 mennesker i fire måneder, rapporterer Xinhua.

»VFP er meget taknemmelig over for Kinas regering for dens mangeårige engagement over for humanitær nødhjælp, som i betydelig grad vil styrke vores indsats for at levere vital fødevarehjælp til sårbare mennesker på randen af hungersnød. Fødevarer fra Kina vil nu tage rejsen ad den Maritime Silkevej for at støtte somaliere, der er ramt af tørke«, sagde Sixi.

Kina udvider ligeledes sit samarbejde med Etiopien, Somalias nabo på Afrikas Horn, efter Bælte & Vej Forum. Meles Alem, talsperson for Etiopiens Udenrigsministerium, rapporterede den 1, juni, at PM Hailemariam Desalegn i maj måned mødtes med folk fra 17 store, kinesiske selskaber med en anmodning om, at også de investerede i Etiopien. Kinesiske firmaer har investeret $4 mia. i Etiopien i løbet af de seneste to årtier.

Efter han havde deltaget i og talt på Bælte & Vej Forum for Internationalt Samarbejde i Beijing, besøgte Desalegn flere kinesiske provinser, underskrev en låneaftale til $250 mio. til en industripark og underskrev formelt Etiopiens medlemskab i AIIB med håbet om at fremme lån til diverse planlagte infrastrukturprojekter«, sagde Alem.

Foto: I det tørkeramte Somalia på Afrikas Horn trues millioner af mennesker i hele landet af hungersnød.

6. juni, 2017 – Indiens premierminister Narendra Modi, der talte på en paneldiskussion på Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum (SPIEF), der fandt sted 1.-3. juni, sagde, at den aktuelle, gensidigt forbundne verden og lande – hvilket betød Kina og Indien – kunne have nogle uoverensstemmelser og nogle samarbejdsområder. Press Trust of India (PTI) rapporterede hans kommentarer den 3. juni.

Modi blev spurgt, om Indiens opposition til Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ reflekterer dyb uoverensstemmelse i deres relation. Den indiske PM, der var på scenen sammen med Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin og den østrigske kansler og Moldovas præsident, sagde: »Det er rigtigt, at vi har en grænsetvist med Kina. Men, i de seneste 40 år er der ikke affyret ét eneste projektil pga. af grænsestridigheder.«

Modis udtalelse om både Indiens og Kinas – de to mest folkerige nationer på Jorden – evne til at holde tingene i det rette perspektiv, blev hilst velkommen i Beijing. »Vi har noteret den positive bemærkning fra den indiske premierminister Narendra Modi om den kinesisk-indiske (situation). Vi hilser dette velkommen«, bemærkede talsperson for det Kinesiske Udenrigsministerium, Hua Chunying, under sin faste mediebriefing den 5. juni, rapporterer The Hindu. »At de to, store lande, Kina og Indien, opretholder solide og støtte, bilaterale relationer, er af stor betydning.«

The Hindu rapporterede ligeledes 5. juni, at Kinas assisterende udenrigsminister, Li Huilai, havde hilst velkommen de mange møder mellem den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping og premierminister Modi og sagde, at »sunde relationer« mellem Kina og Indien ville bidrage »til fred og stabilitet i Asien, så vel som også i Verden.«

Foto: Sammen på scenen på SPEIF: (fra venstre) Ruslands Putin, Indiens Modi, Kinas Xi.    

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 5. juni, 2017 – I denne uge vil vi få endnu en runde at se i det, der har været et nu næsten et år langt hysteri à la McCarthy-perioden, med de »liberale« og de »liberale medier« i USA versus Donald Trumps plan om at genoprette fundamentale samarbejdsrelationer med Rusland – og, med Kina.

En ledende, Demokratisk blodhund, senator Mark Warner fra Efterretningskomiteen, indrømmede søndag på Tv, at der ikke findes beviser for, at Trump skulle have indgået et »aftalt spil« med russere: »der er blot en masse røg«, sagde senator Warner. Så de »liberale« kaster sig over anklager mod Trump for at »hindre retfærdighedens gang« ved at fyre FBI’s direktør.

Det rette spørgsmål blev stillet til amerikanerne af den russiske præsident Putin i dennes interview til NBC-TV, hvor han gentagne gange blev anklaget for at undergrave og forsøge at kontrollere USA:

»Er I alle sammen gået fra forstanden?«

Efter næsten et årti med økonomisk fiasko, og sågar fortvivlelse i nogle dele af den amerikanske befolkning, ønsker de »liberale« nu at genoplive J. Edgar Hoover og senator Joe McCarthy for at finde undskyldninger?

Siden de amerikanske bankers og nationaløkonomiens krak for ni år siden, er der i verden vokset en ny, økonomisk orden frem, med infrastrukturudvikling, kredit til højteknologisk industriudvikling, videnskab og udforskning af rummet. Denne orden udvides omkring Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, eller den Nye Silkevejs økonomiske vækst og forbundethed; Og Rusland er fuldt engageret i det. Det samme er asiatiske, afrikanske og sydamerikanske lande, inklusive Amerikas hovedallierede i Asien, Japan og Sydkorea.

Hvis amerikanerne ønsker deres økonomi genopbygget og ønsker atter at blive en førende industrimagt og førende magt inden for videnskab og rumforskning – så må de have samarbejde med disse initiativer for økonomisk fremskridt. De må have det samarbejde, som præsident Trump har indledt med præsident Xi Jinpings Kina.

Og der finder en i stigende grad reel, international kamp sted, imod ISIS/al-Qaeda-terrorisme og massive blodsudgydelse fra samme ophav, i hvilken kamp Putins Rusland er en hoveddrivkraft.

USA’s økonomiske politik må ændres: Glass/Steagall-loven må genindføres, og der må skabes en statslig nationalbank i Hamiltons tradition; og rumforskning må atter gøres til en storslået, national mission.

Men samarbejdsrelationer med Kina og Rusland, og med den Nye Silkevejs nye system, er afgørende for, at USA kan genoprette sine egne, førende kapaciteter. De, der ønsker, at præsidenten, af disse grunde, skal afsættes ved en rigsret – og nogle, der endda ønsker, han skal myrdes – må midlertidigt være gået fra forstanden.

Foto: Den russiske præsident Putins interview til NBC.

4. juni, 2017 – Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ (BVI) er måske ikke blot i færd med at omringe det skeptiske Tyskland med europæiske lande, der samarbejder med BVI, men er også i færd med at bane en indfaldsvej til Tyskland gennem Mittelstand, den berømte, tyske teknologiske motor bestående af små og mellemstore virksomheder (SMV’er).

Den kinesiske PM Li Keqiang lovede at promovere samarbejde mellem Kinas og Tysklands SMV’er, under en tale den 1. juni i Berlin, på Kina-Tyskland Forum: »At sammen skabe innovation«. Li lovede også at styrke beskyttelsen af intellektuel ejendomsret (IER) – immaterialret. »Under processen med samarbejde om innovation beskytter Kina strengt foretagenders IER og kræver ikke obligatorisk teknologioverførsel«, sagde Li.

Li sagde, at Tyskland har henved 1.300 selskaber, der er »skjulte mestre«, og at Kina har hundredetusindevis af højteknologiske SMV’er, og at »Kina er rede til at arbejde sammen med Tyskland om at etablere en regeringsmekanisme for samarbejde mellem SMV’er og promovering af netværk og grupper af innovationssamarbejde«, lyder det i en rapport fra Xinhua.

Xinhua rapporterede, »Tysk innovationselite priser kinesisk PM’s tale«. Li opfordrede til, at de to lande optrapper deres bestræbelser for samvirke mellem deres udviklingsstrategier, nemlig, Kinas innovationsdrevne udviklingsstrategi, »Fremstillet i Kina 2025« og »Internet plus«, og så Tysklands »Industri 4.0« og High-Tech-Strategi, og også optrapper deres lancering af pilotprojekter.

Præsidenten for Tysklands Nationale Akademi for Videnskab og Ingeniørarbejde, Dieter Spath, sagde til Xinhua, at de to landes producenter hidtil havde ligget i konkurrence; nu håber han, at de vil samarbejde og opgradere den industrielle kæde. Dette er Kinas plan.

Direktøren for EH Doducta, Manfred Jagiella, kaldte Lis bemærkninger om immaterialret (IER) for »imponerende« og »en hjørnesten for bilateralt samarbejde«. Dette blev sekunderet af Stefan Magerstedt, chef for innovation ved firmaet KHS. Heiner Lang fra Bosch Rexroth AG sagde, Lis tale opmuntrede til at fortsætte med at gøre investeringer i Kina.

Wang Zi, adm. dir. for Berlinafdelingen af Kinas innovations-inkubator Techcode, blev opmuntret af den kinesiske regerings løfte om at tilskrive innovative SMV’er stor betydning. Gong Xin, direktør for internationalt salg ved Tysklands FemtoFiberTec GmbH, sagde, han mener, at samarbejdet – nu mellem store firmaer – vil udvides til græsrodsforetagender i de to lande.

Foto: Den kinesiske PM Li Keqiang og den tyske kansler Angela Merkel forlader sammen det Tysk-Kinesiske Forum, ’Innovation Gemeinsam Gestalten’ i Berlin, torsdag (1. juni).

3. juni, 2017 – Spanien er rede til at udvide samarbejde med Kina under Bælte & Vej-Initiativet (BVI), især inden for infrastruktur, sagde Spaniens handelsminister Marisa Poncela den 1. juni på forummet i Madrid, »Forretningsmuligheder for spanske selskaber under Bælte & Vej-Initiativet«.

BVI samler tæt på 60 % af verdens befolkning og tilbyder enorme muligheder, sagde Poncela. »Alle Handelsministeriets redskaber er til rådighed for dette initiativ … Spanien har fire handelskontorer i hele Kina, og som analyserer, hvordan projekter udføres, og hvordan, de samarbejder med vore selskaber og institutioner gennem vore redskaber til at hjælpe dem med at fremlæge det bedste tilbud.«

Spanien ønsker ikke blot en landforbindelse gennem jernbaner, men også en maritim forbindelse, sagde handelsministeren: »vi ønsker, at den maritime forbindelse mellem Kina og Europa skal ende i Spanien, i vore havne, Barcelona, Valencia, i alle vore havne ved Middelhavet, eller længere endnu, i vort land.«

Madrid-forummet, der er arrangeret i fællesskab af Det Kinesiske Handels- og Investeringskammer i Spanien (CCINCE) og den Spanske Konføderation af Erhvervsorganisationer (CEOE), tiltrak henved 200 repræsentanter fra betydningsfulde institutioner og foretagender i Kina og Spanien. Vicepræsident for CEOE, Juan Pablo Lazaro, sagde, »Bælte & Vej-Initiativet har vakt stor interesse blandt vore erhvervsorganisationer og vore medlemmer og partnere pga. af dets ambition og store format.«

Han sagde, at dette infrastruktur- og kommunikationsnetværk langs med BVI’s strækning med logistiske og industrielle centre er en stor mulighed for at integrere asiatiske markeder og promovere Eurasiens, Kinas og EU’s økonomiske udvikling. Lazaro sagde, spanske iværksættere »har hilst initiativet velkommen med stor interesse i betragtning af, at vi kan bidrage med vores management-kapacitet og vores viden inden for områderne«. Spanien har en afgørende position inden for logistik i Europa, Latinamerika og Nordafrika, sagde han og fremhævede Madrid som et logistisk omdrejningspunkt.

Foto: Spaniens handelsminister, Marisa Poncela.

v/ Tom Gillesberg.

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/trump-melder-usa-us-af-paris-aftale-vil-han-melde-usa-ind-i-russisk-kinesisk-patnerskab

Matthew Ogden: Temaet for aftenens webcast er: USA må afgjort tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej. Dette er den strategisk vigtigste ting, der kan ske; alt andet må ses som underordnet dette mål. Vi havde lejlighed til at tale med Lyndon og Helga LaRouche for et par timer siden, og vi har lidt nyheder; nogle bemærkninger fra Helga Zepp-LaRouche, som jeg gerne vil oplæse som indledning. Hun sagde, at verden hastigt bevæger sig i en meget ny og dynamisk retning. Momentum er meget klart. Tag Bælt & Vej Forum, der fandt sted for kun to uger siden, og tag dernæst Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum, der finder sted netop i disse dage; naturligvis med den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin som vært. Ved denne lejlighed er den særlige gæst premierminister Modi fra Indien, og vi ser en fortsat integration mellem Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationen (SCO), Bælt & Vej, den Nye Silkevej og alle disse eurasiske, økonomiske udviklings- og integrationsorganisationer.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde, vi må nu optrappe vores kampagne her i USA, for, at USA kan blive fuldt ud engageret og involveret i denne nye dynamik med win-win-samarbejde og gensidigt fordelagtige udviklingsprojekter. Hun sagde, at vi må holde fokus på dette spørgsmål; ikke lade os distrahere af noget som helst andet. Verden har totalt forandret sig. Vi befinder os i en fuldstændig ny epoke, en ny æra for civilisationen.

Hun sagde, vi i nyhederne netop har set, i de sidste 24 timer, at præsident Trump har sagt nej til denne Paris-klimaaftale, og det er en god ting, sagde hun. For det (klimaaftalen) er ikke baseret på videnskab. Jo, vi ved godt, at klimaet ændrer sig, men det er ikke baseret på menneskeskabt, global opvarmning. Spørgsmålet er så, hvad er årsagen? Paris-aftalen var baseret på ideologi, sagde hun; den var baseret på ideologien om grænser for vækst, befolkningsreduktion, undertrykkelse af udvikling – især i den tredje verden.[1] Sæt som modsætning den Nye Silkevej, Bælt & Vej-initiativet, der kommer fra Kina, og som bringer hårdt tiltrængt udvikling til den tredje verden, til Afrika og andre steder; som disse områder ikke har haft adgang til i generationer. Man må se, at dette er en virkelig bølge af optimisme.

Hun sagde, hold tingene optimistisk, bliv ved at være optimistiske. Det kunstige diskussionsmiljø i USA, der er skabt af nyhedsmedierne, er ren propaganda, sagde hun. De falske nyheder er ikke kun de negative rapporter – det har vi set masser af. Men, de falske nyheder er i realiteten, at man ikke rapporterer de positive og optimistiske udviklinger, der finder sted i hele verden, og som især kommer via Bælt & Vej Forum.

Vi havde lejlighed til at få en ti minutter lang briefing fra fr. Helga Zepp-LaRouche i går, under en telefonkonference med hendes medarbejdere (i USA). Det var en virkelig vidunderlig og optimistisk refleksion tilbage over betydningen og virkningen af dette Bælt & Vej Forum, som hun havde mulighed for at deltage i personligt. Vi har fremstillet en slags video til jer her, hvor vi har brugt nogle billeder af Helgas besøg til Kina, og noget baggrundsmateriale, som I vil få at høre her, som gennemgår LaRouche-bevægelsens 40-50 år lange historie for denne nye, internationale, økonomiske orden, der nu er ved at blive til virkelighed. Her kommer denne ti minutter lange video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ekspcgnkoY

(Her følger resten af diskussionen på engelsk. Helgas briefing (videoen) er oversat til dansk, her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=19877 )        

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I just wanted to make sure that
you get a first impression from me from my trip, because I think
the worst mistake we could make would be to respond to the
absolutely incredible psywar propaganda coming from the U.S.
mainstream media and the neoliberal media in Europe, like Spiegel
Online with its Chief Editor piece which was really out of this
way! It is very clear that people who are primarily relying on
such media have a completely, totally, 100% wrong idea of what
the reality is of what’s going on.  And we should really get that
out of our heads and not try to swim within the fishbowl of an
artificially created environment. Because, from my standpoint,
the world looks very, very different.
First of all, I said this already, and I reiterate it:  With
the Belt and Road Forum, the world has dramatically consolidated
the beginning of the new era, and I don’t think at all, that
short of World War III, this is going to go away, because the
majority of the world is moving in a completely liberated way.
And first of all, this was the highest level conference I ever
participated in.  There were 28 head of state, speaking one after
the other, and obviously, the speech by Xi Jinping was absolutely
outstanding, and whoever gas time to listen to it, should really
do it, because it was a very, very Confucian speech, which set
the tone for the two-day conference in a very clear way. So,
please listen to it when you have some time.
I think the way people have to understand what is going on,
you have to really think what this organization, and Lyn in
particular did for the last almost 50 years.  The first time when
Lyn in 1971 recognized what the significance of the dismantling
of the Bretton Woods system was, and then all the many, many
things we did in the last over 40 years: Lyn coming back from the
Iraq Ba’ath Party celebration in 1975, when he proposed the IDB
as an International Development Bank to foster a new world
economic order; the fact that we, for one year, campaigned with
this IDB proposal which then basically became part of the
Colombo, Sri Lanka resolution of the Non-Aligned Movement in ’76.
Then, in the end of the ’70s, when we worked with Indira Gandhi
on a 40-year development plan for India.  Already in ’76, we
published a whole book about the industrialization of Africa.  We
worked with Mexican President José López Portillo on “Operation
Juárez.”  We put out a 50-year Pacific Basic development plan.
Lyn had already in ’75 had proposed Oasis Plan.  And then
naturally when the [Berlin] Wall came down and the Soviet Union
disintegrated, we proposed the Productive Triangle and the
Eurasian Land-Bridge.
And all of these proposals!  And just think of the many,
many activities we did, conferences all over five continents, all
of this was on the level of ideas, on the level of program — but
only after Xi Jinping put the New Silk Road on the agenda in
2013, and in the four-years of breathtaking developments of the
One Belt, One Road initiative since, these ideas are becoming
realized!  And the genie is out of the bottle!
When you have now the Bi-Oceanic Railway discussion and the
tunnels and bridges connecting the Atlantic and Pacific around
Latin America, you have all these railways now being opened up in
Africa — this is unprecedented!  This was not done by the IMF or
the World Bank.  They suppressed it with the conditionalities.
But with the AIIB, the New Development Bank, the New Silk Road
Fund, the Maritime Silk Road Fund, the direct investment of the
Chinese Ex-Im Bank, the China state bank, all of these projects
are now proceeding, and they have completely changed the attitude
and the self-confidence of all participating countries.
Now, the way people in China look at President Trump is
absolutely different than what the media are trying to say.  They
are very positive about Trump, in the same way that people in
Russia think that Trump is somebody you can absolutely have a
decent relationship with, and that is reality. And forget the
media!  Forget these whores in the press who are really just
prostitutes for the British Empire.  Don’t pay any attention to
what they say, and don’t allow the people you are talking with to
do that, either.
When Trump promised $1 trillion infrastructure investments,
this was the right thing, and we put out the right program saying
the United States must join the Silk Road and that {should be our
focus}, and nothing else.  Everything else should be a subsumed
aspect of that.  This is the strategically important thing, and
the fact that the head of the China Investment Corp. Ding Xuedong
said it’s not $1 trillion but $8 trillion, is what the United
States needs, is absolutely on the mark; and you know it yourself
from the conditions of the roads and the infrastructure in all of
the United States.
So the fact that the same organization has now set up their
office in New York, advising Chinese investors how to invest in
the United States, and vice versa, how U.S. investors can invest
in China; the fact that the Chinese are invited to participate in
this infrastructure conference in June; all of this is absolutely
going in the right direction.
What happened in the Belt and Road Forum and the many
meetings I had afterwards — after all, I spent two full weeks in
Beijing, in Nanjing, in Shanghai  but it’s the fact that in the
many interviews, many quotes, and the general view is that we
were treated with the highest respect possible.  I mean, people
are fully aware of Lyn’s significance as a theoretician of
physical economy, his ideas are highly respected; and people
treated me as we should be treated, namely as people who have
devoted their entire lives to the common good of humanity.  And
this is absolutely in stark contrast to the shitty behavior that
we are normally getting from the neo-liberals in the
trans-Atlantic region.
And you should understand that what the attack on Trump is
supposed to do:  Is to make — it’s so difficult for him to focus
on the positive aspect, and there are quite some many of them,
including his working relationship with Russia and China, which
is strategically the most important. So that, basically, he has
to defend himself instead, and everybody thinks they have to
spend all the time to defend themselves.
So don’t fall for it.  The idea that we are losing is
completely off! Mankind is on the winning track and we have to
pull the American population to create the kind of ferment so
that the implementation of the infrastructure program as a first
step is on the agenda, and on everybody’s mind and nothing else.
Even if Europe is still in the grip of the EU Commission, I
mean, if Merkel wants to be the leader of the free West, —
forget it.  Macron just had a very excellent meeting with Putin,
defining a cordial relationship with Russia! This is not what
Merkel and Obama have been cooking up, when Obama addressed the
church day of the Protestant church, but Merkel is pretty
isolated.
Just look around in Europe:  Macron send Raffarin, the
former Prime Minister, to the Belt and Road Forum who gave an
excellent speech, why China and France have to work together.
Gentiloni from Italy said China and Italy will work together on
the development of Africa.  All the East Europeans, Tsipras [from
Greece], Serbia, Hungary, Czechia’s Zeman, Orban [Hungary] — all
of these people were absolutely enthusiastic on the Belt and Road
Initiative.  And now even Germany, it shows that the German
industry is actually really getting it, that their interest is to
work on joint ventures in third countries together with China. So
I think even Germany will change.
I have the strong conviction that by the end of this year,
it will look completely different, because the development
perspective is so contagious, that I think all the efforts by the
British Empire to somehow throw in a monkey wrench will not work!
So take the winning perspective, take the high ground, think
strategically:  And realize that what is happening in reality, in
many, many development projects around the world, is what this
organization has been fighting for, for almost half a century.
I just wanted to tell you that, because the worst thing we
could do, is look at it from inside the United States, from
within the box, when the whole world has moved out of the box
decisively, with the Belt and Road Forum, which is not going to
be stopped by anything.  And that is my view I wanted to
communicate.
[end video: https://larouchepac.com/20170602/silk-road-
strategy-helga-larouche-report-belt-and-road-forum
OGDEN:  As you could hear, Helga LaRouche was extremely
optimistic after spending an entire two weeks in China; and her
point could not be more clear.  The United States must join the
Silk Road; this must be our focus and nothing else.  “Everything
else should be a subsumed aspect of that,” she said; “this is the
strategically most important thing.”
Helga also had, among many media interviews, you could see
some pictures there from her interview on the “Dialogue with Yang
Rui” show, which was a very widely watched and wonderful
interview.  She had many TV interviews, many other press
interviews.  Here’s an interview that just came out; this is from
{Shanghai Daily}, and I’m going to read a few excerpts from that
interview as well.  I think is just really a nice overview.  As
you can see, the title is “Belt and Road Initiative Instills Hope
for Peace and Development Among Nations.” You can see the picture
of Helga LaRouche there.  The editor’s note begins the article;
it says,
“Helga Zepp-LaRouche visited Shanghai for the first time in
the summer of 1971. In 1977 she married American economist Lyndon
LaRouche, and the couple have since worked together on
development plans for a just new world economic order.”  That was
the overview that we saw in the video just now.  It goes on:
“Zepp-LaRouche founded the Schiller Institute in 1984, a
think tank devoted to the realization of these plans and a
renaissance and a dialogue of classical cultures.
“She is an expert in European humanist philosophy and
poetry, Confucius, and history.
“After attending the recent Belt and Road Forum in Beijing,
she visited Shanghai, where {Shanghai Daily} reporter Wan Lixin
interviewed her.”
These are going to be a few excerpts from Helga LaRouche’s
answers to the questions that were posed to her in this {Shanghai
Daily} interview.
So, Helga said: “I think the Belt and Road initiative
signifies a revolutionary move to a new epoch of civilization.
The idea of having a win-win cooperation among nations is the
first time that a concrete concept has been offered to overcome
geopolitics.
“Since geopolitics was the cause of the two world wars, I
think it is a completely new paradigm of thinking where an idea
proposed by one country has the national interest basically in
coherence with the interests of humanity as a whole. This has
never happened.
“This has instilled tremendous hope among developing nations
that they have the chance to overcome poverty and
underdevelopment. And I think this is an initiative that will
grow until all the continents are connected through
infrastructure and development.”  (That’s the idea of the World
Land-Bridge.)
“We have always made the point that for this new Silk Road
to succeed in the tradition of the old Silk Road, which was also
an exchange of ideas and cultures, not just products and
technology, you have to combine economic cooperation with
dialogue between cultures. This dialogue must be on the highest
level, so each culture has to present example of the best of
their culture, like Confucianism, Italian renaissance, the German
classical period, and present the best works of arts in music and
poetry, paintings and other forms of art.
“Our experience is that when people get into contact for the
first time with expression of such high culture from another
culture, they are surprised by its beauty. And this beauty then
opens the heart and souls of the people. And this is the best
medicine against chauvinism, xenophobia, and prejudice, and it
opens the way for the love of other cultures.
“This is in conformity with Confucian teaching that all
activity must be combined with strengthening of love for the
mankind, because without that cultural component, that new Silk
Road will not flourish.”
“I think it a great honor for me to participate in this Belt
and Road Forum, and I was deeply impressed by the speech of
President Xi Jinping. Among all participants I spoke with there
is consensus that we are actively participating in the shaping of
history. All this means that China is right now leading the world
in terms of providing the perspective for the future.
“I think this has been recognized by many countries in Latin
America, in Africa, in Asia, and even some European countries
start to recognize it is in their best interests to ally with
that initiative. So I think it has made clear that China is the
only country right now that offers a positive perspective to
overcome the strategic bottleneck of our present times.”
“Here I would like to quote from Pope Paul VI who said that
‘Development is the new name for peace.'”
“I was first in Shanghai 46 years ago in 1971, after
traveling on a cargo ship. Although it was not the best time to
be in China, it had awoken my love for China.
“I think the Chinese people are much too modest. They should
feel more confident about what they have accomplished. They have
created the biggest miracle of the world, even bigger than the
post-war German economic miracle. They should be very proud to be
Chinese.”
So again, that was from an interview in {Shanghai Daily}
called “Belt and Road Initiative Instills Hope for Peace and
Development Among Nations.”
[http://www.shanghaidaily.com/opinion/chinese-perspectives/
Belt-and-Road-initiative-instills-hope-for-peace-and-development
-among-nations/shdaily.shtml]
Obviously, this is just a wonderfully optimistic view of the
world right now.  I think it gives you a sense of what Helga
LaRouche gained as an eyewitness and participant on the ground at
the Belt and Road Forum.  It’s what Americans are not being
given; we’re not being given this kind of optimistic perspective
of what the future of mankind could be, and it’s very much within
our grasp.  The kind of pride that she said Chinese should feel
about being Chinese, this is something that Americans desperately
to access again; this pride of being American.
With that kind of overview and our very clear sense of what
our mission is, that the United States should join this New
Paradigm of win-win development, I think maybe Ben can give us a
little bit of a sense of what it’s going to take to get the
United States back on this path to development.  It’s been 50
years since the assassination of John F Kennedy and the departure
of the United States from this sense of development and progress.
This embrace of this Malthusianism, zero-growth kind of
population control ideology, which has brought us to the point of
just miserable economic suffering.

BENJAMIN DENISTON:  As you mentioned in the beginning,
Trump’s announcement that the U.S. is going to pull out of this
Paris climate change agreement is a really big deal; this is
excellent.  To my knowledge, unless I’m missing something, since
this whole climate change scare got going, this is the first U.S.
President who has actually kicked back against this.  It started
really back with George H.W. Bush; Bill Clinton went along with
it.  Despite the narrative of it being a Republican versus
Democrat issue, the George W Bush administration was fully on
board; they went with all this junk.  Bio-fuels, global warming,
they pushed it fully.  Obama pushed it further.  Now, we finally
have a President who is actually kicking back against this.  This
is huge, this important; Trump definitely deserves respect and
support for fighting against this thing.  As many of our viewers
know, this is a huge global lobby that’s been pushing this thing
from the top down for decades now.
I thought it was also important that Trump highlighted the
economic effects of this.  Some people just say the science says
this, or the science says that; but there’s also the reality of
what is the effect on the people.  What’s the effect on your
citizens of going with these policies?  They say CO2 is terrible,
it’s a pollutant, etc.; therefore, we need to go with all these
wonderful, clean energy solutions.  They paint this rosy picture,
when in fact, that has devastating effects on the real-life
conditions of our population.  This whole Green energy fraud is
ridiculous.  Given that this issue is now coming up, I think it’s
worth just highlighting a couple of points on this.
If you want to talk about the reduction in CO2 emissions and
the Green energy stuff, I still think it’s worth looking at what
Germany is facing right now in terms of their energy prices.  If
you want a case study in what wind and solar and exiting nuclear
and getting rid of coal and natural gas does; in Germany, just
between 2004 and 2015, their energy prices went up 50% from $0.23
cents a kilowatt-hour in U.S. values, to $0.35 cents a
kilowatt-hour.  They were already in 2004, twice the rate we pay
in the U.S. on average.  And over that ten-year period, in the
context of a lot of this nuclear exit, CO2-reduction stuff, they
went up another 50% to now three times what Americans pay on
average for energy, just as an example of what that means for
real life conditions.  This has been driving industries to leave
Germany, so it has an effect on industry, other forms of economic
activity as well.
In 2013, just one subsidy — this major surcharge they added
to the average German’s bill to pay for wind and solar — was the
equivalent of $0.07 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour.  That alone is
60% of what we pay on average for the U.S.; just for one subsidy,
just for wind and solar.
In the context of all the propaganda that gets put out, it’s
worth emphasizing the idea that we can transition to some
wonderful world powered by wind, solar electricity is a face;
it’s a fraud.  We need to go in the other direction.  To the
degree necessary, use coal, use natural gas, whatever; but move
towards more advanced higher forms of energy like fission and
nuclear fusion — that’s really the future.  The future is
increasing energy use per capita, increasing the use of higher
qualities of energy per capita, not reduction.
I also think it’s worth in the context of the debate
re-erupting right now, people are freaking out about Trump doing
this; I think it’s worth re-examining the issue of CO2.  What
does CO2 do?  It’s now officially labelled a pollutant by the
EPA.  There are all these horror stories about extreme weather,
climate change, etc.
I just want to highlight one graphic [Fig. 1].  Tons could
be said, but I think it’s just worth it for the education of our
audience and the real facts on the issue, it’s worth just
highlighting this study, comparing literally dozens of different
computer models on the effects of CO2 increase with the reality
that’s happened just in the last couple of decades.  So, what
these people did was to take 32 different computer models, all
claiming what the effects of CO2 increase were going to do to the
global temperature.  Those are all the variety of small dotted
lines rising up in the graph there.  The thick red line there is
the average of all of these 32 different computer models.
If you take the claims being made by these models and by
these fear-mongers around the CO2, they say this is the type of
rate of temperature increase you’re going to get.  But if you
compare that to the actual observations indicated below in the
blue and green lines with the squares and the dots, you see that
none of the computer models have been accurate in reality.  Both
satellite measurements by two different types of measurements, as
well as independent {in situ} measurements with balloon systems,
have shown that the temperature over the past 15 years now on
average, has been relatively flat with little increase.  {None}
of the models showed this; none of them.
So, have this in mind when you hear these scare stories
about this much temperature rise is going to cause this much
extreme weather, etc.  They’re basing it all on these models that
have already shown to be ridiculous.
There’s another interesting aspect to the CO2 issue, which
isn’t discussed at all, which is this apparently secret thing
that many of these fear-mongering people around climate change
don’t apparently know, which is that CO2 is actually a part of
the biosphere, and it’s actually an important part of the
ecological cycle.  People talk about being “pro-green”:  It’s
actually an important contribution to green on the planet.
And there’s been some work done, and I’d like to play a few
short clips of an interview I’d done a few weeks back with a
scientist who’s led a great amount of effort on studying the
positive effects of higher CO2 levels.  This is Dr. Craig Idso,
and he has spent many years and a lot of effort doing actual
experiments with greenhouses, overviews of various studies,
overviews of satellite measurements, and actually studying the
question of what is the effect of increasing CO2 levels on plant
growth and then also on agricultural activity.  These clips speak
for themselves, but I think this is an important part of the
discussion, as being completely blacked out, which is, aside from
the scare-stories about CO2 not being grounded in reality,
there’s actually a beneficial side for increasing CO2 levels.

[start video]
DR. CRAIG IDSO:  There are three main benefits from
increasing carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere:  The
first is that it increases plant productivity for biomass of the
plant.  On average, what we see is that for a doubling of CO2,
something that’s going to happen by the end of this century, most
are basis plants, non-woody plants like crops and things like
that, will experience anywhere from a 25% to a 55% increasing in
biomass per yield.  And that’s a phenomenal result and that’s
something that’s going to happen just because we raise the CO2
concentration and nothing else.
Second is that higher CO2 concentrations help increase the
plant’s  water use efficiency.  Again, a doubling of CO2 allows
plants to use about half as much water as they need to produce
the same amount of tissue, so another phenomenal benefit.
And then the third benefit is that higher CO2 concentrations
helps to ameliorate environmental stresses.  So if you have a
stress from hot air temperature, maybe low light, low levels of
soil fertility, those sorts of things, when you have higher CO2
concentrations they tend to reduce or lessen that stress if not
completely ameliorate it, under a doubling of CO2.
You put all those three benefits together, and what you get
is a tremendous benefit to the biosphere to the growth.  And
we’re seeing that already:  We see it in tree-ring cores, you can
look and look at how their water use efficiency has improved over
time, and we see anywhere from 35% to 40% increase already, as
the CO2 concentration has increased by about 40%.  So the
satellites have been up measuring reflectivity of vegetation,
over the entire globe ever since about the early 1980s.  And what
they find consistently, whether they’re focussing on a particular
region of the globe or the globe as a whole, you get anywhere
from about 6% to 15% increase in biomass in that period of time.
The globe as a whole, or in total, is actually in a better off
condition now than it was when those measurements began.
I did the first approximation to determine what is the net
monetary benefit on crop production globally, in the past and
then also projected into the future, and what I found was that
over the 50-year period from 1961 to 2011, it amounts to about
$3.2 trillion on the global economy, a phenomenal benefit. And
then, projecting that forward in time, as the CO2 concentration
is going to continue to rise, from about 2012 to 2050, we expect
it to be about $10 trillion to the economy.
And that’s just really scratching the surface, because you
could look at studies, for example, I’ll take rice, where there’s
a number of genotypes of rice, and scientists have looked at for
example, in one study I’m thinking of, they looked at 16
different genotypes of rice, and how those genotypes responded to
a doubling of CO2, and they received values that ranged from
about 0 all the way to a whopping 265%.  So, if governments and
scientists focussed on those specific genotypes that we received
the greatest increase in biomass per CO2 rise, and then grew
them, we could have this phenomenal increase in agriculture and
have no problem in feeding the planet in the future.
[end video]

DENISTON:  I wanted to just highlight that interview,
because that needs to get out.  These are astounding facts: You
compare on the one side, the scare stories are not adding up.  On
the other side, just review what he said, that over the past 35
years, according to global satellite measurements a 6-15%
increase in total biomass production to the planet, the entire
planet!  We’re not talking about a 10th of a percent of a half of
a percent, 6-15%, that’s huge.  And these assessments they’ve
done on the increased crop yield, which they put in monetary
terms of $3 trillion increased value production from higher crop
yields.  Again, these are not models and studies; you can take a
greenhouse, you can study tomato plants, this particular species,
what’s their yield under regular atmospheric CO2 conditions,
what’s their yield under this much increase?  And they have hard
data on this, so these are not models, this is real stuff.
And then the other irony, which is an irony for some people
is this water use efficiency:  You actually get a highly
significant boost for certain plant species in their ability to
produce more biomass with less water use, and this has rather
interesting implications for drier regions in particular, where
water becomes a limiting factor in plant growth.  And now, all of
a sudden, with higher concentrations of plant food in the
atmosphere, CO2, they can grow in regions they couldn’t grow in
before; they can be more healthy in regions they couldn’t be
healthy before.  And you just take a look at places we’ve had
water issues — California — and we have our crazy governor in
California, running around pretending he’s the world leader on
CO2, when his state is actually benefitting greatly from the fact
there’s been higher CO2 levels in the context of the recent
droughts. The ironies are just all over the place.
You’ve really got to ask yourself, why are none of these
just basic scientific facts even being added into the discussion?
All you hear is these super, extreme, incredible flimsy arguments
claiming to be science, about scare stories, and then basic, raw,
scientific data and studies and discussion — you don’t hear
about that in the media, at all.  I think people need to let that
irony sink in, on this whole climate debate issue.
And Matthew, as you said in the beginning, the real issue is
there’s an ideology behind this, as Helga Zepp-LaRouche said in
our discussion earlier today: The whole climate change issue is
not really about climate change.  That’s the latest scare story
certain people have grabbed onto and pushed from the standpoint
of a Malthusian ideology.  And tons can be said; we put out an
entire report, “Global Warming Scare Is Population Reduction, Not
Science.”  This was put out by  {Executive Intelligence Review};
if you don’t have a copy of this, you should get one.
[http://store.larouchepub.com/category-s/1840.htm]  Under Mr.
LaRouche’s direction, over decades, his organization has uniquely
put out the entire story  of the origins of this, not just
climate-change scare, but more broadly this whole
environmentalist movement as coming from this Malthusian
ideology.
And you look at the founders of the modern environmentalist
movement, if you look at who these people were, these are people
that created the entire structure that pushed globally this whole
environmentalist system.  We can just highlight some of the key
figures:  Sir Julian Huxley, a lifelong proponent of eugenics,
head of the British Eugenics Society.  After World War II, after
Hitler’s horrific war crimes, and crimes against humanity were
exposed, and the connection to eugenics there, Huxley still
promoted eugenics in his position in the UN, as the head of
UNESCO at the time.
Prince Philip, whenever he gets the chance, talks about how
terrible population growth is, and the fact that population
growth is the number one problem on the planet.  The guy whose
said if he could be reincarnated, he’d like to come back as a
deadly virus to reduce world population.  That’s his view, that’s
his belief-system.
Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands, who was actually
working with Nazi intelligence, a member of the Nazi Party.  He
even helped Nazi war criminals escape after World War II.  These
people came together and started the environmentalist movement,
going back to the immediate post-World War II period, and going
into the ’50s and ’60s when it started to take off.
This is the ideology behind this.  It’s not about the
debates you see on the media, about this claim or that claim on
supposed science of CO2.  If you really want to understand the
issue, it’s this oligarchical, Malthusian ideology that’s been
campaigning for generations against economic development, against
population growth, against the development of so-called Third
World nations.  These are people who have said we cannot allow
the world to rise to the living standards of America and the
West.  Think of Obama travelling to Africa, telling students in
Africa, if you all had air conditioning and cars the planet would
boil over, so that’s not an option.
And that’s the issue.  I think what Helga said, in response
to Trump’s pulling out of the Paris climate agreement, is, that’s
the issue.  This is an expression of the old Malthusian,
geopolitical paradigm, and what we’re seeing emerging with
everything around this Belt and Road Forum summit, everything
that you just went through, Matthew, is the future.  That’s the
future.  So Trump’s dumping this climate change thing is
completely coherent with the idea of the United States bucking
this past, geopolitical, zero sum game, Malthusian ideology, and
getting towards building the future again.
And I would say, from our work, the next steps in the energy
issue is going hard with fusion, nuclear fission as needed along
the way.  But the key is not only cheap energy, in using coal,
natural gas, etc., but what are the future energy sources that
are going to allow not only nations around the world to come up
to the same energy use that we have in the U.S. now,  but even
higher levels and including in the U.S.  How can we actually
increase the total energy-flux density of the global economy in
totality?  That’s the future.  The entire history of the
development of mankind has always been intimately connected with
and tied to these kinds of increases in energy-flux density.
That’s got to be the next step in this thing.

OGDEN:  I think that idea, the increases in energy-flux
density is the key.  It unlocks the entire mystery of this whole
discussion.  If you go back to that history that Helga
Zepp-LaRouche walked us through, about the 40, 45-year history of
the LaRouche movement’s fight for a new, international economic
order, that was paralleled by a 45-year history of a fight
against this kind of Malthusianism, the idea of “limits to
growth” and overpopulation and these kinds of things that have
become ingrained.
This was paralleled, in fact, we saw all those reports about
the great development of India, the development of the Pacific
Basin, the development of Africa, the development of Latin
America, all of these reports mapping out a blueprint for the
development of the planet; but also, there was a book that was
published, called {There Are No Limits to Growth}! And this was a
book by Mr. LaRouche [1983] and it is rooted so deeply in his
unique approach to economic science, the idea that, no, in fact,
we are not living in a closed system.  This is not a closed
economic system, this is not even a closed biological system, but
that in fact, the very fact that mankind has a voluntary,
creative capability as a species, allows mankind to move into
progressively higher and more efficient economic systems.
Because we’re not based on one sort of limited resources regime.
And we’ve seen this throughout history:  If you just take
the empirical view of human history, mankind has progressively
moved from one resource base to another resource base, through
discoveries, through new technologies, and each one of those
resource bases is defined by a higher energy-flux density, more
powerful forms of “fire,” as you could call it,  a Promethean
idea of what mankind is capable of.
You take that idea of economics, and this is really Mr.
LaRouche’s unique contribution, and you say: OK, the fact that
that debunks the entire idea of limited resources, that very fact
itself overthrows the entire idea which has been at the basis of
geopolitics for at least the last 50 years.  What was the
justification for saying, “no we have to limit the access of
these countries in the Third World to these limited resources, so
that the developed countries — the United States, Western Europe
— can have access to them?”  This was literally the basis of our
national security strategy in the 1970s and the 1980s.  But when
you say, there’s no such thing as “limited resources,” it
overthrows that entire idea of geopolitics.
And I think that really serves as the scientific basis for a
new idea of “win-win” cooperation, as counterposed to the idea of
a zero-sum game, where, if some countries win that means other
countries lose.  No.  In fact, {all} countries can win and
development is an unlimited potential.

DENISTON:  I don’t think it can be stressed enough, this is
an entire paradigm shift we’re talking about.  I think Helga’s
point about this being the end of the geopolitical perspective,
people have to realize that’s what’s on the table.  And that’s
why it’s so important she came back from China with this report.
Because we have to get Americans to understand the depth of this
revolution that’s happening right now, and the importance of the
United States jumping on board with this, immediately.  Because
this is a historic shift:  If you get the United States onboard
now with Russia and China and the nations allied with them,
that’s it.  We can have the future, we can create the future we
want with that alliance.  The British will be forced to go along
with that global alliance — they can put up as much of a fight
as they can, as we’re seeing, with this crazy propaganda campaign
in the United States, but people have to realize how vulnerable
the British Empire actually is, and that we have this perspective
before us.  Because this has happened, this is moving right now

OGDEN:  OK! Wonderful.  I think that what Helga
Zepp-LaRouche’s point was, stands:  The United States must join
the New Silk Road.  This is the primary strategic focus and
everything else must be subsumed, as subsumed factor of that.
This is our focus, and nothing else.
So we need to escalate that campaign, obviously, and watch
for very dramatic and rapid developments around the globe!
Thank you very much, Ben, for joining me here in the studio
today, and thank you all for tuning.  That’s the conclusion to
our broadcast today:  Please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.
We’ll make that video that we showed you earlier, of Helga
Zepp-LaRouche’s remarks available as a standalone, and your task
for this weekend is to spread that around as far as you can.
Thank you very much, and good night.

[1] Se vores omfattende dossier: Stop den Grønne Kult Feature

Torsdag, 1. juni, 2017 – Under en telefonkonference med medarbejdere diskuterer Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter af det internationale Schiller Institut, sin seneste rejse til Kina, hvor hun var inviteret til at deltage i det historiske Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, 14.-15. maj, 2017. Zepp-LaRouche fortæller, hvor dramatisk anderledes, verden ser på Trumps præsidentskab, i modsætning til de hysteriske, vestlige mainstream-medier. »Tænk ud over kassen; resten af verden er allerede trådt frem og går fremad.«

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Jeg vil gerne sikre mig, at I får et førstehåndsindtryk af min rejse fra mig, for jeg mener, den absolut værste fejltagelse, vi kunne begå, ville være at respondere til den absolut utrolige psykologiske krigsførelse, der kommer fra de amerikanske mainstream-medier og de neoliberale medier i Europa, såsom Spiegel Online, med dets chefredaktør-indlæg, som virkelig var helt ved siden af alting! Det står helt klart, at folk, der primært baserer sig på disse medier, har en komplet, 100 % ’s forkert idé om, hvad kendsgerninger er i det, der foregår. Det bør vi virkelig få ud af hovedet og ikke forsøge at svømme inden i fiske-glasbowlen med et kunstigt skabt miljø. For ud fra mit synspunkt, så ser verden meget anderledes ud.

For det første, som jeg allerede har sagt, og nu gentager: Med Bælt & Vej Forum har verden på dramatisk vis konsolideret begyndelsen af en ny æra, og jeg tror slet ikke på, at dette vil forsvinde, med mindre Tredje Verdenskrig skulle indtræffe; for størstedelen af verden bevæger sig på en fuldstændig frigjort måde. Først og fremmest var dette den konference på det højeste niveau, jeg nogensinde har deltaget i. Der var 28 statsoverhoveder, der talte efter tur, og Xi Jinpings tale var selvfølgelig fuldstændig fremragende, og I bør absolut lytte til den, hvis I har tid, for det var en meget, meget konfuciansk tale, der på en meget klar måde satte tonen for denne todages konference. Så lyt til den, når I har tid.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx_mE951GzI]

(Engelsk udskrift af talen her: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-05/14/c_136282982.htm)

Måden at forstå, hvad det er, der finder sted, er virkelig at tænke på, hvad denne organisation, og Lyn[don LaRouche] i særdeleshed, har gjort i de seneste næsten 50 år. Første gang, da Lyn i 1971 erkendte betydningen af nedtagningen af Bretton Woods-systemet, og dernæst alle de mange, mange ting, vi har gjort i de seneste mere end 40 år; da Lyn kom hjem fra det irakiske Ba’ath Partis jubilæum i 1975, og han foreslog den Internationale Udviklingsbank (IUB)[i], der skulle formidle en ny, økonomisk verdensorden; den kendsgerning, at vi, i et helt år, førte kampagne for denne IUB-idé, som dernæst blev en del af Den Alliancefri Bevægelses Colombo-resolution i Sri Lanka i 1976; dernæst, da vi i slutningen af ’70’erne arbejdede sammen med Indira Gandhi om en udviklingsplan over 40 år for Indien.[ii] Allerede i ’76’ udgav vi en hel bog om Afrikas industrialisering.[iii] Vi arbejdede sammen med den mexicanske præsident, José López Portillo om »Operation Juárez«.[iv] Vi udgav en 50-års Basal Udviklingsplan for Stillehavsområdet.[v] Lyn havde allerede i ’75’ foreslået Oasis-planen.[vi] Og så, selvfølgelig, da [Berlin]Muren faldt, og Sovjetunionen gik i opløsning, foreslog vi den Produktive Trekant[vii] og den Eurasiske Landbro.[viii]

Alle disse forslag![ix] Tænk blot på de mange, mange aktiviteter, vi lavede, konferencer på alle fem kontinenter, alt dette var på idé-planet, på program-planet – men først efter, at Xi Jinping satte den Nye Silkevej på dagsordenen i 2013, og med de åndeløse udviklinger i de fire år, der er gået, med Ét Bælt, én Vej (OBOR), er disse ideer nu ved at blive til virkelighed! Lampens ånd er sluppet ud!

Når vi nu ser diskussionen om den Bi-oceaniske Jernbane [Sydamerika] og tunneller og broer, der skal forbinde Atlanterhavet og Stillehavet omkring Sydamerika, og vi ser alle disse jernbanestrækninger, der nu åbnes i Afrika – dette er uden fortilfælde! Det var ikke IMF (Den internationale Valutafond) eller Verdensbanken, der gjorde det! De undertrykkede det med deres ’betingelsespolitik’. Men, med Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), den Nye Udviklingsbank (’BRIKS-banken’), den Nye Silkevejsfond, den Maritime Silkevejsfond, de direkte investeringer fra Kinas Exim Bank, Kinas statsbank, skrider alle disse projekter nu fremad, og de har fuldstændig ændret alle de deltagende landes holdning og selvtillid.

Måden, hvorpå man i Kina ser på præsident Trump, er absolut anderledes end det, medierne forsøger at sige. Kineserne er meget positive mht. Trump, på samme måde, som man i Rusland mener, at Trump er en person, man absolut kan have et anstændigt forhold til, og dét er virkeligheden.

Glem medierne! Glem disse presse-horer, der faktisk ikke er andet et Det britiske Imperiums prostituerede. Lad være at lytte til, hvad de siger, og giv heller ikke de mennesker, I taler med, lov til det.

Da Trump lovede $1 billion i infrastrukturinvesteringer, gjorde han det rette, og vi fremlagde det rette program, da vi sagde, at USA må tilslutte sig Silkevejen, og dét, og intet andet, bør være vores fokus. Alt andet bør være et underordnet aspekt af dette. Dette er, hvad der er strategisk vigtigt, og det faktum, at chefen for China Investment Corp. Ding Xuedong sagde, det er ikke $1 billion, men $8 billion, som USA har brug for, rammer absolut plet; og I ved det selv fra den forfatning, som vejene og infrastrukturen i hele USA befinder sig i.

Så det faktum, at samme organisation nu har åbnet et kontor i New York, hvor de rådgiver kinesiske investorer om, hvordan de skal investere i USA, og vice versa, hvordan amerikanske investorer kan investere i Kina; det faktum, at kineserne er inviteret til at deltage i denne infrastruktur-konference i juni; alt dette går absolut i den rigtige retning.

Det, der fandt sted i Bælt & Vej Forum og de mange møder, jeg havde bagefter – jeg tilbragte trods alt to fulde uger i Beijing, i Nanjing, i Shanghai – mange af disse ting rapporterer jeg ikke om, for det er blot ting, der er i gang, men det er det faktum, at, i de mange interviews, de mange citater og det generelle synspunkt – I kan spørge Kasia og Stefan Tolksdorf, eller Bill Jones, for den sags skyld – vi blev behandlet med den største respekt. Jeg mener, folk er fuldt ud bevidste om Lyns betydning som en teoretiker inden for fysisk økonomi; hans ideer er højt respekterede, og folk behandlede os, som vi burde blive behandlet, nemlig som mennesker, der har helliget hele deres liv til menneskehedens almene vel. Dette står i absolut stærk kontrast til den dårlige behandling, vi normalt får fra de neoliberale i det transatlantiske område.

Man bør forstå, hvad disse angreb på Trump går ud på, hvad de skal gøre; det er for – det er så vanskeligt for ham at fokusere på det positive aspekt, og dem er der en hel del af, inklusive hans arbejdsrelation med Rusland og Kina, som rent strategisk er det vigtigste; så han grundlæggende set i stedet må forsvare sig, og alle mener, de må bruge al deres tid på at forsvare sig. Tænk blot tilbage, for de af jer, der var her dengang, hvordan vores liv som organisation ændrede sig efter angrebet i 1986. Frem til dette tidspunkt var vi alle positive, vi vandt primærvalg i Illinois, vi overvejede at skabe tre, private universiteter, for vi havde et netværk af henved 100 professorer, der ønskede at gennemføre Lyns ideer i form af et pensum i universiteter.

Og efter angrebet i 1986[x], udført af det samme apparat, der nu går efter Trump, måtte vi bruge alle disse penge på advokater, og vi måtte forsvare os, og det ændrede fuldstændig organisationens liv, og det er, hvad de nu forsøgerat gøre imod Trump!

Så lad være med at falde for det. Den idé, at vi er ved at tabe, er helt forkert! Menneskeheden er på vej fremad, og vi må få den amerikanske befolkning til at skabe den form for grobund, så gennemførelsen af infrastrukturprogrammet som første skridt kommer på dagsordenen, og på alles tanker, og intet andet.

Jeg ville blot sige dette, for ud fra indledende diskussioner, jeg havde i dag, fik jeg indtryk af, at folk ligger for meget under for det, og selv om Europa stadig er i EU-kommissionens greb, jeg mener, hvis Merkel ønsker at være leder af det frie Vesten – glem det. Macron har netop haft et meget fremragende møde med Putin, der satte betingelser for en hjertelig relation med Rusland! Dette er ikke, hvad Merkel og Obama havde lagt op til, da Obama talte på den protestantiske kirkes kirkedag, men Merkel er temmelig isoleret.

Se jer omkring i Europa: Macron sendte Raffarin, den tidligere premierminister, til Bælt & Vej Forum, og som holdt en fremragende tale om, hvorfor Kina og Frankrig må samarbejde. Gentiloni fra Italien sagde, at Kina og Italien vil samarbejde om Afrikas udvikling. Alle østeuropæerne; Tsipras [Grækenland], Serbien, Ungarn, Tjekkiets Zeman, Orban [Ungarn] – alle disse personer var absolut entusiastiske over Bælt & Vej-initiativet. Og nu, selv Tyskland; det viser, at tysk industri faktisk er ved at fatte det, at det er i deres interesse at samarbejde om joint ventures i tredjelande, sammen med Kina. Så jeg tror, selv Tyskland vil skifte mening.

Det er min faste overbevisning, at, ved dette års afslutning, vil det hele se helt anderledes ud, for perspektivet for udvikling er så smittende, at jeg tror, at alle Det britiske Imperiums bestræbelser på at smide en svensknøgle [i maskineriet], ikke vil virke!

Så sats på vinderperspektivet, sats på det bedste perspektiv, tænk strategisk: Og indse, at det, der finder sted, i mange, mange udviklingsprojekter i hele verden, i realiteten er det, som denne organisation har kæmpet for i næsten et halvt århundrede. Det ville jeg blot fortælle jer, for det værste, vi kunne gøre, er at se på det inde fra USA, inde fra kassen, når hele verden på afgørende vis er trådt ud af kassen, med Bælt & Vej Forum, der ikke lader sig standse af noget som helst. Og det er mit synspunkt, som jeg ønskede at videreformidle.

(Herefter følger Spørgsmål og Svar, i uddrag, med den efterfølgende diskussion på engelsk)

Diane Sare: Jeg ved, du skal skåne din stemme, men vil du have en diskussion?

Zepp-LaRouche: Hvis folk har uafklarede spørgsmål, hold jer ikke tilbage.

Spørgsmål: Hej, Helga, her er Mindy. Dette er ganske klart og det er godt at høre det fra dig, på en måde, for vi ser på, hvad vi gjorde på Beijing-topmødet, kineserne her kender CIC, og dernæst det forestående juni-topmøde og G20-topmødet i juli, hvor Putin og Xi og Trump vil være til stede; og vores rolle, og Lyns og din rolle har været – vi har opnået meget, og nu skal vi bare gå fremad for virkelig at bringe USA ind i et optimistisk syn og knuse denne fjende og satse på det, på meget kort tid.

Zepp-LaRouche: Præcis. jeg mener, potentialet absolut er til stede, diskussionerne mellem Xi Jinping og Trump er meget gode; udnævnelsen af den nye ambassadør [til Kina] Branstad udgør nu en yderligere kanal. Der er den igangværende kommission, der blev oprettet på Mar-a-Lago, med fokus på økonomien, og vi bør forstærke dette. Jeg mener, det er vigtigt, at vi får hele landet ind i en fornemmelse af en kampagnemobilisering, for vi vil ikke overlade denne kamp til de britiske agenter, der forsøger at ødelægge denne chance for at få USA ind sammen med denne udvikling.

Det fordrer virkelig, at vores organisation er fuldstændig klarhjernet og simpelt hen viser folk vejen. Og vejen er, at USA går med i Silkevejen. Vi må få veje bygget, ved I nok. Vi må få havne og nye byer. USA befinder sig i en forfalden tilstand, det ved I alle, og kineserne har absolut indikeret, at de har til hensigt og er villige til at investere. Tag blot det faktum, at Detroits Symfoniorkester nu turnerer i Kina, jeg tror, det er i fem byer, de giver koncert – Detroit, af alle steder! Så den rette hensigt er der, og vi bør blot forstærke den.

Giv ikke folk lov at være pessimistiske i blot ét enkelt sekund! Fortæl dem, at pessimisme er en sygdom. Det bør ikke tolereres.

Foto: Helga Zepp-LaRouche sammen med værten og den anden gæst på Tv-showet Dialog med Yang Rui under sin deltagelse i Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, 14.-15. maj, 2017.

Q:  It’s Margaret Scialdone, I have a question about —
right after the Beijing conference we had initiated a petition
that went along with a marvelous little video by Jason, and the
petition was called “Suck It Up and Move On” — a petition to
Congress. I found it very refreshing.  I thought it had the right
kind of bite to it.  So I think it sort of dwindled, it hasn’t
been pushed or anything like that; but I’m wondering if we should
have a renewed initiative to really use this attitude to mobilize
people.  Or, if you think that we ought to come out with a new
wording, or new title or something like that?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I have not seen the video, or if it’s the
one I saw, my memory is overshadowed by many, many impressions,
so  — maybe it would be good to make a short new one, because I
think this video was made before the Belt and Road conference?
Am I correct?
Q:  It was done, I think two days after it.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  If it kept to what I just expressed before,
then we should use it, and if not, it should probably be updated.
But if you say it’s already in there, then use it, and maybe make
another one in the next days, but go with it now.
SARE:  I think it definitely could be updated.  This dynamic
is completely new, and it is foreign to Americans, the sense that
you’re conveying.  I think that Americans would have a very hard
time imagining anyplace where Trump is viewed with respect and
optimism.  And if there’s billions of people in China, Russia,
and otherwise, who think that, Americans don’t know it.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  What people say is that they’re very, very
happy that it’s not Obama or Hillary, because they knew perfectly
where this would have led to.  So people — and the fact that Xi
Jinping and Trump got along well is really important.  It’s not
only important for Trump to say to his supporters in Harrisburg,
that Xi is “great guy” and he gets along well with him, it’s also
the other way around.  When Xi Jinping gets along well with
Trump, then this is very important for all the Chinese.
Q:  Hi, this is Susan Director.  I think that what you’re
saying today, Helga, could be made into a very powerful audio to
post on the website, today.  Because, the intensity of your
presentation is the kind of thing that will lift people up and
pull them into action.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Then put it on!  Tiramisu! Tiramisu! Pull
me up!

Q: This is Evelyn in Houston, and it struck me, when Robert
Mueller was appointed as a Special Prosecutor, who also headed
the Get LaRouche task force, that the best flank on the attack on
Trump and also on the economic question, would be for us to call
again for the exoneration of Lyn.  Because it was the same
network, that attacked him, and for the same reasons, because they
don’t want Trump to go with Lyn’s policies.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes, I agree.  That is one of the moral
stains on the history of the United States, and it absolutely
should be done.  I fully agree.  Remember that Ramsey Clark said
that Lyn’s case was the worst violation of justice in U.S.
history.  I think people can find the exact formulation of what
he said and use it.  And I think it’s very useful, because it
{is} the same network.
But while we should say it, I still think we should focus on
the positive thing, because it is the same network, and we should
do it, but more importantly, or not more importantly, but the
angle with which to go about it is to say, the world has moved in
a completely different direction, and what the mainstream media
are doing is sort of the last battles of a war which they have
been lost already by them. Maybe you could find some
appropriate battle from the Civil War — aren’t there some
battles where the British were still making some noises but they
were defeated, I mean, the Confederates —

SARE: In the War of 1812, they had surrendered but people
were still fighting in different places long after, not knowing
somehow.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah, why don’t you use that as an image?

SARE:  That’s a nice image!
If there’s nothing else, I think this is excellent.  I think
we can put this to good use.  We should get this up on the
website, and then we’ll have a lot to talk about on Sunday, after
our success.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: OK, very good!

[i] http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1998/eirv25n32-19980814/eirv25n32-19980814_020-1975_larouche_calls_for_intl_dev.pdf

[ii] http://wlym.com/archive/fusion/fusion/19800505-fusion.pdf

[iii] http://wlym.com/archive/fusion/book/1980IndustrializeAfrica.pdf

[iv] http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/31620 og http://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1986/eirv13n35-19860905/eirv13n35-19860905_018-ibero_americas_strategy_to_defea-lar.pdf

[v] http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1983/eirv10n35-19830913/eirv10n35-19830913_018-a_50_year_development_policy_for-lar.pdf

[vi] http://www.schillerinstitute.org/economy/maps/maps.html#Oasis plan

[vii] http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1990/eirv17n31-19900803/eirv17n31-19900803_031-the_economic_geography_of_europe.pdf og

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/economy/maps/maps.html#Triangle

[viii] http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/14728

[ix] En omfattende online oversigt, ’LaRouche’s 40-Year Record’; A New International Economic Order, kan studeres her:

https://larouchepac.com/new-economic-order

[x] Helga henviser her til de falske anklager om bedrageri imod Lyndon LaRouche, som var politisk motiverede. LaRouche blev idømt 15 års fængsel, men løsladt i 1994. Tretten af hans medarbejdere blev ligeledes idømt fængselsstraffe på falske anklager.

Torsdag, 1. juni, 2017 – Aftenen før et forum for tyske erhvervsfolk i Berlin i dag, hvor også premierminister Li Keqiang og den tyske kansler, Angela Merkel, deltog, sagde Kinas ambassadør til Tyskland, Shi Mingde, til kinesiske medier, at »de to nationers varefremstillingsindustrier er særdeles komplementære. Kina er et stort vareproduktionsland, alt imens Tyskland er et stærkt ditto. En ny runde med industriel revolution tager fart og vinder momentum … hvilket har bragt en mulighed uden fortilfælde for strategisk samarbejde«.

Shi sagde, at der er 8000 tyske selskaber, der opererer i Kina, med et totalt investeringsvolumen på mere end €60 mia. ($67mia.), mens henved 2000 kinesiske foretagender opererer i Tyskland. Disse selskaber bliver en væsentlig styrke i promoveringen af samarbejde, sagde han. To stærke nationer, der går sammen, vil få en effekt langt ud over deres grænser, sagde Shi.

Han nævnte potentialet for byggeri i alle lande under Bælt & Vej-initiativet. Dette refererer til det Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte og det 21. Århundredes Maritime Silkevej, der tilsigter at øge forbindelserne mellem Asien, Europa og andre områder. Han nævnte også muligheden for globale standarder for intelligent varefremstilling. Forummet under Lis besøg forventes at skabe nye, innovative måder at samarbejde på, i felter såsom smart-varefremstilling, elektriske transportmidler og innovation, der kommer fra unge mennesker.

Hubertus Troska, et medlem af Daimler AG’s bestyrelse, med Kina som ansvarsområde, sagde, at trenden med forbundethed (konnektivitet), selvkørende fartøjer, ’sharing’ og elektrisk mobilitet er i færd med at revolutionere bilindustrien, »måske intetsteds hurtigere end i Kina«. I et nedskrevet interview med China Daily sagde Troska, »På linje med Kinas økonomiske udviklingsplan vil vi møde både muligheder og udfordringer frontalt med yderligere innovationer og opgraderet varefremstilling«.

Foto: Kinas ambassadør til Tyskland, Shi Mingde, giver her interview til Xinhua på Kinas ambassade i Berlin, Tysklands hovedstad, 29. maj, 2017. Kina og Tyskland kan gå frem med opgradering af deres eksisterende samarbejde under de nye, internationale betingelser, sagde Shi i interviewet. (Xinhua/Shan Yuqi)