Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Den forgangne weekends begivenheder fremstiller skarpt den strategiske situation. På den ene side, en massiv fremvisning af magt, demonstreret ved Moskvas højtideligholdelse af 70-års dagen for sejren i Anden Verdenskrig, med den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin i spidsen. Flertallet af menneskeheden deltog, repræsenteret ved militære enheder fra Rusland, Kina, Indien og andre BRIKS-nationer. Ved Putins side sad den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping, der var i Moskva i de to foregående dage for at underskrive aftaler, der integrerer Kinas Et bælte, En vej-politik med Putins Eurasiske Union. På den anden side, de bemærkelsesværdigt fraværende, affældige ledere af det døende, transatlantiske system, der som ledere af en kollapsende, bankerot økonomi var hunderædde over, hvad Putin havde gennemført.

Dette kom tydeligt til udtryk gennem opførslen hos den tyske kansler Angela Merkel, der, sammen med Obama og den franske præsident Hollande, boykottede højtidelighederne den 9. maj. Men hun rejste til Moskva dagen efter, for at forsøge at forhandle med Putin.

Merkel er i klemme, sagde LaRouche til sine medarbejdere i går. Den tyske situation befinder sig i krise. Det kan ikke fortsætte ad den nuværende vej. Måske er der andre folk i Tyskland, der vil være mere seriøse end Merkel, som jeg ikke stoler det mindste på.

LaRouche fortsatte: Merkel, der allerede har problemer, fosøger at finde en forhandling, der vil give Tyskland mulighed for at give efter på visse krav, som hun ønsker skal forhandles. Og det vil ikke virke. Det vil Rusland ikke acceptere.

Det, vi taler om her, er truslen om generel atomkrig. Og hele spørgsmålet frem til det aktuelle punkt har drejet sig om idéen om at få Rusland til at miste sin mulighed for at forsvare sig, og således forhandle ud fra disse betingelser. Det har været planen, og det har været politikken.

Der er utvivlsomt personer i Tyskland, der seriøst forsøger at skabe en endelig fred. Man behøver ingen forhandlinger; alle betingelserne for fred findes. Det er ikke nødvendigt med indrømmelser fra Rusland for at opnå dette. Det, der må ske, er, at der i Tyskland er folk, der forsøger at ødelægge grækerne, og en af betingelserne er, at Tyskland dropper angrebet på Grækenland. Det er prøven.

Vi er ved at vinde. Og derfor bliver de bange. De prøver på at forhandle. Og de håber, de kan få et smuthul, som Rusland ikke vil give dem …

Se på det ud fra magtbalancen. Se på, hvad der er sket i Rusland i løbet af de seneste to uger. Hvad Rusland har gjort med støtte fra Indien og Kina direkte, med en massiv militæropvisning. Hvad har de gjort? De har skræmt livet af Vesteuropa. Rent teknisk lever briterne på lånt tid. Men det, der skete, er, at den skotske historie ikke er forbi. Den såkaldte engelske sejr over den skotske frækhed vil ikke virke. Storbritannien er bankerot. Tyskland er på randen at bankerot pga. kollapset i den tyske økonomi. Frankrig er i en tilstand af kaos. Italien er næsten helt til rotterne. Og nu har vi en magt, Rusland, Kina, Indien med mere, dvs. også Egypten, hvilket betyder andre ting. Det, som det er lykkedes Putin at gennemføre, ikke som et nummer, men som politik, har truet og skræmt Vesteuropa fra vid og sans.

Det, vi må gøre, er simpelt hen at anerkende, at Rusland er gået af med sejren. Lad være med at prøve at udtænke nogle forhandlinger. Hvis Tyskland nu giver efter for Rusland, betyder det, at Tyskland måtte bryde med Storbritannien og Obamaregeringen. Og Kina ville kræve det samme. For Kina trues også.

Det britiske monarkis svækkede stilling indikeres også af afstemningen til fordel for det Skotske Nationalparti (SNP) i de nyligt afholdte valg til Det forenede Kongeriges nationale parlament. I dette valg fik SNP 56 af de i alt 59 skotske pladser og fejede fuldstændig det Britiske Labourparti af bordet. I et interview søndag sagde Nicola Sturgeon, lederen af SNP, at SNP vil udgøre hovedoppositionen til de Konservatives nedskæringspolitik, og at hun vil arbejde for en ny uafhængighedsresolution så tidligt som i 2017.

Det kunne ske meget tidligere, sagde LaRouche. Man må tænke på en ting. Det britiske Imperium er i fiaskoens gab. Hvad er Det britiske Imperium, der kontrollerer alt muligt, mht. onde mennesker, i alle dele af verden. Hvad er deres problem? Problemet er, at deres magt er i færd med at blive knust. Se! Vi befinder os i en strategisk situation, hvor vi har vundet en margin af indflydelse, vi ikke har haft i årevis. Og pludselig er det tilfaldet os, og nøglen ligger i den nylige fejring, centreret omkring Rusland. Fejringen centreret omkring Rusland, med disintegrationen af Ukraine, økonomisk og på anden vis, og det store sammenbrud, der er på vej i Tyskland, og Italiens knuste økonomi, og krisen i Frankrig. Hvad fanden tror I, problemet er? At Putin repræsenterer en magt, der strategisk er ved at vinde.

Nøglen er, hvad vi gør. Den ekstremt fremtrædende og hurtige respons, med hvilken Sputnik News udsendte LaRouches bemærkninger om fejringen i Moskva, er særligt vigtig.

Og den måde, de responderede på mig (LaRouche), fra Rusland i denne weekend, omgående, og som blev offentliggjort af Rusland til os, og om os. Det siger noget, eller burde sige noget.

Vi er de eneste, der har en betydningsfuld respons i denne situation. Så lad os ikke ødelægge det. Lad os ikke begå nogen fejltagelser ved at skabe nogen fantasier. Situationen er fuldstændigt forståelig. Se på udstillingen af de russiske styrker og den måde, de blev fremstillet, samt de internationale styrker. Flertallet af den menneskelige befolkning marcherede i Moskva gennem deres repræsentation. Spørgsmålet er, at der er to alternativer til dette. Det ene er at forsøge at få Rusland til at trække sig selv ned. Det andet er at ødelægge alting og gå direkte til international krig. Situationen nu er den, at der lægges hindringer i vejen for Obamaregeringen, der er hovedinstrumentet i det internationale krigspotentiale. Og på den anden side er resten af planeten ikke parat til at gøre noget. De styrker, der marcherede i Rusland ved denne begivenhed, udgjorde den største alliance af styrker på denne planet, den, der har den militære kapacitet, der matcher den politiske styrke. Så vi bør ikke tænke, at vi kan behandle dette, som om der kommer et svar fra de tyske kræfter generelt. For de finansielle interesser i Tyskland vil blive udslettet, hvis de bøjer sig.

Under disse betingelser, på nuværende tidspunkt, vakler Det britiske Imperium stadig, klar til at falde. Sagen om Skotland er en udløsermekanisme, der har knust Englands interne magt som en enhed, økonomisk og politisk. Reaktionen er, at det, vi har gjort, har virket. Det er ikke noget stort. Det er en lille ting. Men det er en vægtstang. Og vægtstangen er Manhattan.

8. maj 2015 – Sammen med den russiske udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov lagde den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier i går i Volgograd (tidl. Stalingrad) en krans på stedet for kampen om Stalingrad for at mindes 70-året for sejren over de nazistiske styrker i Anden Verdenskrig, rapporterer Agence France Presse. Selv om kansler Angela Merkel ikke deltager i højtideligholdelse af mindedagen i Moskva, den 9. maj, vil hun være i byen dagen efter for at mødes med Vladimir Putin og lægge en krans på den ukendte soldats grav, til minde om Sovjetunionens ofre under krigen.

Steinmeier var tydeligt bevæget af den højtidelige begivenhed i Volgograd og bemærkede, at »de lidelser, som de tyske, nazistiske styrker påførte befolkningen og soldaterne her i Volgograd, er fuldstændigt ufattelige … For mig, pga. krisen i Ukraine, var det især vigtigt at komme her som et tegn på forsoning og forståelse.« Hvor komplicerede, tingene end har været, tilføjede han, og »hvor forskelligt, vi end ser på forskellige spørgsmål, så må vi, konfronteret med mindet om Stalingrad, forsøge så hårdt som muligt at løse konflikten i Ukraine.«

Ifølge TASS rapporterede Steinmeier, at NATO gør fremskridt mht. at genetablere militære kontakter med Rusland, og mht. Ukraine sagde han, at »efter den situation, vi havde sidste år, er vi nu i færd med at genetablere information på dette niveau.« Han noterede sig også resultatet af Kontaktgruppens møde i Minsk og sagde, at det markerede »overgangen til den næste fase af gennemførelsen af Minsk-aftalerne. Jeg håber, at begge sider fortsat vil gå fremad.«

Lavrov understregede, at Moskva tillægger »den øgede dialog mellem Moskva og Berlin særlig stor betydning« og tilføjede, at »vi har store forhåbninger til de drøftelser, der er planlagt til kansler Merkels besøg i Moskva den 10. maj.«

Foto: Mindesmærket for kampen om Stalingrad, hvor 700.000 mennesker mistede livet.

8. maj 2015 – Vladimir Putin og Xi Jinping erklærede i dag, i kølvandet på deres møde, deres forpligtelse over for at forhindre en genkomst af fascisme. »Rusland og Kina led de største tab under Anden Verdenskrig og har derfor størst grund til at modsætte sig forsøg på at rehabilitere nazisme og militarisme«, sagde Putin efter mødet med Xi Jinping, rapporterer RT.

»I morgen vil vi, med andre verdensledere, deltage i fejringen af 70-året for sejren i anden Verdenskrig, og i september vil vi i Beijing markere afslutningen af Anden Verdenskrig. Vi vil mindes dem, der stod side ved side imod det militaristiske Japan«, sagde Putin. Han sagde, at Kina og Rusland havde betalt den højeste pris i form af tab af liv i krigen, og at »vi nu står samlet imod alle forsøg på at rehabilitere nazisme og militarisme og forsøg på at forfalske historien.«

Xi inviterede Putin til at deltage i mindehøjtideligheden den 3. september i Kina og sagde, at begivenheden tilsigter »at ære mindet af de mistede helte og ikke tillade denne krigs tragiske historie at gentage sig, og sammen at skabe verdensfred. Den hårde lektie efter Anden Verdenskrig siger, at menneskehedens sameksistens ikke regeres af jungleloven. Fredens politik er diametralt modsat den aggressive, eneherskende magtpolitik. Menneskets vej frem mod udvikling ligger ikke i princippet, vinderen tager det hele, ikke i nulsums-spil.«

Moskva-parade til minde om sejr under Anden Verdenskrig

– En spektakulær opvisning med international deltagelse

8. maj 2015 – Moskva-paraden den 9. maj til minde om de allieredes sejr i Anden Verdenskrig bliver en hele vejen igennem spektakulær forestilling. Statsoverhoveder fra flere end 20 nationer vil være til stede. Militære enheder fra 12 nationer vil deltage, omfattende f.eks. Indien, der aldrig tidligere har deltaget i en sådan begivenhed. Brasilianske tropper vil marchere i Moskva. Som en af de få, sydamerikanske nationer, der sendte soldater til Anden Verdenskrig, udsendte Brasilien i dag en enhed af sine marinesoldater til at bære Ruslands flag – for at mindes Sovjetunionen blandt de allierede – på den nationale sejrsdagsparade i Rio de Janeiro.

USA vil, sammen med en række europæiske og andre nationer, gøre sig bemærket ved deres fravær. Et arrangement, der afviger herfra, er fra Tysklands ledere. Den 11. maj vil kansler Angela Merkel mødes med præsident Putin i Rusland. Den 7. maj deltog den tyske udenrigsminister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, sammen med sin russiske modpart, Sergei Lavrov, i en kranselægning i Volgograd (Stalingrad).

Gårsdagens forpremiere på paraden i Moskva var imponerende og blev transmitteret bredt. General Sergei Shoigu, forsvarsminister, overværede den godt timelange øvelse, der bestod af rækkevis af soldater i tæt kadence, 200 stykker udstyr, inkl. T-34-tanks, den nye ICBM og 120 fly.

Ligeledes i dag ankom kinesiske flådeskibe – krigsskibe og escort-skibe, inkl. Linyi og Weifang, til Sortehavet til den russiske flådebase Novorossiysk. Skibene vil blive her til den 12. maj, hvor de fortsætter til Middelhavet for at deltage i fælles øvelser med russiske flådeskibe.

Putin i russisk Tv-dokumentar om fælles russisk-kinesiske interesser;

Yakunin i kinesisk interview om russisk-kinesisk Silkevejs-jernbane

8. maj 2015 – Der er stærk medieopmærksomhed på mange aspekter af de igangværende aftaler om russisk-kinesisk partnerskab, når de respektive præsidenter mødes i Moskva i dag og i morgen.

På den russiske Tv-kanal 1 i dag blev en TV-dokumentar i anledningen vist. Produceret af Alexei Denisov gennemgår filmen Ruslands og Kinas historie tilbage fra 1600-tallet.

Præsident Vladimir Putin havde på forhånd indtalt erklæringer om samarbejdet mellem de to nationer. Han sagde: »Vor to staters interesser er sammenfaldende for de fleste holdningers vedkommende, og det er netop dette, der danner basis for vore relationer i dag. I området for internationale relationer koordinerer vi vores arbejde på FN’s Sikkerhedsråds niveau og inden for rammerne af FN. Og denne koordinering er en meget vigtig del af skabelsen af en mere fair, mere demokratisk verdensorden i dag.« Han nævnte begge landes medlemskab af Shanghai Samarbejdsråd og BRIKS.

Ligeledes i dag interviewede CCTV Vladimir Yakunin, chef for Russiske Jernbaner, om udsigterne for og betydningen af udviklingen af jernbanenettet mellem de to lande. Yakunin understregede vigtigheden af Silkevejsbæltet. »Strategien giver os løsningen på aktuelle problemer.« Yakunin gennemgik det specifikke projekt – jernbanelinjen fra Chonqing til Duisburg på 11.800 km. CCTC gav interviewet titlen, »Russiske Jernbaner synes om samarbejdet med Kina«.

Foto: Den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping modtages i Kreml af den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin, i anledning af Moskva-paraden den 9. maj m.m. til minde om de allieredes sejr over nazismen under Anden Verdenskrig. 

Med Tom Gillesberg

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE ADDRESSES “CHINA’S ‘ONE BELT, ONE ROAD’
POLICY’ SEMINAR IN COPENHAGEN, April 27, 2015

Here is the transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s address to the
Schiller Institute seminar in Copenhagen, which was held
Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, Copenhagen Business
School. Click her for the audio and video from Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s speech and the other speeches from the seminar.

TOM GILLESBERG: I have the great honor of introducing Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, who has come here from a rather busy schedule both
in Germany and the United States, but also the whole world she’s
intervening to. Just as a short introduction, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche
has been since 1977 the wife and very close collaborator of
Lyndon LaRouche in the United States, the economist, philosopher,
statesman who is giving leadership in the U.S., for the U.S. to
return to the intentions of its founders, to be a promoter of
sovereign nations that can collaborate on an equal footing to
secure the benefits for all nations and peoples.
And Helga has a very, I think, close connection to China.
As a young journalist she traveled to China in 1971, in the
height of the Cultural Revolution as one of the first Western
journalists and actually saw on the spot what was going on. She
then became politically active with the LaRouche movement and
embarked on a life-long battle for a new just world economic
order, for the possibilities of development for all nations and
peoples.
She then founded, among many other things, the Schiller
Institute, in 1984. She is presently the chairwoman of the
German political party, the BüSo — the Bürgerrechtsbewegung
Solidarität, or Civil Rights Soliarity Movement. She was vry
active after the Fall of the Berlin Wall and one of the authors
of the Schiller Institute program for the development of the
world after the Iron Curtain had fallen of the program the
Paris-Berlin-Vienna Productive Triangle, a Locomotive for the
World Economy. And when that did not materialize, she was very
active in extending that program to the program for the Eurasian
Land-Bridge, going from China and Asia to Europe and having a
development of the whole region. And as part of that, she then
became a visitor many times to China to speak on the need for a
New Silk Road and actually earned her nickname in China as the
“Silk Road Lady,” for her efforts to have China embark on this
policy.
And since then, she has been also the driving force in
holding many scores of conferences in Europe and the United
States on the need for creating a paradigm shift, to get the
Western world out of its long-term economic, strategic, and
cultural crisis. And, over the last couple of years, she has
been one of the architects of this report, “The New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” She has also been leading the
campaign to stop the present geopolitical games that threaten to
detonate thermonuclear war and instead get the United States and
Europe to accept the offer of the BRICS countries to join forces
in an inclusive world order, where all nations of the world, on
an equal footing, collaborate to secure the peace and development
of all nations.
So I think it’s very appropriate that you are here to
directly lay what’s going on, so please, welcome. [applause]

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Thank you, Tom, for these kind words of
introduction.
Well I have a certain dilemma, because I want to present to
you the potential, which lies in this program, and given the fact
that the Western media have reported very little about it, I have
a dilemma, that I need to tell you, that this is {the} most
important political initiative on the planet right now. The
dilemma comes from the fact that, by introducing this idea, have
to tell you immediately why this is the case, and that is the
reality, that the world is much more close to a new global war,
than most people have an inkling of. And this New Silk Road
initiative, which comes from China, but which in the meantime has
been joined by many countries, is the only available
war-avoidance policy.
Now there was just on the April 18- 19 in Moscow the Fourth
Moscow International Security Conference, and the main subject of
this conference was the danger of nuclear war. And this is a
reaction to the fact that NATO has been expanding eastward, up to
the borders of Russia. You have a whole bunch of strategic
doctrines which Russia regards as a threat to their security
interests, and naturally you have the horrendous situation in
Ukraine, which contrary to what the Western media have been
reporting on — or not reporting actually — is it’s really
something which the West must make up. I just participated in the
last two days, or Friday and Saturday in a conference in
Baden-Baden in Germany, the German-Russian Cultural Days. It’s an
annual conference, and there was a large gathering of German
industrialists and Russian speakers and Russian people. And we
had the fortune to have a videoconference connected to this
conference, which brought in a live program from the former Prime
Minister of Ukraine, Mr. [Mykola] Azarov. And he gave an
absolutely hair-raising report about the conditions in Ukraine,
the fact that the country is being torn apart. Political leaders
are either forced to go into exile or are threatened to be
assassinated; journalists are being killed openly in the street;
trenches are being built; and, as you know, American soldiers are
now training the National Guard, which has a lot of Nazi
components in it. And for the Russians this is extremely severe,
because we are shortly before the 70th anniversary of the end of
Nazism and the end of the Second World War, and the mood of the
people were really horrified to see this endorsement of Nazis 70
years after the Second World War.
Now, I don’t want to go into this in depth, we can do that
in the discussion if people have questions about it, but I think
this crisis, in Ukraine in particular, I could also point to the
Middle East, which is in a similar horrible condition, makes
very, very clear, that if we as humanity cannot move away from
geopolitics — geopolitics was the reason for two world wars in
the 20th century, and right now the continuation of geopolitics
is threatening a new global war. I just want to mention an
article in {New York Times} from 19th April, where two generals,
Gen. James Cartwright, who is former head of the U.S. Strategic
Command, and Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, who is the chief of
intelligence of the Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces, they penned
together an article, In which they said that the world has never
been so close to the danger of nuclear war globally, and
therefore extinction, as right now. And the reason is obviously
that even the normal code of behavior among nations, which
existed in the Cold War, that you had a red telephone between
Kennedy and Khrushchev, this no longer exists; and you have the
two nuclear forces, from NATO and the West and Russia, all the
time on launch on warning. And launch on warning means there are
only a few minutes time, if one side perceives a launch, either
by intention or by accident, they have a few minutes, actually
it’s estimated three minutes’ time, to respond or be eliminated.
So that shows you how extremely close we are to the danger
of a global extinction of civilization. Because if this would
happen, we would not exist as humanity. And I’m saying it with
that gravity, to say that this calls all the more urgently, for a
different approach. And the different approach must be to move
away from geopolitics and move in the direction of the common
aims of mankind.
And it just happens to be, that the policies which are
proposed by President Xi Jinping, which he calls a “win-win”
policy, is exactly that. It’s the idea, that with the New Silk
Road, you have a policy where every country which participates in
it, will have a benefit for it. The New Silk Road, Maritime Silk
Road policy by China is {not} a new imperial policy replacing the
Anglo-American imperial policy, but it is a completely new model
of the nations among nations, where the enormous example of the
Chinese economic miracle, which China was able to develop in the
last 30 years — you know, where China in {30 years}, developed
as much as most industrial nations needed 100 or 200 years to
develop — and China is now offering to export that model and
have other countries benefit in a similar way from that kind of
economic miracle, which China did.
Can you move to the first slide?
So the world has changed since July last year, the summit of
the BRICS countries in Fortaleza in Brazil. And this is a
picture which was made at this occasion, showing the leaders of
Russia, India, Brazil, China and South Africa. And they basically
concluded a new strategic alliance — economic alliance, which
Prime Minister Modi characterized in the following way: He said,
“This is the first alliance of nations, which are not defined by
their current capacity, but by their future potential of
development.” And at another occasion, Modi said that the biggest
potential of India is, that 60% of its people are below 30 years
of age, and therefore, if they are well-educated and developed,
they can come to the help of other nations, which has demographic
problems, like Germany, for example.
What these countries did, is they concluded an enormous
amount of economic treaties, of economic cooperation, including
peaceful development of inherently safe nuclear energy, the
development of fusion energy, joint space projects, space travel,
and numerous other high-tech cooperation areas.
Then, the next day, they met with the leaders of South
America, the organizations of CELAC [Community of Latin American
and Caribbean States] and Unasur [Union of South American
Nations]. Then a little bit later they also had meetings with
countries of ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] and
actually you have now a completely parallel system of economics,
which is really going to be the infrastructure development of the
world.
Now this here is an official picture of the New Silk Road
and the Maritime Silk Road, which shows you the old Silk Road
from Xi’an, actually it goes even farther to the west,
Lianyungang, where the end of that Silk Road is on the China Sea,
all the way through Urumqi, then Central Asia into Europe; and
then Maritime Silk Road is actually connecting even Africa and
much of the Pacific also into Europe. And this is modelled on the
famous Maritime Silk Road of the 15th century, which connected
the nations of the world already at that time.
Now, I want to very quickly say that this made us very
happy, when Xi Jinping announced the New Silk Road in Kazakhstan
in 2013, we jumped that high — you know, in the Schiller
Institute — because we had promoted this idea. This was our
proposal when the Berlin Wall came down, in ’89, and the wall no
longer was there. So we said let’s connect Paris with Berlin and
Vienna, which is a triangular area of the size of Japan, and has
the highest concentration of industrial capacity in the world;
and let’s make corridors to Warsaw, to Kiev, to the Balkans. And
it would have been a perfect way to intervene.
Unfortunately at that time, despite the fact there was a
very good resonance, you had Bush Sr., you had Margaret
Thatcher, and they had completely different ideas: They wanted to
reduce Russia from a superpower to at Third World, raw
materials-exporting country, and therefore they introduced the
shock-therapy, instead, which dismantled the Russian industrial
potential between ’91-’94, to only 30% left.
But then, when in ’91, the Soviet Union collapsed, we
connected this triangle, Paris-Berlin-Vienna, and we said: OK,
now the Iron Curtain is gone, now we can have development
corridors connecting the population and industrial centers of
Europe with those of Asia, through corridors. And then we looked
at the best geographical conditions. I should say, we were
inspired very much by the railway program of Sun Yat-sen, the
founder of modern China, who had developed a whole network of
Chinese railways, and that went into this program. So, at that
time we said let’s look at the best geographical preconditions,
and we found, not so accidentally, that the old Trans-Siberian
Railroad and the old Silk Road, the ancient Silk Road, had the
best geographical conditions to build such infrastructure.
So at that point the shock therapy started to destroy
Russia’s economy, but we kept holding seminars — we had hundreds
of seminars, in Europe, in United States, and then, eventually,
in Warsaw, in Budapest, in Moscow. And in ’96 even in Beijing,
where the Chinese government had responded to our proposal to all
the governments, to hold a big conference promoting the regions
along the Silk Road. And I was there as a speaker, but then came
the Asia Crisis in ’97, and China, at that conference said, that
this will be the long-term strategy for China until 2010. But
then the Asia crisis brought chaos and then the Russian GKO
crisis [in ’98].
So in the mean time we kept working on this initial proposal
which grew. And the latest of this, is this report: It’s a
370-page study which is really the idea of connecting the world
through infrastructure corridors.
Now, here you see some of these projects, which are already
being built, by the BRICS, by some of the other countries — for
example China is now building a transcontinental railroad from
Brazil to Peru, this is letter A [on the map]. This has already
started — you know, Latin America does not have an
infrastructure network! It is still in the colonial condition,
where you have little railroads from the iron ore mountain to the
coast, but if you want to travel from Peru to Brazil, you have to
go via Miami. So this is the idea, to develop a continental
railroad system.
Then number 1 there is the canal built in Nicaragua, it will
be the second Panama Canal, which obviously is an extremely
important project, which will mean that Nicaragua has a very good
chance to become an industrial country, with improving living
standards of its population. Naturally the Greenies are going
crazy and they say there are two fishermen who have to be
resettled. But, first of all, these people will be compensated,
and secondly without infrastructure, there is {no} industrial
development; without infrastructure there is not even
agriculture, because without infrastructure you cannot transport
and process food.
So then, naturally you have the Bering Strait, this number
2. This has been recently announced by Vladimir Yakunin, who is
the head of Russian Railways. And he proposed (I don’t think I
have that slide), a fast train connection from London all the way
through the Bering Strait to New York. A couple of years ago, Mr.
LaRouche and I participated in a conference in Moscow where the
fathers of the Bering Strait Project were present. These were all
older men over 80, and they said: “Oh, in 20 years, we can go
with a maglev train from Acapulco through the Bering Strait to
Mumbai, and this will be much faster than you can go by ship
today,” and they had a very pioneering spirit.
So this is very important because this connection not only
would connect the transport lines of North America with those of
Eurasia, but it would be absolutely crucial to open up the Arctic
Region. In the Far East of Russia you have all the raw materials
which are in the periodic table of Mendeleyev, and they represent
for the next 100 years a very important raw-material potential
which will be important not only for Russia, but for Europe, for
the United States, for China, for Japan, for Korea. So this will
be the way to develop it, because these raw-material are in
permafrost conditions, and you have to build, you have to build
cities, which have a dome, because people have to live — you
cannot live in permanfrost conditions like that, you have to have
a special way of developing it.
Now, I could go into many other projects — the Seikan
tunnel between the Japanese islands does already exist, it
connects the two important islands in Japan. Then the Bohai
Tunnel will connect two Chinese cities and shorten the transport.
The brown line there, this is the actual Silk Road [Silk Road
Economic Belt], which is now being promoted by China; this larger
gray line is the [21st-Century] Maritime Silk Road; but as you
can see, it stretches all the way to Europe and into Africa.
Prime Minister Li Keqiang was several times last year in Africa,
and he proposed to connect all African capitals through a fast
train system. And I know from many Africans, leaders and leading
politicians, they are very happy about that, because Africa right
now urgently needs development. And I think, if you look at the
horrendous refugee crisis, the people drowning by the thousands
in the Mediterranean, it makes it {so} clear that to bring
development to Africa is the only way how you can overcome this
unbelievable tragedy. And if Europe would have a right mind, they
would join! You know, rather than sending the Triton boats to
chase the refugees back, which is a complete moral bankruptcy of
Europe.
Now this is very interesting, because the big question
always comes, “who should finance all of this?” As you know,
already at the Brazil Fortaleza summit, the BRICS countries
agreed, together with some of the other countries, to create new
financial institutions: the New Development Bank of the BRICS,
the AIIB [Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank] was already
founded in last October, but also a whole set of other banks.
And it came from the idea, that when the Asia crisis happened in
’97, in which speculators like George Soros speculated against
the currencies of countries like Korea, Philippines, Thailand, in
one week up to 60-80% downward, and these countries had no
defense; so they concluded, “OK, we have to protect ourselves,”
so they created the Contingency Reserve Arrangement [CRA], which
is a pool of currencies of a $100 billion, which will defend all
of the participating countries against speculative attacks.
Now, the AIIB, the New Development Bank, the New Silk Road
Fund, the Maritime Silk Road Fund, the bank of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization [SCO Development Bank], and the SAARC
[South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation] Development
Fund, are all new banks which follow a completely different
principle than Wall Street and the City of London, or Frankfurt,
for that matter. They say, we do not participate in speculation,
but we will use these funds only for investment in the real
economy, into these projects. And this is urgently needed,
because as you know, despite all of the quantitative easing of
the Federal Reserve, and now [ECB President] Mr. Draghi, who are
printing money as if there would be no tomorrow, the money does
not arrive at the industries! Because the banks, the speculators
prefer to keep the casino going, and this is actually reaching a
point where at the IMF annual spring meeting which just took
place in Washington, the IMF itself put out a report saying that
we are facing a collapse {bigger} than 2008 with the collapse of
Lehman Brothers. And several economists from J.P. Morgan and
other banks warned that you could have a simultaneous stock and
bond crisis, causing a meltdown of the system; or, if the Federal
Reserve would increase the interest rate only by a tiny, tiny
amount it could blow up the whole derivatives bubble of $2
trillion. And if the Troika and the ECB are pushing Greece out
of the Eurozone, that could also trigger a collapse, because it
would not so much hurt Greece, but it would blow up the European
banks.
So therefore, the existence of these banks are de facto a
lifeboat in the face of the immediate danger of a collapse.
Now, as you probably have noticed, when the question came,
who would be a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank, which was already constituted last October, but
the date until which countries could join as founding members was
end of March [2015]. And the United States put a lot of pressure
on the allies, not to join; they didn’t want Korea to join;
naturally, they didn’t want Europe to join, and they put maximum
pressure on Asian countries not to join. But then, it just so
happened, that the best ally of the United States, Great Britain,
was the first European country to join, and that caused a kind of
a dam break, and then Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland,
Austria, and all the Scandinavian countries joined. And the
actual founding members included 57 countries. And they
basically participate in different degrees in this new bank,
which obviously people realize that what China is offering with
the economic cooperation in these projects, is much, much more
attractive than to participate in more speculative bubbles which
eventually will pop. So, this was from the founding meeting in
October, already, but in the meantime, it become many more
states.
Now, this is also very interesting, because this is a
proposal which my husband made in 1975. It was called the
International Development Bank, and it was basically the same
idea as the AIIB, today, saying that the IMF and the World Bank
do not provide enough credit for Third World development. This
was a proposal he made in ’75, and it went into the final
resolution of the Non-Aligned Movement in 1976 in Colombo, Sri
Lanka, and it had the same idea as the AIIB.
The World Bank only spends per year $24 billion for
projects. But the actual requirement of the developing
countries, is about $8 trillion in the next years! So there is
no way the World Bank can manage that, and this bank, on the
other side, the AIIB, and the other banks will grow and will
become more productive.
Now, this is very important because what the AIIB and the
New Development Bank and this new economic system which is
emerging represent, is something completely different than
monetarism. Monetarism is the idea that you have to have maximum
profit, the real economy doesn’t count; as a matter of fact, you
all know, that if you have an industrial firm which lays of
10,000, the stock goes up! It doesn’t make any sense. In the
realm of monetarism, this is explained by the idea that the firm
becomes “more productive” because fewer workers work more, and
therefore the profit is greater; but from the standpoint of the
real economy this makes no sense at all.
And it is exactly that philosophy which has caused the
Troika to destroy Greece. What they managed to do is to reduce
the Greek economy by one-third, to increase the youth
unemployment to 65%, and people are extremely unhappy, not only
in Greece, but also in Italy, in Spain, Portugal and so forth.
What we propose, both the IDB and these new banks, is really
going back to a completely different model. It’s based on the
idea of this man, whom you all recognize, I’m sure — he is
Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the
United States. And he created, actually, the United States, by
creating the National Bank and the credit system, because, what
he did, was after the War of Independence, the different states
in the United States were totally indebted. So he unified the
United States by taking over the debt obligations of these
states, and basically saying, it’s no longer your business, we’ll
take these debts as a Federal state, as a national state, and we
will transform that into a credit mechanism, only aimed at areal
production.
And that was really the actual founding of the United
States. And this idea of a credit system which is not
monetarism, but it is the idea that credit can only be given for
future production in the real economy, not for speculation, that
model was what made the United States a great industrial power.
Because, despite the fact that some following Presidents then
tried to dismantle it, the United States went back to it, again
and again. It was the policies of John Quincy Adams; it was the
policy of Abraham Lincoln with the greenbacks; it was the policy
of Franklin D. Roosevelt. This is how Roosevelt brought the
United States out of the Depression of the ’30s by building the
Reconstruction Finance Corp. which financed the New Deal, and
that’s how America got out of the Depression. And, also, it was
the basis for the German Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the
state bank, which help to finance the reconstruction and the
economic miracle of Germany in the postwar period — which was
modeled on the Reconstruction Finance Corp.
So this is therefore, not something new. It’s a tested
model, it has always been the basis when there was progress in
the real economy, as compared to the financial markets. I’m not
talking about the financial markets, I’m talking about real
production for the livelihood and the common good of the people.
So the first step there, we have called for — Tom
mentioned it — that we think it is an absolute matter, actually
of war and peace, if we succeed to get the European nations {and}
America to join with this “win-win,” all-inclusive,
non-geopolitical system. And, as I said, the financial system of
Wall Street and the City of London {is} about to blow up, bigger
than 2008, and the only way how that can be avoided from leading
to a chaotic collapse, is by going back to the Glass-Steagall
legislation which was introduced by Franklin D. Roosevelt in
1933, which was his answer to the collapse of ’29-’33 period.
And he separated the banks, by making the commercial banks
separate from the investment banks, so that the investment bank
could not have access to assets of the commercial banks.
And this exist from 1933 until 1999 in the United States,
and in Europe you had practically the same thing, because you had
a very regulated banking sector. But the Wall Street forces did
not like it, because naturally it reduced their profit, so they
worked very hard to eliminate it, which they were able to do in
1999, and the whole super-expansion of the speculative area only
occurred after this law was eliminated. And the good news, is
that there is a right now a Presidential candidate in the United
States, who has said that his first act if he would move into the
White House, would be to reintroduce this Glass-Steagall law: And
that is the former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, about whom many
papers are writing that he has a very good chance to take the
Democratic nomination, because many people think Hillary Clinton
has made too many compromises with bad policies, when she was
Secretary of State. But, O’Malley is not alone, but you have a
whole bunch of people around him, who say the United States must
go back to being a Republic; it must go back to putting the
common good above the interests of Wall Street. And that is
really the “to be or not to be” question of the whole world.
Now, if this reorganization would take place, then, the
United States could easily join with the BRICS countries in such
efforts as the AIIB and other such things. And, as you know, the
Greek government has also demanded that there is no way how they
can pay their debt, because as you know, of all the rescue
packages which went to Greece, only 3% of that money remained in
Greece, while all the rest really went to the European banks.
And therefore, to demand that Greece should pay back these debts,
it’s just impossible! And the Greek government has made the
point that they want to have a European Debt Conference, like
Germany in 1953, without which the German economic miracle would
never have taken place. So if this all happens, and that could
happen in the short term, Europe could easily participate in
that.
Now, I just want to say, the ancient Silk Road was not only
an exchange of silk, and porcelain, and paper, printing,
gunpowder, and many, many other goods, but much more important
than that, it was an exchange of ideas and technologies: Silk
making is more important than silk; how to print books is more
important than the book. So the ancient Silk Road was an
extremely important exchange of goods and culture, and ideas, and
understanding among people — and so will be the New Silk Road,
just with modern means.
Now, if you go back to the picture, this is why we have
said, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge” where we
have the camels, sort of symbolizing the old Silk Road, and here
you see a maglev train, and here you see a rover on the Moon, to
give you an idea that the exchange of technologies and goods in
the modern world will be the most advanced technologies to the
benefit of all of mankind.
So going back to the problem here, is, obviously, if you
look at that map, you see, these are the deserts of the world: A
very broad desert band which goes from the Atlantic coast of
Africa, through the Sahara-Sahel zone, the Arab Peninsula, the
Middle East, all the way to China. And that desert is growing.
It’s expanding. And then you have the desert in the West of the
United States, which is right now ruined by a big drought in
California, in Texas, in all the states west of the Mississippi;
and naturally, Brazil has a drought.
In the United States this is very severe. Here you have a
global water scarcity map; here you have the water stress
indicator. In the United States, just to mention that, Governor
Brown of California has just announced that the water consumption
will be cut by 25% up to 36%! Now that is the death to
Californian agriculture; in the south of California, for example,
in the Central Valley, in this region, 40% of the entire
agriculture of the United States is produced, and this is now
being completely destroyed. Here you see, this is a former
reservoir, which is almost dried up. This is the snowpack: in
2013, it was relatively, a lot of snow, and last year, no snow,
so the drought is expanding, and obviously, to cut consumption
means you kill people. I mean, you cannot cut water — where
should these people go? There are already cities and towns where
people are — it’s not just not watering their lawn — it’s
taking public showers, of getting water rations, and then
eventually people have to move away, because if there is no water
there is no life. There were already herds being transformed, of
hundreds of thousands of head of cattle, and the idea to just
accept that, and as Governor Brown said, “California historically
has only a carrying potential of 400,000 people,” is ridiculous,
because there are presently 39 million people living in
California! And the idea to say there’s only room for 400,000 is
completely ahistorical about what is the role of human beings,
who differentiate themselves from animals by being able to
increase the living capability for more people by improving
productivity, by transforming the industry, the infrastructure,
and in that way, developing the planet.
So obviously, China has taken a completely different
approach. Here you see, China is actually the only country which
has taken a very big water diversification: There is on the one
side, the Three Gorges Dam, which is now producing, I think 22
gigawatts of electricity per year, and it has eliminated flooding
which killed many thousands of people in the past; and even more
important, is the water diversification project from the southern
area of the Yangtze River through a Northern Route into the
Yellow River and the desert area of China; and the Middle Route
to the region around Beijing.
So this is actually a model which is now being followed by
Narendra Modi for India, who just agreed to make gigantic water
projects to tame the water coming down from the Himalayas, and
also making canals out of 101 Indian rivers.
Now, what most people don’t consider is, that water is not a
natural resource like iron ore, or gold, or whatever: You can’t
use up, because water is organized in global cycles, where 90% of
the precipitation rains down over the ocean, only 10% rains down
over the land. And that water, the Sun causes evaporation, this
leads to cloud formation, and then the water rains down, and it
is human activity, which can make these cycles more efficient.
It’s not just, that it rains down over land and then flows back
into the ocean. You can use it in agriculture, you can use it in
industrial production, you can use it in other urban activities,
and it is actually the ability of man to make that more
efficient.
Here you see a very interesting comparison — you see here
the water diversion of the United States. Even though the water
diversion of China has started much more recently, it’s almost
double, which shows you the completely different philosophy.
This is a very important project, which is part of the
approach to fight the desert, and this is the Lake Chad Transaqua
project, which is the idea, that you could eliminate a lot of the
drought in the Sahel zone and around Lake Chad by bringing some
of the surplus water from the headwaters region of the Congo on
the one side, through rivers and canals into Lake Chad, which has
been reduced to less than 10% right now; and also through a
second canal along the Nile to increase the agricultural land in
Africa tremendously. And also now to bring real development to
these countries, without which you will have more people running
away from Boko Haram, which is now at Lake Chad and Nigeria. And
without a real development perspective, there is no way how you
can contain these projects.
Human beings are the only species, which can improve the
conditions of mankind again and again and again, and the last
10,000 years, or 20,000 years since the last Ice Age, just think,
what an enormous development mankind has made. We have increased
the population potential of the Earth from about 5 million at
most, to presently around 7 billion. This is due to the fact that
man, unlike animals, can make new discoveries, discovers the
universal principles of our physical universe, and think things,
which have never been thought before.
Therefore, the attack on the water crisis is not just a
question of using the aquifers, because the aquifers can — they
replenish, but this goes much too slowly. It’s not only
re-diverting the rivers, dams, but it’s especially influencing
the global cyclical process of water. There is a relationship
between what happens in our Solar System and the rain. Because
the Sun, which shines on the oceans, causes evaporation, but the
Sun is not the only solar impact on the weather; it’s also the
cosmic radiation, which comes from our galaxy, which leads to
cloud formation, ionization of moisture, and therefore to rain.
That is not just something where we have to wait passively until
it happens, but we can study, for example, what is happening in
our galaxy, which influences the weather, and then understand
better, how we can create more water.
Here, you see our Solar System in a 32 million year cycle,
moving along the Milky Way. The Milky Way is basically a flat
plateau, in which our Solar System is moving up and down in
cycles, and you have a complete change in the weather patterns,
which comes from the position of our Solar System in our galaxy.
I’m not saying, that we know everything about that yet. We
know, that there is a lot of connection between the Solar System,
the galaxy and the weather patterns on our Earth, and I can
assure you, that if you look at the long-term changes in our
weather patterns, then {these} things are a lot more important,
than whatever you use in your little car as CO2 production.
Because these are forces, which are of a completely different
magnitude, and naturally, the climate is changing, but galactic
processes are really what is the cause of it.
Anyway, the idea of using cosmic rays and ionization of
moisture is already successfully being done by Israel and by some
of the Gulf States; Russia is doing a lot of research on this,
and this is, what we have to do. The reason, why I’m saying this,
is, the Silk Road is not just building railways from Dunhuang to
Lisbon or wherever; it’s not just building roads, it’s not just
building canals. The modern Silk Road, the New Silk Road is,
exactly as the old Silk Road was, {an exchange of ideas, of
technology, for the common good of all.}
Obviously, today the big challenges are world poverty, are
the danger of war, are the danger of water scarcity, which could
become the reason for new wars. So the New Silk Road — and this
is what we understand with it, and I’m sure that our Chinese
friend will show his perspective — but that is the philosophy,
which we have taken as a basis in our approach, that the New Silk
Road is {a vision}, of how humanity can move away from
geopolitics and the stupid idea that we have to fight over scarce
resources, that we have to create wars because we don’t like
another system, that we have to eventually self-destruct, but
that we have to make the evolutionary jump to the idea of the
common aims of mankind and to define the next phase of evolution
in the interest of all.
If you look at this, the Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry
Rogozin of Russia just two days ago, pointed to the fact, that
the BRICS countries are all space travelling nations. China is
the leader in space travel. When China in December 2013 landed
the Yutu rover on the Moon, with was the idea, that in a few
missions later, I think it was in 2017, this Yutu — “Jade
Rabbit” — that they will bring back helium-3. Helium-3 is an
isotope, which is actually a fuel for fusion power. It’s much
more efficient than deuterium or tritium, because with this heavy
deuterium and tritium in the fusion process, you are still using
turbines, and you use turbines to create electricity in the old
way. But with helium-3 you can directly gain electricity from the
physical process of fusion power, and therefore, naturally, the
energy efficiency is much, much higher. And once we have fusion
power, for example, this will create for the first time energy
and raw materials security for the Earth. Energy security,
because on the Moon, you have several tons of helium-3, which
will be sufficient for many tens of thousands of years of energy
security on the Earth; and raw materials security, because with
the high heat of the plasma torch, you can take any waste,
including nuclear waste, including waste in your household, and
turn it back into isotopes, which you then can reconstruct and
make new raw materials.
So this is the vanguard of where mankind must go, and China
has made that its national pride. And China, contrary to Germany,
which is very stupid with respect to energy — you know, this
stupid exit from nuclear energy without having an alternative, is
completely crazy — but China has basically created a situation,
where they are in the right position to solve this problem, and
Rogozin, the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, has said, that the
BRICS countries will cooperate in space to solve these problems.
So this is extremely important, because if mankind makes
that jump to not have war as a conflict resolution, which in a
time of nuclear energy, it should be obvious that we must move to
a different regime, that we must define the common aims of
mankind, that which is, — if you have seen these pictures with
astronauts and cosmonauts and taikonauts, they all report the
same: When they are in space and look at our little planet, this
blue planet, they realize that there are no borders. They also
realize that our planet is extremely small in a very big Solar
System, in an even bigger galaxy, and there are {billions} of
galaxies. So, there are dangers from space, like cosmic
radiation, like asteroids; there are all kinds of dangers, which
we don’t manage right now. But if we don’t want to have the same
fate as the dinosaurs, who became eliminated 65 million years
ago, because probably a meteorite hit the Earth and created so
much cloud cover, that all the vegetation stopped, and then the
dinosaurs, and 96% of all other species were eliminated; if we
as a creative species, {are} really the creative species, we
should put our efforts together and defend against common dangers
to our planet, common dangers to our civilization, and unite.
And there is no better image for that than space collaboration.
This whole question also has a philosophical dimension.
Because people think, China is just doing an imperial expansion,
they want to have their interests. Well, I have the deepest
conviction that what is working in China right now, especially
with President Xi Jinping, {is} the 2,500-year-old Confucian
tradition in China. And I go even so far to say the Chinese
people have Confucius in their genes. Confucius was a
philosopher, who reacted to a historical period in China, which
was characterized by war, by great unrest, by turmoil. And he
developed the Confucian philosophy, which is beautiful. I can
only advise you, in case you are not doing it, study Confucius.
Because Confucius has this idea that there must be harmony in the
world, on the planet. And that, for example, the best way to
have harmony is, there is one key notion, which is {li}, which is
the idea, that each person, each nation, should take its proper
place, and develop in the best possible way, and then you have
harmony. Because if everybody develops their creative potential
and their best maximum capacity, and takes the development of the
other as their own interest, and vice versa, then you have peace.
And that should also be based on the other notion of {ren}.
{Ren} basically means the same thing as love, or {agapë}, or the
Christian idea of charity.
And it happens to be that these ideas are also in the
European best tradition. There is a very important philosopher of
the 15th century, called Nicolaus of Cusa, who was the founder of
modern science, the founder of the modern nation-state, and he
was very important: He broke through the barrier from the Middle
Ages to modern times. Because he was actually the person, who
brought the Council of Florence into being by first finding
handwritings in Byzantium, which were then the basis for the
unification of the Orthodox Church with the Roman Church; but
when he brought the Orthodox delegation in 1453 to the Council of
Florence, he had a stroke of genius: He said, now, I am thinking
something, which no human being has ever thought before. He then
wrote his {De Docta Ignorantia}, and he developed this notion of
the coincidence of opposites, the {coincidentia oppositorum},
which was the idea, that the One has a higher quality than the
Many, and that the human mind is capable of synthesizing some
hypothesis, which gives you a deeper insight into the laws of the
universe, into Classical art — in other words, it’s the
creativity of the human mind, which is the driving force in the
development of the universe. And that’s for example, what the
Russian philosopher Vladimir Vernadsky called, that the
creativity of man is a geophysical force in the universe. Now,
what he did basically, is to say — he didn’t say it in this way,
but the effect of it was — that in order to move away from the
Middle Ages, from the Scholasticism, from the Neo-Peripatetics
and the Aristotelean ideas, you had to basically break with the
axioms of the Middle Ages thinking, and that you had to create
something basically completely new, a new method of thinking.
And I’m saying, that with the New Silk Road, we have to do
exactly that: We have to break away from money, greed,
monetarism, all of these things, which really are a decaying
culture. If you look at the European, American, Western culture,
it {is} a decaying culture. Just look at the youth culture. Look
at what our young people watch in terms of pop music, video
games, the violence, just the popular entertainment has become
really degenerate. And we have to break with that, and we have to
combine the New Silk Road economic model — which I did not go
into so much today, because I already spoke about it two months
ago here in Copenhagen — but we have to break with the whole
axiomatic of globalization and basically go for a New
Renaissance, a new cultural renaissance of thinking, which will
build on the best traditions of each country: on Confucianism,
on Vedic tradition of India, on Avicenna [Ibn Sina], and other
thinkers, Al-Farabi, Abu Al-Kindi in the Arab world; in Europe,
the great Classical music tradition, the Italian Renaissance, the
German Classical music. We just have to take the high points of
all civilizations, and study that, and start to love the culture
of the other countries, and then we will create out of this a
completely New Renaissance, which will bring mankind into a
completely new phase of evolution.
Because I do not believe, that the present condition of
mankind is, what we are here for! We are not here to kill each
other; we are not here to eat caviar, until we have it coming out
of our ears. We are here to be creative! We are here to discover
the laws of the universe, to write beautiful poems, to write
beautiful music, to celebrate the creativity of civilization. And
I think, that the idea of man in space, man going into the next
phase of the evolution of man, is really what will get us out of
this crisis. So that is, what the New Silk Road is all about.
[ovation]

Mens verden har kurs mod nogle uger, der er afgørende for Det britiske Imperiums desperate forsøg på at fremprovokere et opgør gennem økonomisk fascisme og atomkrig, udstedte Hung Tran, direktøren for Instituttet for International Finans – IIF, også kendt som Ditchley-gruppen eller »bankierernes kartel« – en skarp advarsel om, at, hvis Grækenland skubbes ud af eurozonen ved at insistere på, at landets regering gennemtvinger umulige nedskæringsbetingelser, så »kunne der opstå tvivl om hele sammenhængen i den vestlige alliance«, og det kunne bringe hele det transatlantiske finanssystem til fald med kort varsel.

Dette er fuldstændigt sandt, lød Lyndon LaRouches kommentar i dag. Hele systemet kan falde, hvad øjeblik, det skal være, og Grækenland kunne bliver aftrækkeren. Men, forklarede LaRouche, man behøver ikke få denne krise; den vil kun fremkomme, såfremt Europa fortsat forsøger at forpligte sig til et svindelnummer, som består i de falske, finansielle værdier i forbindelse med den græske og tilsvarende gæld. Dette svindelnummer består af alt, hvad Wall Street foretager sig.

Alt dette kan forandres gennem en tilbagevenden til Franklin Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-politik. Glass/Steagall er toneangivende for alt det, der må gøres, og vi må presse på med det i USA og lægge alle vore kræfter bag et sådant fremstød, sagde LaRouche. Det er blevet gjort til det centrale spørgsmål i præsidentkampagnen af Martin O’Malley, hvis mission foreløbig er fin og kvalificerer ham til præsidentskabet. En sådan genindførelse af Glass/Steagall ville være meget smertefuld for Wall Street, men det er præcist, hvad landet og verden har brug for. O’Malley som potentiel præsidentkandidat med en kampagne for denne politik frembyder en global løsning.

Men vi kan ikke bare vente og se, om det sker, fortsatte LaRouche. Vi må gribe forebyggende ind, både mht. Glass/Steagall og den hermed tilknyttede politik for at løse den såkaldte »ferskvandskrise« gennem at rejse spørgsmålet om det galaktiske princip, som er blevet udarbejdet og fremlagt af LaRouches videnskabspolitiske team. Det er dette galaktiske, universelle, fysiske princip, der er årsag til vandcyklussen på Jorden, understregede LaRouche i dag, og ikke omvendt. Det, man skal tænke, er ikke på Jorden her og nu, men ud mod galaksen (mindst) og tænke frem 32 millioner år ud i fremtiden (mindst) for at danne sig et begreb om de universelle, skabende processer, der styrer de lokale, planetariske udviklinger i dag.

Som LaRouche erklærede det under drøftelser med sine medarbejdere her til eftermiddag:

»Der er ingen knaphed på vand. På planeten Jord er der ingen knaphed på vand! For knapheden på vand udgør en forbindelse mellem de overordnede kræfter, galaksen, og de lokale kræfter, som er planeten Jord. Planeten Jord er en mindre, underordnet enhed i det galaktiske system … Og det eneste, vi behøver at gøre, er at tænke over den teknologi, som vi må anvende for at udnytte de fordele, som det galaktiske system frembyder. Det betyder mange ting, og mange formodninger hos en masse mennesker, i USA og andre steder, må ændres.«

»Problemet er, at vi må få folk i USA i særdeleshed til at forlade den politik, som er den aktuelle politik under Obamaregeringen. Med andre ord, så må Obama fjernes fra [regeringsmagten i] USA. Det er den nødvendige handling … Vi må ganske enkelt ændre USA’s politik og USA’s relation til andre nationer i det transatlantiske område. Vi må ændre vores politik i overensstemmelse med denne forudsætning. Og det kan lade sig gøre. Spørgsmålet er, vil det blive gjort? Og hvad der er vigtigere: Vil vi, som nation, få lov til, få tilladelse til at tage de skridt, der kan tages for at løse dette problem?«

Denne krise, og den foreliggende løsning, er grunden til, at briterne og Obama ønsker at dræbe, dræbe og dræbe, sagde LaRouche. Folk indser ikke, at Obama blot er en farlig idiot. De er forvirrede, fordi han udviser de kendetegn på magt, som er forbundet med det amerikanske præsidentskab. Men han er ikke en intellektuel person, uanset, hvor meget man strækker sin forestillingsevne; han er en tåbe, om end en farlig én af slagsen.

Briternes/Obamas ’kill-kill’-politik er deres svar på Kinas ’win-win’-strategi. Den udstilles gennem de fortsatte mord på migranter i Middelhavet, som er en direkte konsekvens af Obamas krig og statskup i Libyen i 2011, der igen var en direkte efterfølger for den britisk/amerikanske promovering af den tjetjenske opstand mod Rusland, der så levende blev fordømt af LaRouche i hans videoberetning, »Storm over Asia«, fra 1999.

Dette tjetjenske spørgsmål er stadig afgørende i dag som omdrejningspunkt for fremvæksten af den britisk-sponsorerede jihadist-terror, som stedfortræderkrig imod Rusland, og imod et civiliseret menneskebegreb generelt.

Denne ’kill-kill’-politik ses også i den seneste nedslagtning af yazidier (kurdisk stammefolk, hovedsageligt i Irak, -red.), udført af ISIS-udyrene, som Obama har bragt til magten tværs over hele Nordafrika og Sydvestasien. Og politikken er skarpt udstillet i det ukrainske brændpunkt for krig mod Rusland og Kina, hvor det samme slæng, som frembragte Anden Verdenskrigs nazister – dvs. Det britiske Imperium og Prescott Bush og hans lige – er fanatisk besluttet på at sikre, at ingen i dag vil fejre 70-året for sejren over deres nazister, med mindre disse samme nazister stoppes igen i dag.

»Er der noget at fejre?«, kan man næsten høre Dronningen (den britiske, -red.) mumle, med en vis irritation.

Foto: Franklin D. Roosevelt, USA’s præsident 1933-45.

(FDR underskrev den 16. juni 1933 Glass/Steagall-loven, der var i kraft frem til 1999, og som indførte en skarp adskillelse mellem kommercielle banker med normal indlåns- og udlånsaktivitet, og så investeringsbanker, der promoverer hasarderet spekulation, der ikke investerer i et lands fysiske realøkonomi, herunder infrastruktur, og som, uden Glass/Steagall-loven, har adgang til almindelige indskydermidler til at spekulere med. (-red.))

2. maj 2015 – Der kommer ikke fred i det sydøstlige Ukraine, så længe der fortsat sidder fascister på magten i Kiev, og deres fjernelse fra magten kan kun fremmes ved, at præsident Obama, der støtter dem, fjernes fra magten i USA. En potentiel sabotage af Minskaftalens våbenhvile, så længe denne situation er fremherskende, blev yderligere antydet i går, da den ukrainske præsident Petro Poroshenkos kontor udstedte en erklæring, der hævdede, at den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin havde antydet, at han var åben over for idéen om at udstationere FN-fredsbevarende styrker i Donbass-regionen.

»I forbindelse med drøftelserne hen imod en fredelig løsning [på konflikten], har præsident Putin accepteret muligheden af, at der udstationeres en fredsbevarende styrke i Donbass-regionen«, sagde Poroshenkos kontor i kølvandet på firevejs-telefonsamtalen mellem Poroshenko, Putin, den tyske kansler Angela Merkel og den franske præsident François Hollande.

Talsmand for Kreml, Dmitry Peskov, benægtede imidlertid, at Putin skulle være åben over for spørgsmålet om fredsbevarende styrker. »Før ordlyden i Minskaftalen og aftalens konkrete punkter bliver gennemført mener vi, at det ville være absolut forkert at rejse andre spørgsmål, inklusive spørgsmålet om fredsbevarende styrker«, sagde han. Forespurgt, om Putin var åben over for spørgsmålet, sagde Peskov, »Nej, dette er ikke sandt.« Det er op til Kiev og republikkerne Luhansk og Donetsk at indgå aftale om en sådan udstationering, sagde han, men først må de overholde det dokument, som de allerede har underskrevet.

Med hensyn til Poroshenkos erklæring i går om, at krigen i den sydøstlige del ikke vil slutte, før Krim og Donbass er genintegreret i Ukraine, så udstedte Denis Pushilin, repræsentant for den selvudråbte Folkerepublik Donetsk, er erklæring til Minsk Kontaktgruppen som svar, hvor han advarede om, at sådanne erklæringer blot indikerer Kievregimets plan om at optrappe konflikten. »Dette bekræfter endnu engang den kendsgerning, at Kiev ikke er parat til at gennemføre alle Minskaftalens betingelser«, sagde han. Han tilføjede, at Poroshenkos erklæring også reflekterer holdningen hos regimets støtter, nemlig USA. »Dette siger endnu engang, at Kievs oversøiske støtter forbereder en ny krig og ikke har til hensigt at handle på linje med Minsk-2«, sagde han.

I mellemtiden sagde den offentlige anklager i Krim i går, at et medlem af Azov-bataljonen var blevet tilbageholdt i Simferopol under forsøg på at udføre et terrorangreb imod den offentlige anklagers kontor, rapporterer TASS. Den samme person mistænkes også for at være indblandet i en ildspåsættelse af en moske.

Foto: Den ukrainske præsident Petro Poroshenko sagde torsdag, den 30. april, at krigen i Ukraine vil være forbi, når Donbass og Krim er tilbage i Ukraine. (TASS)

Titelbillede: Dr. Liu Chunrong og Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Schiller Instituttets seminar fandt sted på Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute under Copenhagen Business School.

The Schiller Institute seminar was held at the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, Copenhagen Business School.

Hr. Li Xiaoguang, kinesisk meddirektør for Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, holdt en velkomsttale.

Mr. Li Xiaoguang,  the Chinese co-director of the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, welcomed the participants to the Institute.

H.E. Ambassador Liu Biwei (right)

HE hr. Liu Biwei, Den kinesiske Folkerepubliks ambassadør til Kongeriget Danmark holdt åbningstalen.

His Excellency Mr. Liu Biwei, Ambassador of the People’s Republic of  China to the Kingdom of Denmark delivered opening greetings to the seminar.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter og formand for det Internationale Schiller Institut, holdt en tale om ‘Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen, med introduktion v/Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and president of the international Schiller Institute spoke about The New Silk Road becomes The World Land-bridge. Introduced by Tom Gillesberg, chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark:

Video af Zepp-LaRouches tale, med dia-billeder; en dansk oversættelse følger lige under videoen.

(Video of Zepp-LaRouches speach, with the slides included. An english transcript can be found further down the page)

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Audio:

Hr. Liu Chunrong, PhD., associeret professor, School of International Public Affairs, Fundan Universitetet; eksekutiv vicedirektør for Fundan-European Centre for China Studies, Københavns Universitet, præsenterede Kinas “En Bælte, En Vej” politik.

Dr. Liu Chunrong, PhD, Associate Professor, School of International Relations and Public Affairs, Fudan University, and Executive Vice Director Fudan-European Centre for China Studies, NIAS,  University of Copenhagen, presented China’s One Belt, One Road policy.

Video:

Audio:

Discussion period:

Video:

Audio:

(See English report below.)

Stor succes for Københavner-seminar om Kinas politik for »Et Bælte, En Vej«

København, 27. april 2015 – Omkring 80 mennesker deltog i dag i et seminar, som blev holdt på Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute under Copenhagen Business School.

Følgende personer var talere på seminaret:

Velkomsttale: Hr. Li Xiaoguang, kinesisk meddirektør for Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute.

HE hr. Liu Biwei, Den kinesiske Folkerepubliks ambassadør til Kongeriget Danmark – åbningstale.

Fr. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, grundlægger af og international præsident for Schiller Instituttet og en betydningsfuld medforfatter af »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«; mangeårig leder i LaRouche-bevægelsen og gift med den amerikanske statsmand, økonom og filosof Lyndon LaRouche; forkvinde for det tyske politiske parti Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität (Borgerrettighedsbevægelsen Solidaritet), BüSo. Introduktion v/Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark.

Hr. Liu Chunrong, PhD., associeret professor, School of International Public Affairs, Fundan Universitetet; eksekutiv vicedirektør for Fundan-European Centre for China Studies, Københavns Universitet.

De ca. 80 deltagere inkluderede fem ambassadører samt diplomater fra seks andre ambassader, mange medlemmer og kontakter af Schiller Instituttet, og andre interesserede som har specielle tilknutning til Kina.

Denne konference er den tredje i rækken af ’Manhattan-projekt’-konferencer i København siden januar, som Schiller Instituttet har arrangeret. En mere udførlig rapport vil følge, inkl. links til video- og audiooptagelser.

English:

Very Successful Copenhagen Seminar on “China’s ‘One Belt,
One Road’ Policy”

The Schiller Institute in Denmark held a very successful seminar about China’s “One Belt, One Road” policy, at the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, attended by approximately 80 people. Video and audio recordings can be found at:  http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=6387

Li Xiaoguang, the Chinese co-director of the Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, welcomed the speakers and attendees.

The seminar participants had the honor to have opening remarks by His Excellency Mr. Liu Biwei, Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China to the Kingdom of Denmark.

The next speaker was Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and president of The Schiller Institute, and a major author of the EIR Report “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” She was introduced by Tom Gillesberg, chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark. Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche presented the world land-bridge policy and the new BRICS paradigm, as the alternative to the danger of economic and financial collapse, and nuclear war. One area of special emphasis was the growing crisis of fresh water scarcity, counterposing the lack of action in the U.S., with the great infrastructure project approach in China.

The Chinese point of view of the “One Belt, One Road” policy was presented by Dr. Liu Chunrong, PhD, Associate Professor, School of International Relations and Public Affairs, Fudan University, and Executive Vice Director Fudan-European Centre for China Studies, NIAS, University of Copenhagen.

Among the audience were: five ambassadors, plus diplomats from another six other embassies; people who have a special connection to China representing a Danish think tank, academia and businesses; plus many Schiller Institute members and contacts.

This seminar was the third in a series of Manhattan project-style Schiller Institute conferences held in Copenhagen since January.

English transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s speech, and Tom Gillesberg’s introduction:

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE ADDRESSES “CHINA’S ‘ONE BELT, ONE ROAD’
POLICY’ SEMINAR IN COPENHAGEN, April 27, 2015

Here is the transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s address to the
Schiller Institute seminar in Copenhagen, which was held
Copenhagen Business Confucius Institute, Copenhagen Business
School. Click her for the audio and video from Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s speech and the other speeches from the seminar.

TOM GILLESBERG: I have the great honor of introducing Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, who has come here from a rather busy schedule both
in Germany and the United States, but also the whole world she’s
intervening to. Just as a short introduction, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche
has been since 1977 the wife and very close collaborator of
Lyndon LaRouche in the United States, the economist, philosopher,
statesman who is giving leadership in the U.S., for the U.S. to
return to the intentions of its founders, to be a promoter of
sovereign nations that can collaborate on an equal footing to
secure the benefits for all nations and peoples.
And Helga has a very, I think, close connection to China.
As a young journalist she traveled to China in 1971, in the
height of the Cultural Revolution as one of the first Western
journalists and actually saw on the spot what was going on. She
then became politically active with the LaRouche movement and
embarked on a life-long battle for a new just world economic
order, for the possibilities of development for all nations and
peoples.
She then founded, among many other things, the Schiller
Institute, in 1984. She is presently the chairwoman of the
German political party, the BüSo — the Bürgerrechtsbewegung
Solidarität, or Civil Rights Soliarity Movement. She was vry
active after the Fall of the Berlin Wall and one of the authors
of the Schiller Institute program for the development of the
world after the Iron Curtain had fallen of the program the
Paris-Berlin-Vienna Productive Triangle, a Locomotive for the
World Economy. And when that did not materialize, she was very
active in extending that program to the program for the Eurasian
Land-Bridge, going from China and Asia to Europe and having a
development of the whole region. And as part of that, she then
became a visitor many times to China to speak on the need for a
New Silk Road and actually earned her nickname in China as the
“Silk Road Lady,” for her efforts to have China embark on this
policy.
And since then, she has been also the driving force in
holding many scores of conferences in Europe and the United
States on the need for creating a paradigm shift, to get the
Western world out of its long-term economic, strategic, and
cultural crisis. And, over the last couple of years, she has
been one of the architects of this report, “The New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge.” She has also been leading the
campaign to stop the present geopolitical games that threaten to
detonate thermonuclear war and instead get the United States and
Europe to accept the offer of the BRICS countries to join forces
in an inclusive world order, where all nations of the world, on
an equal footing, collaborate to secure the peace and development
of all nations.
So I think it’s very appropriate that you are here to
directly lay what’s going on, so please, welcome. [applause]

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Thank you, Tom, for these kind words of
introduction.
Well I have a certain dilemma, because I want to present to
you the potential, which lies in this program, and given the fact
that the Western media have reported very little about it, I have
a dilemma, that I need to tell you, that this is {the} most
important political initiative on the planet right now. The
dilemma comes from the fact that, by introducing this idea, have
to tell you immediately why this is the case, and that is the
reality, that the world is much more close to a new global war,
than most people have an inkling of. And this New Silk Road
initiative, which comes from China, but which in the meantime has
been joined by many countries, is the only available
war-avoidance policy.
Now there was just on the April 18- 19 in Moscow the Fourth
Moscow International Security Conference, and the main subject of
this conference was the danger of nuclear war. And this is a
reaction to the fact that NATO has been expanding eastward, up to
the borders of Russia. You have a whole bunch of strategic
doctrines which Russia regards as a threat to their security
interests, and naturally you have the horrendous situation in
Ukraine, which contrary to what the Western media have been
reporting on — or not reporting actually — is it’s really
something which the West must make up. I just participated in the
last two days, or Friday and Saturday in a conference in
Baden-Baden in Germany, the German-Russian Cultural Days. It’s an
annual conference, and there was a large gathering of German
industrialists and Russian speakers and Russian people. And we
had the fortune to have a videoconference connected to this
conference, which brought in a live program from the former Prime
Minister of Ukraine, Mr. [Mykola] Azarov. And he gave an
absolutely hair-raising report about the conditions in Ukraine,
the fact that the country is being torn apart. Political leaders
are either forced to go into exile or are threatened to be
assassinated; journalists are being killed openly in the street;
trenches are being built; and, as you know, American soldiers are
now training the National Guard, which has a lot of Nazi
components in it. And for the Russians this is extremely severe,
because we are shortly before the 70th anniversary of the end of
Nazism and the end of the Second World War, and the mood of the
people were really horrified to see this endorsement of Nazis 70
years after the Second World War.
Now, I don’t want to go into this in depth, we can do that
in the discussion if people have questions about it, but I think
this crisis, in Ukraine in particular, I could also point to the
Middle East, which is in a similar horrible condition, makes
very, very clear, that if we as humanity cannot move away from
geopolitics — geopolitics was the reason for two world wars in
the 20th century, and right now the continuation of geopolitics
is threatening a new global war. I just want to mention an
article in {New York Times} from 19th April, where two generals,
Gen. James Cartwright, who is former head of the U.S. Strategic
Command, and Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, who is the chief of
intelligence of the Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces, they penned
together an article, In which they said that the world has never
been so close to the danger of nuclear war globally, and
therefore extinction, as right now. And the reason is obviously
that even the normal code of behavior among nations, which
existed in the Cold War, that you had a red telephone between
Kennedy and Khrushchev, this no longer exists; and you have the
two nuclear forces, from NATO and the West and Russia, all the
time on launch on warning. And launch on warning means there are
only a few minutes time, if one side perceives a launch, either
by intention or by accident, they have a few minutes, actually
it’s estimated three minutes’ time, to respond or be eliminated.
So that shows you how extremely close we are to the danger
of a global extinction of civilization. Because if this would
happen, we would not exist as humanity. And I’m saying it with
that gravity, to say that this calls all the more urgently, for a
different approach. And the different approach must be to move
away from geopolitics and move in the direction of the common
aims of mankind.
And it just happens to be, that the policies which are
proposed by President Xi Jinping, which he calls a “win-win”
policy, is exactly that. It’s the idea, that with the New Silk
Road, you have a policy where every country which participates in
it, will have a benefit for it. The New Silk Road, Maritime Silk
Road policy by China is {not} a new imperial policy replacing the
Anglo-American imperial policy, but it is a completely new model
of the nations among nations, where the enormous example of the
Chinese economic miracle, which China was able to develop in the
last 30 years — you know, where China in {30 years}, developed
as much as most industrial nations needed 100 or 200 years to
develop — and China is now offering to export that model and
have other countries benefit in a similar way from that kind of
economic miracle, which China did.
Can you move to the first slide?
So the world has changed since July last year, the summit of
the BRICS countries in Fortaleza in Brazil. And this is a
picture which was made at this occasion, showing the leaders of
Russia, India, Brazil, China and South Africa. And they basically
concluded a new strategic alliance — economic alliance, which
Prime Minister Modi characterized in the following way: He said,
“This is the first alliance of nations, which are not defined by
their current capacity, but by their future potential of
development.” And at another occasion, Modi said that the biggest
potential of India is, that 60% of its people are below 30 years
of age, and therefore, if they are well-educated and developed,
they can come to the help of other nations, which has demographic
problems, like Germany, for example.
What these countries did, is they concluded an enormous
amount of economic treaties, of economic cooperation, including
peaceful development of inherently safe nuclear energy, the
development of fusion energy, joint space projects, space travel,
and numerous other high-tech cooperation areas.
Then, the next day, they met with the leaders of South
America, the organizations of CELAC [Community of Latin American
and Caribbean States] and Unasur [Union of South American
Nations]. Then a little bit later they also had meetings with
countries of ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] and
actually you have now a completely parallel system of economics,
which is really going to be the infrastructure development of the
world.
Now this here is an official picture of the New Silk Road
and the Maritime Silk Road, which shows you the old Silk Road
from Xi’an, actually it goes even farther to the west,
Lianyungang, where the end of that Silk Road is on the China Sea,
all the way through Urumqi, then Central Asia into Europe; and
then Maritime Silk Road is actually connecting even Africa and
much of the Pacific also into Europe. And this is modelled on the
famous Maritime Silk Road of the 15th century, which connected
the nations of the world already at that time.
Now, I want to very quickly say that this made us very
happy, when Xi Jinping announced the New Silk Road in Kazakhstan
in 2013, we jumped that high — you know, in the Schiller
Institute — because we had promoted this idea. This was our
proposal when the Berlin Wall came down, in ’89, and the wall no
longer was there. So we said let’s connect Paris with Berlin and
Vienna, which is a triangular area of the size of Japan, and has
the highest concentration of industrial capacity in the world;
and let’s make corridors to Warsaw, to Kiev, to the Balkans. And
it would have been a perfect way to intervene.
Unfortunately at that time, despite the fact there was a
very good resonance, you had Bush Sr., you had Margaret
Thatcher, and they had completely different ideas: They wanted to
reduce Russia from a superpower to at Third World, raw
materials-exporting country, and therefore they introduced the
shock-therapy, instead, which dismantled the Russian industrial
potential between ’91-’94, to only 30% left.
But then, when in ’91, the Soviet Union collapsed, we
connected this triangle, Paris-Berlin-Vienna, and we said: OK,
now the Iron Curtain is gone, now we can have development
corridors connecting the population and industrial centers of
Europe with those of Asia, through corridors. And then we looked
at the best geographical conditions. I should say, we were
inspired very much by the railway program of Sun Yat-sen, the
founder of modern China, who had developed a whole network of
Chinese railways, and that went into this program. So, at that
time we said let’s look at the best geographical preconditions,
and we found, not so accidentally, that the old Trans-Siberian
Railroad and the old Silk Road, the ancient Silk Road, had the
best geographical conditions to build such infrastructure.
So at that point the shock therapy started to destroy
Russia’s economy, but we kept holding seminars — we had hundreds
of seminars, in Europe, in United States, and then, eventually,
in Warsaw, in Budapest, in Moscow. And in ’96 even in Beijing,
where the Chinese government had responded to our proposal to all
the governments, to hold a big conference promoting the regions
along the Silk Road. And I was there as a speaker, but then came
the Asia Crisis in ’97, and China, at that conference said, that
this will be the long-term strategy for China until 2010. But
then the Asia crisis brought chaos and then the Russian GKO
crisis [in ’98].
So in the mean time we kept working on this initial proposal
which grew. And the latest of this, is this report: It’s a
370-page study which is really the idea of connecting the world
through infrastructure corridors.
Now, here you see some of these projects, which are already
being built, by the BRICS, by some of the other countries — for
example China is now building a transcontinental railroad from
Brazil to Peru, this is letter A [on the map]. This has already
started — you know, Latin America does not have an
infrastructure network! It is still in the colonial condition,
where you have little railroads from the iron ore mountain to the
coast, but if you want to travel from Peru to Brazil, you have to
go via Miami. So this is the idea, to develop a continental
railroad system.
Then number 1 there is the canal built in Nicaragua, it will
be the second Panama Canal, which obviously is an extremely
important project, which will mean that Nicaragua has a very good
chance to become an industrial country, with improving living
standards of its population. Naturally the Greenies are going
crazy and they say there are two fishermen who have to be
resettled. But, first of all, these people will be compensated,
and secondly without infrastructure, there is {no} industrial
development; without infrastructure there is not even
agriculture, because without infrastructure you cannot transport
and process food.
So then, naturally you have the Bering Strait, this number
2. This has been recently announced by Vladimir Yakunin, who is
the head of Russian Railways. And he proposed (I don’t think I
have that slide), a fast train connection from London all the way
through the Bering Strait to New York. A couple of years ago, Mr.
LaRouche and I participated in a conference in Moscow where the
fathers of the Bering Strait Project were present. These were all
older men over 80, and they said: “Oh, in 20 years, we can go
with a maglev train from Acapulco through the Bering Strait to
Mumbai, and this will be much faster than you can go by ship
today,” and they had a very pioneering spirit.
So this is very important because this connection not only
would connect the transport lines of North America with those of
Eurasia, but it would be absolutely crucial to open up the Arctic
Region. In the Far East of Russia you have all the raw materials
which are in the periodic table of Mendeleyev, and they represent
for the next 100 years a very important raw-material potential
which will be important not only for Russia, but for Europe, for
the United States, for China, for Japan, for Korea. So this will
be the way to develop it, because these raw-material are in
permafrost conditions, and you have to build, you have to build
cities, which have a dome, because people have to live — you
cannot live in permanfrost conditions like that, you have to have
a special way of developing it.
Now, I could go into many other projects — the Seikan
tunnel between the Japanese islands does already exist, it
connects the two important islands in Japan. Then the Bohai
Tunnel will connect two Chinese cities and shorten the transport.
The brown line there, this is the actual Silk Road [Silk Road
Economic Belt], which is now being promoted by China; this larger
gray line is the [21st-Century] Maritime Silk Road; but as you
can see, it stretches all the way to Europe and into Africa.
Prime Minister Li Keqiang was several times last year in Africa,
and he proposed to connect all African capitals through a fast
train system. And I know from many Africans, leaders and leading
politicians, they are very happy about that, because Africa right
now urgently needs development. And I think, if you look at the
horrendous refugee crisis, the people drowning by the thousands
in the Mediterranean, it makes it {so} clear that to bring
development to Africa is the only way how you can overcome this
unbelievable tragedy. And if Europe would have a right mind, they
would join! You know, rather than sending the Triton boats to
chase the refugees back, which is a complete moral bankruptcy of
Europe.
Now this is very interesting, because the big question
always comes, “who should finance all of this?” As you know,
already at the Brazil Fortaleza summit, the BRICS countries
agreed, together with some of the other countries, to create new
financial institutions: the New Development Bank of the BRICS,
the AIIB [Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank] was already
founded in last October, but also a whole set of other banks.
And it came from the idea, that when the Asia crisis happened in
’97, in which speculators like George Soros speculated against
the currencies of countries like Korea, Philippines, Thailand, in
one week up to 60-80% downward, and these countries had no
defense; so they concluded, “OK, we have to protect ourselves,”
so they created the Contingency Reserve Arrangement [CRA], which
is a pool of currencies of a $100 billion, which will defend all
of the participating countries against speculative attacks.
Now, the AIIB, the New Development Bank, the New Silk Road
Fund, the Maritime Silk Road Fund, the bank of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization [SCO Development Bank], and the SAARC
[South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation] Development
Fund, are all new banks which follow a completely different
principle than Wall Street and the City of London, or Frankfurt,
for that matter. They say, we do not participate in speculation,
but we will use these funds only for investment in the real
economy, into these projects. And this is urgently needed,
because as you know, despite all of the quantitative easing of
the Federal Reserve, and now [ECB President] Mr. Draghi, who are
printing money as if there would be no tomorrow, the money does
not arrive at the industries! Because the banks, the speculators
prefer to keep the casino going, and this is actually reaching a
point where at the IMF annual spring meeting which just took
place in Washington, the IMF itself put out a report saying that
we are facing a collapse {bigger} than 2008 with the collapse of
Lehman Brothers. And several economists from J.P. Morgan and
other banks warned that you could have a simultaneous stock and
bond crisis, causing a meltdown of the system; or, if the Federal
Reserve would increase the interest rate only by a tiny, tiny
amount it could blow up the whole derivatives bubble of $2
trillion. And if the Troika and the ECB are pushing Greece out
of the Eurozone, that could also trigger a collapse, because it
would not so much hurt Greece, but it would blow up the European
banks.
So therefore, the existence of these banks are de facto a
lifeboat in the face of the immediate danger of a collapse.
Now, as you probably have noticed, when the question came,
who would be a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank, which was already constituted last October, but
the date until which countries could join as founding members was
end of March [2015]. And the United States put a lot of pressure
on the allies, not to join; they didn’t want Korea to join;
naturally, they didn’t want Europe to join, and they put maximum
pressure on Asian countries not to join. But then, it just so
happened, that the best ally of the United States, Great Britain,
was the first European country to join, and that caused a kind of
a dam break, and then Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland,
Austria, and all the Scandinavian countries joined. And the
actual founding members included 57 countries. And they
basically participate in different degrees in this new bank,
which obviously people realize that what China is offering with
the economic cooperation in these projects, is much, much more
attractive than to participate in more speculative bubbles which
eventually will pop. So, this was from the founding meeting in
October, already, but in the meantime, it become many more
states.
Now, this is also very interesting, because this is a
proposal which my husband made in 1975. It was called the
International Development Bank, and it was basically the same
idea as the AIIB, today, saying that the IMF and the World Bank
do not provide enough credit for Third World development. This
was a proposal he made in ’75, and it went into the final
resolution of the Non-Aligned Movement in 1976 in Colombo, Sri
Lanka, and it had the same idea as the AIIB.
The World Bank only spends per year $24 billion for
projects. But the actual requirement of the developing
countries, is about $8 trillion in the next years! So there is
no way the World Bank can manage that, and this bank, on the
other side, the AIIB, and the other banks will grow and will
become more productive.
Now, this is very important because what the AIIB and the
New Development Bank and this new economic system which is
emerging represent, is something completely different than
monetarism. Monetarism is the idea that you have to have maximum
profit, the real economy doesn’t count; as a matter of fact, you
all know, that if you have an industrial firm which lays of
10,000, the stock goes up! It doesn’t make any sense. In the
realm of monetarism, this is explained by the idea that the firm
becomes “more productive” because fewer workers work more, and
therefore the profit is greater; but from the standpoint of the
real economy this makes no sense at all.
And it is exactly that philosophy which has caused the
Troika to destroy Greece. What they managed to do is to reduce
the Greek economy by one-third, to increase the youth
unemployment to 65%, and people are extremely unhappy, not only
in Greece, but also in Italy, in Spain, Portugal and so forth.
What we propose, both the IDB and these new banks, is really
going back to a completely different model. It’s based on the
idea of this man, whom you all recognize, I’m sure — he is
Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the
United States. And he created, actually, the United States, by
creating the National Bank and the credit system, because, what
he did, was after the War of Independence, the different states
in the United States were totally indebted. So he unified the
United States by taking over the debt obligations of these
states, and basically saying, it’s no longer your business, we’ll
take these debts as a Federal state, as a national state, and we
will transform that into a credit mechanism, only aimed at areal
production.
And that was really the actual founding of the United
States. And this idea of a credit system which is not
monetarism, but it is the idea that credit can only be given for
future production in the real economy, not for speculation, that
model was what made the United States a great industrial power.
Because, despite the fact that some following Presidents then
tried to dismantle it, the United States went back to it, again
and again. It was the policies of John Quincy Adams; it was the
policy of Abraham Lincoln with the greenbacks; it was the policy
of Franklin D. Roosevelt. This is how Roosevelt brought the
United States out of the Depression of the ’30s by building the
Reconstruction Finance Corp. which financed the New Deal, and
that’s how America got out of the Depression. And, also, it was
the basis for the German Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the
state bank, which help to finance the reconstruction and the
economic miracle of Germany in the postwar period — which was
modeled on the Reconstruction Finance Corp.
So this is therefore, not something new. It’s a tested
model, it has always been the basis when there was progress in
the real economy, as compared to the financial markets. I’m not
talking about the financial markets, I’m talking about real
production for the livelihood and the common good of the people.
So the first step there, we have called for — Tom
mentioned it — that we think it is an absolute matter, actually
of war and peace, if we succeed to get the European nations {and}
America to join with this “win-win,” all-inclusive,
non-geopolitical system. And, as I said, the financial system of
Wall Street and the City of London {is} about to blow up, bigger
than 2008, and the only way how that can be avoided from leading
to a chaotic collapse, is by going back to the Glass-Steagall
legislation which was introduced by Franklin D. Roosevelt in
1933, which was his answer to the collapse of ’29-’33 period.
And he separated the banks, by making the commercial banks
separate from the investment banks, so that the investment bank
could not have access to assets of the commercial banks.
And this exist from 1933 until 1999 in the United States,
and in Europe you had practically the same thing, because you had
a very regulated banking sector. But the Wall Street forces did
not like it, because naturally it reduced their profit, so they
worked very hard to eliminate it, which they were able to do in
1999, and the whole super-expansion of the speculative area only
occurred after this law was eliminated. And the good news, is
that there is a right now a Presidential candidate in the United
States, who has said that his first act if he would move into the
White House, would be to reintroduce this Glass-Steagall law: And
that is the former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, about whom many
papers are writing that he has a very good chance to take the
Democratic nomination, because many people think Hillary Clinton
has made too many compromises with bad policies, when she was
Secretary of State. But, O’Malley is not alone, but you have a
whole bunch of people around him, who say the United States must
go back to being a Republic; it must go back to putting the
common good above the interests of Wall Street. And that is
really the “to be or not to be” question of the whole world.
Now, if this reorganization would take place, then, the
United States could easily join with the BRICS countries in such
efforts as the AIIB and other such things. And, as you know, the
Greek government has also demanded that there is no way how they
can pay their debt, because as you know, of all the rescue
packages which went to Greece, only 3% of that money remained in
Greece, while all the rest really went to the European banks.
And therefore, to demand that Greece should pay back these debts,
it’s just impossible! And the Greek government has made the
point that they want to have a European Debt Conference, like
Germany in 1953, without which the German economic miracle would
never have taken place. So if this all happens, and that could
happen in the short term, Europe could easily participate in
that.
Now, I just want to say, the ancient Silk Road was not only
an exchange of silk, and porcelain, and paper, printing,
gunpowder, and many, many other goods, but much more important
than that, it was an exchange of ideas and technologies: Silk
making is more important than silk; how to print books is more
important than the book. So the ancient Silk Road was an
extremely important exchange of goods and culture, and ideas, and
understanding among people — and so will be the New Silk Road,
just with modern means.
Now, if you go back to the picture, this is why we have
said, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge” where we
have the camels, sort of symbolizing the old Silk Road, and here
you see a maglev train, and here you see a rover on the Moon, to
give you an idea that the exchange of technologies and goods in
the modern world will be the most advanced technologies to the
benefit of all of mankind.
So going back to the problem here, is, obviously, if you
look at that map, you see, these are the deserts of the world: A
very broad desert band which goes from the Atlantic coast of
Africa, through the Sahara-Sahel zone, the Arab Peninsula, the
Middle East, all the way to China. And that desert is growing.
It’s expanding. And then you have the desert in the West of the
United States, which is right now ruined by a big drought in
California, in Texas, in all the states west of the Mississippi;
and naturally, Brazil has a drought.
In the United States this is very severe. Here you have a
global water scarcity map; here you have the water stress
indicator. In the United States, just to mention that, Governor
Brown of California has just announced that the water consumption
will be cut by 25% up to 36%! Now that is the death to
Californian agriculture; in the south of California, for example,
in the Central Valley, in this region, 40% of the entire
agriculture of the United States is produced, and this is now
being completely destroyed. Here you see, this is a former
reservoir, which is almost dried up. This is the snowpack: in
2013, it was relatively, a lot of snow, and last year, no snow,
so the drought is expanding, and obviously, to cut consumption
means you kill people. I mean, you cannot cut water — where
should these people go? There are already cities and towns where
people are — it’s not just not watering their lawn — it’s
taking public showers, of getting water rations, and then
eventually people have to move away, because if there is no water
there is no life. There were already herds being transformed, of
hundreds of thousands of head of cattle, and the idea to just
accept that, and as Governor Brown said, “California historically
has only a carrying potential of 400,000 people,” is ridiculous,
because there are presently 39 million people living in
California! And the idea to say there’s only room for 400,000 is
completely ahistorical about what is the role of human beings,
who differentiate themselves from animals by being able to
increase the living capability for more people by improving
productivity, by transforming the industry, the infrastructure,
and in that way, developing the planet.
So obviously, China has taken a completely different
approach. Here you see, China is actually the only country which
has taken a very big water diversification: There is on the one
side, the Three Gorges Dam, which is now producing, I think 22
gigawatts of electricity per year, and it has eliminated flooding
which killed many thousands of people in the past; and even more
important, is the water diversification project from the southern
area of the Yangtze River through a Northern Route into the
Yellow River and the desert area of China; and the Middle Route
to the region around Beijing.
So this is actually a model which is now being followed by
Narendra Modi for India, who just agreed to make gigantic water
projects to tame the water coming down from the Himalayas, and
also making canals out of 101 Indian rivers.
Now, what most people don’t consider is, that water is not a
natural resource like iron ore, or gold, or whatever: You can’t
use up, because water is organized in global cycles, where 90% of
the precipitation rains down over the ocean, only 10% rains down
over the land. And that water, the Sun causes evaporation, this
leads to cloud formation, and then the water rains down, and it
is human activity, which can make these cycles more efficient.
It’s not just, that it rains down over land and then flows back
into the ocean. You can use it in agriculture, you can use it in
industrial production, you can use it in other urban activities,
and it is actually the ability of man to make that more
efficient.
Here you see a very interesting comparison — you see here
the water diversion of the United States. Even though the water
diversion of China has started much more recently, it’s almost
double, which shows you the completely different philosophy.
This is a very important project, which is part of the
approach to fight the desert, and this is the Lake Chad Transaqua
project, which is the idea, that you could eliminate a lot of the
drought in the Sahel zone and around Lake Chad by bringing some
of the surplus water from the headwaters region of the Congo on
the one side, through rivers and canals into Lake Chad, which has
been reduced to less than 10% right now; and also through a
second canal along the Nile to increase the agricultural land in
Africa tremendously. And also now to bring real development to
these countries, without which you will have more people running
away from Boko Haram, which is now at Lake Chad and Nigeria. And
without a real development perspective, there is no way how you
can contain these projects.
Human beings are the only species, which can improve the
conditions of mankind again and again and again, and the last
10,000 years, or 20,000 years since the last Ice Age, just think,
what an enormous development mankind has made. We have increased
the population potential of the Earth from about 5 million at
most, to presently around 7 billion. This is due to the fact that
man, unlike animals, can make new discoveries, discovers the
universal principles of our physical universe, and think things,
which have never been thought before.
Therefore, the attack on the water crisis is not just a
question of using the aquifers, because the aquifers can — they
replenish, but this goes much too slowly. It’s not only
re-diverting the rivers, dams, but it’s especially influencing
the global cyclical process of water. There is a relationship
between what happens in our Solar System and the rain. Because
the Sun, which shines on the oceans, causes evaporation, but the
Sun is not the only solar impact on the weather; it’s also the
cosmic radiation, which comes from our galaxy, which leads to
cloud formation, ionization of moisture, and therefore to rain.
That is not just something where we have to wait passively until
it happens, but we can study, for example, what is happening in
our galaxy, which influences the weather, and then understand
better, how we can create more water.
Here, you see our Solar System in a 32 million year cycle,
moving along the Milky Way. The Milky Way is basically a flat
plateau, in which our Solar System is moving up and down in
cycles, and you have a complete change in the weather patterns,
which comes from the position of our Solar System in our galaxy.
I’m not saying, that we know everything about that yet. We
know, that there is a lot of connection between the Solar System,
the galaxy and the weather patterns on our Earth, and I can
assure you, that if you look at the long-term changes in our
weather patterns, then {these} things are a lot more important,
than whatever you use in your little car as CO2 production.
Because these are forces, which are of a completely different
magnitude, and naturally, the climate is changing, but galactic
processes are really what is the cause of it.
Anyway, the idea of using cosmic rays and ionization of
moisture is already successfully being done by Israel and by some
of the Gulf States; Russia is doing a lot of research on this,
and this is, what we have to do. The reason, why I’m saying this,
is, the Silk Road is not just building railways from Dunhuang to
Lisbon or wherever; it’s not just building roads, it’s not just
building canals. The modern Silk Road, the New Silk Road is,
exactly as the old Silk Road was, {an exchange of ideas, of
technology, for the common good of all.}
Obviously, today the big challenges are world poverty, are
the danger of war, are the danger of water scarcity, which could
become the reason for new wars. So the New Silk Road — and this
is what we understand with it, and I’m sure that our Chinese
friend will show his perspective — but that is the philosophy,
which we have taken as a basis in our approach, that the New Silk
Road is {a vision}, of how humanity can move away from
geopolitics and the stupid idea that we have to fight over scarce
resources, that we have to create wars because we don’t like
another system, that we have to eventually self-destruct, but
that we have to make the evolutionary jump to the idea of the
common aims of mankind and to define the next phase of evolution
in the interest of all.
If you look at this, the Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry
Rogozin of Russia just two days ago, pointed to the fact, that
the BRICS countries are all space travelling nations. China is
the leader in space travel. When China in December 2013 landed
the Yutu rover on the Moon, with was the idea, that in a few
missions later, I think it was in 2017, this Yutu — “Jade
Rabbit” — that they will bring back helium-3. Helium-3 is an
isotope, which is actually a fuel for fusion power. It’s much
more efficient than deuterium or tritium, because with this heavy
deuterium and tritium in the fusion process, you are still using
turbines, and you use turbines to create electricity in the old
way. But with helium-3 you can directly gain electricity from the
physical process of fusion power, and therefore, naturally, the
energy efficiency is much, much higher. And once we have fusion
power, for example, this will create for the first time energy
and raw materials security for the Earth. Energy security,
because on the Moon, you have several tons of helium-3, which
will be sufficient for many tens of thousands of years of energy
security on the Earth; and raw materials security, because with
the high heat of the plasma torch, you can take any waste,
including nuclear waste, including waste in your household, and
turn it back into isotopes, which you then can reconstruct and
make new raw materials.
So this is the vanguard of where mankind must go, and China
has made that its national pride. And China, contrary to Germany,
which is very stupid with respect to energy — you know, this
stupid exit from nuclear energy without having an alternative, is
completely crazy — but China has basically created a situation,
where they are in the right position to solve this problem, and
Rogozin, the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, has said, that the
BRICS countries will cooperate in space to solve these problems.
So this is extremely important, because if mankind makes
that jump to not have war as a conflict resolution, which in a
time of nuclear energy, it should be obvious that we must move to
a different regime, that we must define the common aims of
mankind, that which is, — if you have seen these pictures with
astronauts and cosmonauts and taikonauts, they all report the
same: When they are in space and look at our little planet, this
blue planet, they realize that there are no borders. They also
realize that our planet is extremely small in a very big Solar
System, in an even bigger galaxy, and there are {billions} of
galaxies. So, there are dangers from space, like cosmic
radiation, like asteroids; there are all kinds of dangers, which
we don’t manage right now. But if we don’t want to have the same
fate as the dinosaurs, who became eliminated 65 million years
ago, because probably a meteorite hit the Earth and created so
much cloud cover, that all the vegetation stopped, and then the
dinosaurs, and 96% of all other species were eliminated; if we
as a creative species, {are} really the creative species, we
should put our efforts together and defend against common dangers
to our planet, common dangers to our civilization, and unite.
And there is no better image for that than space collaboration.
This whole question also has a philosophical dimension.
Because people think, China is just doing an imperial expansion,
they want to have their interests. Well, I have the deepest
conviction that what is working in China right now, especially
with President Xi Jinping, {is} the 2,500-year-old Confucian
tradition in China. And I go even so far to say the Chinese
people have Confucius in their genes. Confucius was a
philosopher, who reacted to a historical period in China, which
was characterized by war, by great unrest, by turmoil. And he
developed the Confucian philosophy, which is beautiful. I can
only advise you, in case you are not doing it, study Confucius.
Because Confucius has this idea that there must be harmony in the
world, on the planet. And that, for example, the best way to
have harmony is, there is one key notion, which is {li}, which is
the idea, that each person, each nation, should take its proper
place, and develop in the best possible way, and then you have
harmony. Because if everybody develops their creative potential
and their best maximum capacity, and takes the development of the
other as their own interest, and vice versa, then you have peace.
And that should also be based on the other notion of {ren}.
{Ren} basically means the same thing as love, or {agapë}, or the
Christian idea of charity.
And it happens to be that these ideas are also in the
European best tradition. There is a very important philosopher of
the 15th century, called Nicolaus of Cusa, who was the founder of
modern science, the founder of the modern nation-state, and he
was very important: He broke through the barrier from the Middle
Ages to modern times. Because he was actually the person, who
brought the Council of Florence into being by first finding
handwritings in Byzantium, which were then the basis for the
unification of the Orthodox Church with the Roman Church; but
when he brought the Orthodox delegation in 1453 to the Council of
Florence, he had a stroke of genius: He said, now, I am thinking
something, which no human being has ever thought before. He then
wrote his {De Docta Ignorantia}, and he developed this notion of
the coincidence of opposites, the {coincidentia oppositorum},
which was the idea, that the One has a higher quality than the
Many, and that the human mind is capable of synthesizing some
hypothesis, which gives you a deeper insight into the laws of the
universe, into Classical art — in other words, it’s the
creativity of the human mind, which is the driving force in the
development of the universe. And that’s for example, what the
Russian philosopher Vladimir Vernadsky called, that the
creativity of man is a geophysical force in the universe. Now,
what he did basically, is to say — he didn’t say it in this way,
but the effect of it was — that in order to move away from the
Middle Ages, from the Scholasticism, from the Neo-Peripatetics
and the Aristotelean ideas, you had to basically break with the
axioms of the Middle Ages thinking, and that you had to create
something basically completely new, a new method of thinking.
And I’m saying, that with the New Silk Road, we have to do
exactly that: We have to break away from money, greed,
monetarism, all of these things, which really are a decaying
culture. If you look at the European, American, Western culture,
it {is} a decaying culture. Just look at the youth culture. Look
at what our young people watch in terms of pop music, video
games, the violence, just the popular entertainment has become
really degenerate. And we have to break with that, and we have to
combine the New Silk Road economic model — which I did not go
into so much today, because I already spoke about it two months
ago here in Copenhagen — but we have to break with the whole
axiomatic of globalization and basically go for a New
Renaissance, a new cultural renaissance of thinking, which will
build on the best traditions of each country: on Confucianism,
on Vedic tradition of India, on Avicenna [Ibn Sina], and other
thinkers, Al-Farabi, Abu Al-Kindi in the Arab world; in Europe,
the great Classical music tradition, the Italian Renaissance, the
German Classical music. We just have to take the high points of
all civilizations, and study that, and start to love the culture
of the other countries, and then we will create out of this a
completely New Renaissance, which will bring mankind into a
completely new phase of evolution.
Because I do not believe, that the present condition of
mankind is, what we are here for! We are not here to kill each
other; we are not here to eat caviar, until we have it coming out
of our ears. We are here to be creative! We are here to discover
the laws of the universe, to write beautiful poems, to write
beautiful music, to celebrate the creativity of civilization. And
I think, that the idea of man in space, man going into the next
phase of the evolution of man, is really what will get us out of
this crisis. So that is, what the New Silk Road is all about.
[ovation]

Slides from the presentation (click to enlarge):

24. apr. 2015 – I sine slutbemærkninger ved fredagens mindeceremoni i Jerevan for ofrene for det armenske folkemord i 1915 adresserede den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin det store spørgsmål, verden i dag må besvare: Vil massemord atter få lov at gå grassat, eller må nationer lære »godhed og harmoni«? Med Putins ord:

»Ruslands faste beslutning er fortsat den samme, som den altid har været, nemlig, at der ikke er, og ikke kan være, nogen retfærdiggørelse for massemord på noget folkeslag …«

»Det internationale samfund må gøre alt, det kan, for at sikre, at disse tragiske begivenheder aldrig mere forekommer, så alle folkeslag kan leve i fred og harmoni og ikke skal kende til de rædsler, der fremkommer af religiøst fjendskab, aggressiv nationalisme og xenofobi.«

»Ulykkeligvis ser vi, at neofascisme atter rejser sit hoved i mange dele af verden, radikale nationalister søger magt, og antisemitisme er i fremgang. Vi ser også tegn på russofobi. Vi må stille os selv det spørgsmål, hvorfor dette sker, og hvad årsagen er? I alle vore handlinger i afgørende vigtige dele af verden må vi først tænke på, hvad det næste, der vil ske, er, vi må tænke over konsekvenserne.«

»Samtidig med, at vi mindes fortidens tragiske hændelser, må vi også se frem mod fremtiden med optimisme, tro på idealerne om venskab, godt naboskab og solidaritet, lære godhed og harmoni og lære at respektere hinanden og hinandens interesser. Dette er den eneste måde, hvorpå vi kan gøre verden til et bedre, mere stabilt og trygt sted.«

Foto: Den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin indskriver sig i gæstebogen i Tsitsernakaberd-musæet i Jerevan for det armenske folkemord i 1915  

23. apr. 2015 – Verden befinder sig på randen af en atomar Tredje Verdenskrig. De årsager, der sædvanligvis angives til konfrontationen mellem USA og Rusland, er nonsens. Det er snarere tilfældet, at der er nogle mennesker, der har planlagt, at dette skulle ske. »Vi befinder os på randen af en bogstavelig udslettelse, som et resultat af kædereaktionslignende virkninger« af Det britiske Imperiums og deres Wall Street-lakajers vanvid, sagde Lyndon LaRouche den 21. april. At de ikke vil opgive deres svindende greb om magten vil drive dem til, i desperation, at få Obama til at lancere Tredje Verdenskrig. »Dette er den første trussel om menneskets udslettelse i moderne, historisk tid«, konkluderede LaRouche.

Forhenværende næstformand for Generalstabscheferne, gen. James Cartwright, og pensionerede russiske general Vladimir Dvorkin, advarede, i en kronik den 19. april i New York Times med overskriften, »Hvordan man afværger atomkrig«, mod et meget sandsynligt scenarie for, hvordan Tredje Verdenskrig kunne indtræffe. Før han blev medlem af Generalstaben, var Cartwright kommandør for USA’s Strategiske Kommando. I en lang karriere, der strakte sig fra 1958 til 2001, spillede Dvorkin en hovedrolle i Ruslands udvikling af sin ubådsbaserede atomafskrækkelse i 1960’erne, og senere i forhandlingerne om strategiske våben i 1970’erne. Dette er to mænd, der har et intimt kendskab til deres respektive landes strategiske atomstyrker, inklusive kommando- og kontrolsystemerne over disse styrker.

I deres kronik foreslog Cartwright og Dvorkin, at både USA og Rusland burde eliminere konceptet om affyring-efter-varsel fra deres atomstrategier. De bemærker i begyndelsen de voksende, strategiske spændinger mellem USA og Rusland – spændinger, som diplomatisk aktivitet har gjort meget lidt for at lette. »Dette gør det så meget desto mere afgørende for Rusland og USA at tale sammen, for at lette presset om at ’bruge eller spilde’ atomstyrker under en krise og minimere risikoen for affyring ved en fejltagelse«, skriver de. »Kendsgerningen er, at vi stadig lever med atomangrebsdoktrinen fra den Kolde Krig, der dikterede tre strategiske valgmuligheder; førsteangreb, affyring efter varsel og gengældelse efter angreb.« De går videre med at fokusere på affyring efter varsel, hvilket giver en meget stor risiko for affyring ved en fejltagelse, eller affyring baseret på forkerte informationer – og risikoen forværres af korte varslingstider og Ruslands kompromitterede advarselssystemer (Rusland har i øjeblikket ingen satellitter for tidlig advarsel og er udelukkende afhængig af jordbaserede radarsystemer). Som resultat er tidsfristerne, skriver de, »meget sammenpressede og mulighederne for dårligt overvejede beslutninger meget reelle.«

»Denne risiko burde motivere præsidenterne for Rusland og USA til sammen at beslutte at eliminere konceptet om affyring efter varsel fra deres atomstrategier«, skriver de. »De bør genetablere dialog direkte mellem landenes militær, der blev suspenderet pga. Ukraine-krisen, for at forfølge denne tilbagetrækning som en hasteprioritering.« Sådanne forhandlinger er imidlertid meget lidt sandsynlige, så længe den gale Barack Obama er præsident for USA.

»Under perioder med forhøjede spændinger og nedsat beslutningstid vokser sandsynligheden for menneskelige og tekniske fejl i kontrolsystemerne«, konkluderede de. »Affyring efter varsel er et levn fra koldkrigstidens strategi, og det repræsenterer en risiko, der langt overgår dets værdi. Vore ledere må som en hastesag tale sammen og, håber vi, enes om at skrotte denne overflødige fremgangsmåde, før der sker en ødelæggende fejl.«

Nu kan ingen sige, de ikke er blevet advaret.

Foto: En del af det antennesystem, der udgjorde det russiske tidlige advarselssystem fra koldkrigsæraen.

21. apr. 2015 – Britiske tropper har, sammen med nogle amerikanske tropper, kurs mod Estland for »Operation Pindsvin«, en øvelse, der skal uddanne estiske tropper (af hvilke der kun er et par tusinde, inkl. reserver) i, hvordan man går i krig med Rusland. »De tre baltiske stater – Estland, Litauen og Letland – er bekymret for, at hr. Putin vil forsøge en lignede aggression på deres grænser, som han har gjort over for Ukraine, der oplevede, at Moskva annekterede Krim«, rapporterer Daily Express.

Hvis Rusland virkelig var interesseret i at invadere Estland, ville der ikke være andre muligheder end en snarlig anvendelse af atomvåben for at stoppe det. Således argumenterer David Blair, klummeskriver for Daily Telegraph i London, der spørger, om de britiske ledere var klar over dette, da Estland kom under NATO’s artikel 5, da landet kom med i alliancen i 2004.

»Fattede vore ledere de mulige konsekvenser af at garantere sikkerheden i en tidligere Sovjetrepublik med en østlig grænse kun 100 mil fra St. Petersborg?«, spørger Blair. Han bemærker, at NATO-planlæggerne under den Kolde Krig mente, at en sovjetisk invasion af Vesteuropa ville finde sted igennem Tysklands Fulda-svælg. Nu mener den estiske præsident Toomas Hendrik Ilves, at Fulda-svælget ligger mellem det egentlige Rusland og Kaliningrad (Fulda-svælget ligger nu flere hundrede mil nærmere Rusland end under den Kolde Krig pga. NATO’s ekspansion, men dette nævner Blair på intet tidspunkt og foretrækker at forevige myten om, at Rusland er aggressorstaten), og hvis Rusland brugte denne invasionsrute, ville NATO være blokeret i at sende styrker til at forsvare Estland, for der er ingen NATO-tropper i Estland til at forsvare det. Og hvis NATO placerede de tropper i Estland, som Ilves kræver, ville Rusland se det som en alvorlig optrapning.

»Før man begynder at kravle op ad stigen for optrapning, må man være sikker på, at ens modstander ikke vil kravle tre eller fire trin højere op«, skriver Blair. »Man kan med rimelighed formode, at hr. Putin altid ville være villig til at klatre højere op end Vesten, så Rusland ville uundgåeligt vinden spillet om optrapning.« Den eneste mulighed, som NATO derfor har for at forsvare sine baltiske medlemmer, er at satse på atomvåben. Hvis NATO nægter at gøre dette, er alliancen forbi. »Ved at gøre udfald mod de baltiske stater kunne hr. Putin tvinge os til at vælge mellem at skrotte NATO eller satse på atomvåben«, konkluderer Blair. »Er der nogen, der tror på, at denne tanke aldrig er faldet ham ind?«

Foto: Amerikanske panservogne deltager i parade i Narva, Estland, kun få hundrede meter fra Rusland, i febr. 2015.

Udviklingerne i de seneste par dage er en frygtelig påmindelse om, at, så længe Barack Obama forbliver i embedet som præsident for USA, står verden på randen af generel krig, en krig, der hastigt kunne blive til en atomar udslettelseskrig.

Det drejer sig ikke om Obama som sådan. Han er en degenereret syndebuk for kræfterne i Det britiske Imperium og dets allierede, Wall Street, som i øjeblikket er ved at blive vanvittige over den kendsgerning, at hele deres transatlantiske finanssystem er dømt til undergang, og at et alternativt paradigme, centreret omkring det fremvoksende BRIKS, der ledes af Kina og Rusland, er i færd med at blive skabt. De kræfter, der har ejet Obama lige siden de lancerede hans politiske karriere, er parat til at starte Tredje Verdenskrig hellere, end de opgiver deres magt.

Lyndon LaRouche advarede tirsdag om, at »vi står på randen af en bogstavelig udslettelse, som et resultat af situationens kædereaktionslignende virkninger«. Briternes og Wall Streets afvisning af at opgive deres svindende greb om magten vil i desperation drive dem til at få Obama til at lancere Tredje Verdenskrig. »Dette er den første trussel om menneskehedens udslettelse i moderne, historisk tid«, konkluderede LaRouche.

Han observerede desuden, at den blotte kendsgerning, at Obama endnu ikke er blevet fjernet fra embedet, er den tydeligste advarsel om, at ledende amerikanske kredse, og det amerikanske folk generelt, ikke længere besidder temperamentet til at forhindre denne katastrofe i at ske. Fjern Obama fra præsidentembedet, og faren er fjernet. Briterne vil fortsat være hysteriske over deres imperiums forestående død, men magten til at handle vil være fjernet fra dem. Det transatlantiske systems bankerot betyder Det britiske Imperiums død.

Ruslands vitalitet er vendt tilbage, og Kina er ved at vokse frem som en venlig, men dominerende kraft i Asien og fremmer en politik med Win-Win-samarbejde blandt alle regionens nationer og tværs over Eurasien. Alene dette er ved at drive briterne til vanvid.

Det er af afgørende betydning at forstå motiverne bag krigsfremstødet. Dag-til-dag-begivenhederne er blot markører for denne proces – advarselsskilte langs vejen til potentiel undergang.

Den Fjerde Moskva-Sikkerhedskonference, der blev afholdt i weekenden, gjorde det tydeligt, at de russiske ledere klart forstår den umiddelbare fare for atomkrig. Det var det fremherskende tema i de vigtigste indlæg af den russiske forsvarsminister Shoigu, udenrigsminister Lavrov og generalstabschef Gerasimov. Listen over deltagere og talere inkluderede forsvarsministrene fra alle væsentlige eurasiske nationer: Kina, Indien, Iran, Pakistan, Nordkorea, Grækenland, Indonesien, Mongoliet, Serbien og Belarus, plus Sydafrika.

Lavrov gjorde det i sine bemærkninger klart, at USA’s og NATO’s opstilling af antiballistiske missilsystemer i områder, der grænser op til Rusland, udgør en trussel om et førsteangreb mod Rusland. Præsident Obama har påstået, at ABM-systemerne var rettet mod Iran, og at opstillingen ville blive genovervejet, hvis en P5+1-aftale om Irans atomprogram blev opnået. Nu, da en sådan aftale er inden for rækkevidde, har Obama nægtet at nedskalere eller annullere ABM-opstillingerne, som vil anbringe afgørende komponenter af missilforsvarsskjoldet i Rumænien og Polen, direkte op ad Ruslands grænser.

Desuden er Obamaregeringen i færd med at udvide sin Globalt Angreb-kommando til at inkorporere både konventionelle våben og strategiske atomvåben. Regeringen er også i færd med at udvikle en ny generation taktiske atomvåben, der forud skal placeres i Europa og kunne anvendes i langtrækkende stealth-bombefly samt droner, der medfører krydsermissiler.

Situationen i Den persiske Golf, hvor de samme saudiske kræfter, der stod for 11. september-angrebene imod USA – angreb, der er blevet mørklagt af to, successive præsidenter, Bush og Obama – er engageret i en befolkningskrig mod nabolandet Yemen med påstande om, at Houthi-oprørerne i Yemen er surrogater for Iran, er endnu et brændpunkt for umiddelbart forestående krig. Da det oprindelige P5+1-gennembrud blev meddelt i begyndelsen af måneden i Schweitz, advarede LaRouche om, at aftalen ville være en udløser for krig – med mindre saudierne blev knust. I stedet gik Obama med saudierne i bombekampagnen mod Yemen, imod stærk modstand fra det amerikanske militær under anførsel af generalstabscheferne og Centralkommandoen.

I takt med, at Adenbugten blev fyldt med saudiske og amerikanske krigsskibe i de seneste 72 timer, inklusive hangarskibet USS Theodore Roosevelt, og Obama truede med indgreb over for iranske handelsskibe, en route til Yemen, førte intenst pres fra det amerikanske militær og andre kredse til, at saudierne meddelte et stop i deres bombekampagne sent tirsdag aften. Tidligere på dagen havde Kong Salman sat den Saudiske Nationalgarde i alarmberedskab med henblik på mulige operationer over grænsen ind i Yemen. Omstændighederne omkring denne indefrysning i sidste øjeblik af disse operationer mangler stadig at blive opklaret, men den kendsgerning bliver tilbage, at regionen havde kurs mod en »Tonkin-bugt«-type provokation af generel krig, der kun blev standset i sidste øjeblik.

Civilisationens undergang er ikke uundgåelig. Men den er bogstavelig talt garanteret, med mindre Obama fjernes fra embedet. Han er detonatoren for verdenskrig, og hans omgående fjernelse er den eneste, legitime mulighed til forhindring af krig på dette sene tidspunkt.

Foto: USS Theodore Roosevelt

18. apr. 2015 – I en tale til den 4. Moskva-konference for International Sikkerhed den 16. april advarede den russiske generalstabschef, gen. Valeriy Gerasimov, om, at lande, der er værtsnationer for komponenter af USA/NATO’s missilforsvarssystem, risikerer at blive mål.

»Atomvåbenfri magter, hvor der installeres missilforsvarsinstallationer, er blevet genstand for førsteprioritetsrespons«,

sagde han, idet han specifikt henviste til Polen og Rumænien. Gerasimov sagde til konferencen, at NATO’s opstilling af missilforsvar var

»endnu en afgørende militær trussel mod den Russiske Føderation og udgør et voksende problem for bevarelsen af den strategiske stabilitet i verden«, og at dette af Rusland ses som »endnu et skridt fra USA’s og dets allieredes side for at ødelægge det nuværende, internationale sikkerhedssystem i dets stræben efter verdensdominans«.

Gerasimov kaldte NATO’s BMD-systemer, som er i færd med at blive bygget i Polen og Rumænien, for

»et brud fra USA’s side på en af de vigtigste aftaler, der sikrer stabilitet i Europa, Traktaten om Mellemdistance-atomstyrker (INF)«.

Dette refererer direkte til de anvendte MK41 vertikale affyringssystemer, der udgør en del af de rumænske og polske installationer. MK41-systemet er det samme som det, der installeres på det amerikanske søværns missilforsvarsskibe, og skibsversionen kan affyre enten SM-3 interceptor-missiler, eller Tomahawk krydsermissiler, selv om hverken USA eller NATO, så vidt vides, har foreslået, at Tomahawks skulle installeres på de landbaserede BMD-anlæg.

Gerasimov bemærkede også NATO-øvelsernes anti-russiske karakter.

»Hvis øvelserne i tidligere år fokuserede på krisestyring og kontraterror, så er prioriteten i dag blevet løsningen af spørgsmål gennem en militær konfrontation med en konventionel fjende, der er let at gætte: den Russiske Føderation«, sagde han.

NATO blev, ikke overraskende, fornærmet over Gerasimovs bemærkninger, og ligeledes over bemærkninger fra forsvarsminister Sergei Shoigu, der var på talerstolen forud for Gerasimov. Generalløjtnant Darryl Roberson, kommandør af USA’s 3. Luftvåben med hovedkvarter i Ramstein, Tyskland, sagde til Wall Street Journal, at han ikke var »bevidst« om, at NATO skulle praktisere anvendelse af taktiske atomvåben. Derudover hævdede han, at rotationerne af USA’s F-15 og A-10 ind i Østeuropa var planlagt, før Ukraine-krisen begyndte.

»Jeg forventer ikke, at russerne tror på det, men det er sandt«, sagde han.

Talskvinde for NATO, Oana Lungescu, udstedte også en erklæring den 16. april i kølvandet på Shoigu-Gerasimov-bemærkningerne, hvor hun gentog NATO’s erklæring om, at dets BMD-system ikke er en trussel mod Rusland.

»Formålet med NATO’s missilforsvar er at forsvare vore europæiske allierede imod de voksende trusler, som udgøres af spredningen af ballistiske missiler. Aftalerammen om Iran ændrer ikke noget ved dette.«

For det andet benægtede hun, at NATO’s atomvåben er i færd med at blive rykket tættere på Rusland, som Shoigu havde anklaget – men hun kunne godt have indrømmet, at fly, der kan medføre atomvåben, er i færd med at blive flyttet ind i Polen og Baltikum. Hun klagede også over, at Rusland optrapper sin atomvåbenretorik; og hun erklærede, at NATO var en forsvarsalliance, der responderer til russiske handlinger.

Foto: Den russiske generalstabschef, general Valeriy Gerasimov, under den 4. Moskva-konference for International Sikkerhed. 

17. apr. 2015 – Efter USA’s meddelelse om, at 290 amerikanske tropper ville ankomme til Ukraine i dag for at uddanne den ukrainske hær, kom talsmanden for det Russiske Udenrigsministerium Alexander Lukashevich med en erklæring, der blev rapporteret af TASS, det russiske nyhedsagentur.

»Så vidt jeg ved, omfatter uddannelsesprogrammet træning i færdigheder mht. håndtering af våben og udstyr af vestlig standard«, sagde Lukasevich. »Det kan anses for at være første skridt hen imod levering af amerikanske våben af højeste standard, som Kiev-krigspartiet higer så stærkt efter. Washingtons opmuntrende holdning over for dets planer om gengældelse rummer endnu en bølge af vold og blodsudgydelse i vores naboland.«

»Rapporter om ankomsten af 290 soldater fra USA’s 173. Luftbårne Brigade [udstationeret i Vicenza, Italien] til Yavorovsky-øvelsesområdet i Ukraines Lvov-region kan kun volde alvorlig bekymring«, sagde han. »Det er indlysende, at amerikanske soldater i Ukraine ikke vil bringe fred til landet.«

Han påpegede også, at »Disse handlinger er i modstrid med de aftaler, der blev indgået i Minsk den 12. februar og underskrevet af myndighederne i Kiev, og, så vidt vi forstår, støttet af Washington.«

Med en barsk kritik tilføjede han, »Det er således en åbenlys krænkelse af forpligtelser, som Kiev har indgået, samtidig med, at Obamaregeringen, der i ord opfordrer til en fredelig afgørelse af krisen i Ukraine, i realiteten søger at forpurre Minskaftalerne.«

Tidligere har en erklæring fra Kreml på dets webside gennem talsmand for Putin, Dmitry Peskov, ligeledes kritiseret udstationeringen af de amerikanske tropper, rapporterede TASS.

»Tilstedeværelsen af udenlandske instruktører i Ukraine, hvor en intern konflikt fortsat er uløst i den sydøstlige del, og hvor der opstår problemer med implementeringen af Minsk-fredsaftalen, hjælper ikke med at afgøre konflikten og frembringe et miljø, der fremmer en afgørelse«, sagde Peskov. »Tværtimod destabiliserer det situationen.«

Foto: Amerikanske faldskærmstropper fra 173. Luftbårne Brigade, baseret i Vicenza, Italien, i kø for at gå om bord et C-130J Super Hercules transportfly, Ramstein Flyvestation i Tyskland, 10. feb. 2015, i anden anledning.

16. apr. 2015 – I en tale til den 4. Moskva-Konference om International Sikkerhed påpegede den russiske forsvarsminister Sergei Shoigu i dag den atomtrussel, som NATO, gennem opstilling af taktiske atommissiler i Østeuropa, har udgjort. »Geografien i deres øvelser – udelukkende alliancens østlige flanke og de arktiske områder – er bevis for deres anti-russiske holdning«, sagde han.

»NATO-lande, der ikke har atomvåben, deltager i øvelser, hvor de øver sig i at bruge amerikanske, taktiske atomvåben, der er opstillet i flere europæiske stater«, sagde han. Han mindede tilhørerne om anvendelsen af amerikanske atomvåben mod Hiroshima og Nagasaki den 6. og 9. august 1945 og sagde: »Jeg kan kun gætte på, hvad konsekvenserne af en tilsvarende appetit for at anvende atomvåben ville have medført for Europa, hvis den amerikanske hær havde anskaffet dem lidt tidligere«, idet han hentydede til amerikanernes mulige anvendelse af atomvåben mod Tyskland, hvis disse våben dengang havde været tilgængelige.

Ligeledes i en tale til konferencen gav lederen af det National-Europæiske Fællesskabsparti med base i Belgien, Luc Michel, udtryk for en lignende bekymring. Han sagde, »Rumænien er i færd med at transformere sig til en platform for aggression mod Rusland« og tilføjede, at lande som Polen, Bulgarien og nogle baltiske stater også er i færd med at følge i NATO-strategiens fodspor, rapporterede International Business Times i dag.

Under det USA/NATO-ledede ballistiske missilforsvarssystem (BMD) vil det amerikanske forsvarsagentur installere et Aegis landbaseret BMD-kompleks i Rumænien i 2015, og et lignende system i Polen vil blive kommissioneret i 2018. Lignende NATO-BMD-systemer med en blanding af radarer og interceptorer vil også blive placeret i Tyrkiet og Spanien.

Foto: Den russiske forsvarsminister Sergei Shoigu taler på Moskva-Konferencen for International Sikkerhed 2015. 

13. apr. 2015 – USA har indgivet en officiel klage til Rusland over russisk afvisning af et amerikansk RC-135U rekognosceringsfly over Det baltisk Hav i sidste uge. USA klager over, at det russiske Su-27 afviste det amerikanske fly med stor fart bagfra, og dernæst fortsatte med to gange at passere meget tæt forbi flyet med anvendelse af »farlige og uprofessionelle manøvrer«. »Uprofessionel indgriben i luften kan potentielt skade alle de involverede fly. Hvad der er vigtigere, så kan en enkelt pilots ansvarsløse handlinger potentielt set optrappe spændingerne mellem lande«, sagde talsmand for Pentagon Mark Wright til Associated Press. »Denne aktivitet i luften finder sted i sammenhæng med et ændret sikkerhedsmiljø i betragtning af Ruslands aggression over for Ukraine«, sagde han.

Talsmand for det russiske Forsvarsministerium, generalmajor Igor Konashenkov, sagde den 11. april, at det russiske flys afvisning lanceredes efter at »russiske luftforsvarsradarer registrerede et uidentificeret fly over Det baltiske Hav, som var på en stabil kurs mod den russiske statsgrænse«, og at der ikke var rapporteret om nogen nødsituation under det amerikanske rekognosceringsflys flyvning, mens det russiske fly passerede det amerikanske fly. »Med hensyn til vurderingen af vore piloters professionalisme, så er det udelukkende den russiske kommandos kompetenceområde at vurdere dette«, sagde Konashenkov. »Desuden må amerikanske rekognosceringsfly kun foretage selv ’ordinære’ flyvninger tæt ved USA’s grænser.«

Defence News rapporterer i et par historier i løbet af weekenden om den militære oprustning i Det baltiske Hav og Sortehavet fra begge parters side, at »den primære motivering, der driver Moskvas militære oprustning omkring Det baltiske Hav og i det Høje Nord, er deres urokkelige opfattelse af, at landet er omringet af en fjendtlig militæralliance, NATO, med sine 28 medlemmer.« Typisk for denne type dækning gør Defense News sig aldrig den ulejlighed at overveje, hvorfor russerne har denne opfattelse. Kunne det have noget at gøre med NATO’s udvidelse mod øst siden 1990’erne og dets inddæmning af Rusland med missilforsvar? Netop nu har USA 14 F-16-kampfly udstationeret i Estland, sammen med en brigade med pansrede mandskabsvogne, med omkring 3.500 tropper med tanks og artilleri i alle de tre baltiske lande, et dusin F-15-fly i Bulgarien og et dusin A-10-fly i Rumænien, sammen med et mindre antal tropper på jorden, der deltager i øvelser. Alt imens man himler op om russiske bombefly, så er, til sammenligning med alt dette, den russiske militære tilstedeværelse inden for hundreder af mil fra USA’s territorium, nul.

Foto: Et amerikansk RC-135U rekognosceringsfly.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

11. april 2015 – Det Russiske Udenrigsministeriums Informations- og Pressekontor udstedte 10. april en erklæring i respons til erklæringer fra regerings- og embedsfolk fra USA og NATO om, at aftalen om atomkraft med Iran ikke vil ændre NATO’s planer om missilforsvar i Europa. Erklæringen på Udenrigsministeriets hjemmeside lyder:

»Vi ser, at mens fremskridt med hensyn til Irans atomprogram i realiteten bliver tydeligere, så forsøger Washington og Bruxelles at opfinde nye grunde til deres missilforsvarsprogram.«

»Dette bekræfter endnu engang, at referencerne til ‘den iranske trussel’ i dette tilfælde blot er et skalkeskjul, alt imens det virkelige mål med at skabe anti-missilpotentialet er noget helt andet«,

lyder erklæringen. Erklæringerne om, at missilforsvarsskjoldet i Europa ikke er rettet mod Rusland,

»ser derfor mindre overbevisende ud«, understreger erklæringen.

Erklæringen citerer Obama for, i sin tale i Prag i 2009, at sige, at, hvis »den iranske trussel« elimineres, vil drivkraften bag opbygningen af missilforsvarssystemet i Europa bortfalde. Erklæringen siger derfor:

»USA’s og NATO’s åbenbare mangel på villighed til at tage de positive tendenser i løsningen af det iranske atomspørgsmål i betragtning bekræfter vores konklusion om, at missilskjoldet, der er under opstilling i Europa, har anti-russisk karakter.«

Andre hændelser og provokationer fortsætter i mellemtiden. Mens der ikke har været nogen russiske flyvninger med bombefly ud for USA’s eller Europas kyster i de seneste uger, så fortsætter amerikanske rekognosceringsflyvninger nær ved Rusland, og den 7. april var der en hændelse med nærkontakt over Det baltiske Hav.

»Et amerikansk RC-135U, der fløj en rutinerute i internationalt luftrum, blev afskåret af et russisk Su-27 Flanker på en risikabel og uprofessionel måde«,

sagde talskvinde for Pentagon, Eileen M. Lainez. Hun tilføjede, at USA vil tage denne hændelse op med Rusland »gennem de passende diplomatiske og officielle kanaler«.

Foto: Aegis missilforsvaret til søs, en del af missilskjoldet

10. april 2015 – Det Russiske Forsvarsministerium ville byde USA’s deltagelse i den kommende Sikkerhedskonference i Moskva, der er fastsat til 16.-17. april, velkommen. »Vi vil være meget glade for at se vore amerikanske venner til denne konference«, sagde viceforsvarsminister Anatoly Antonov under et interview på Rossiya 24 TV, rapporterer TASS. Antonov sagde, at han forventer deltagelse af 400 delegerede fra 70 lande, på trods af USA’s pres for det modsatte, inklusive forsvarsministeren fra NATO-medlemslandet Grækenland, der er blandt de 15 forsvarsministre, der foreløbig har bekræftet deres deltagelse.

Samtidig indikerede den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin, at Rusland ikke vil slække på sine forsvarsforholdsregler. »Vores indsats og forholdsregler for at styrke forsvarspotentialet vil fortsætte systematisk og vedholdende«, sagde han under en ceremoni for forfremmelse af seniormilitærofficerer og andre officerer i Kreml i går. »Vi er alle sammen bevidste om, at dette udgør en betydningsfuld faktor for Ruslands suveræne udvikling, og en forudsætning for et fredeligt og roligt liv for millioner af vore borgere.« Han sagde også, at Rusland ville »fortsætte med at styrke sin sikkerhed« og samarbejde med »stater, der søger fred, stabilitet og udvikling« blandt det voksende potentiale for konflikt i regioner, der er af strategisk vigtighed for Rusland. Putin sagde, at flere lande var i færd med at transformere deres politik hen imod aggressive handlinger. »Som et resultat heraf kommer der trusler, som vi ikke kan ignorere«, tilføjede han.

Foto: Amerikanske faldskærmstropper med base i Estland gennemfører deres første øvelser med faldskærmsudspring fredag (10. april), meddelte Estlands Forsvarsstyrker (Sputnik News).

Jeg håber inderligt, at fredelige initiativer vil sejre. Jeg håber inderligt, at dette mareridt i Ukraine kan standses, og at Ukraine vil få mulighed for at bruge sit enorme potentiale, sine intellektuelle, industrielle og videnskabelige kapaciteter. De findes stadig væk. Menneskene er stadig i live. Jeg håber, at Ukraine kan vende sig mod opbygning af ting, og, sammen med Rusland, og Europa, og Kina, bygge nye landbroer, og den Nye Silkevej, og programmet for at udvikle Månen, og så videre.

Natalia Vitrenko, parlamentsmedlem (1994-2002), leder af Ukraines Progressive Socialistparti, havde følgende videoindslag på Citizens Electoral Council (CEC) (LaRouche-bevægelsen i Australien), konference 28.-29. marts 2015, Melbourne, med titlen: »Verdenslandbroen: Fred på Jord, og i mennesker en velbehagelighed«.

Video af alle konferencens indslag kan ses her: http://cecaust.com.au/2015conference/

(Optaget 19. marts, Kiev)

»Kære deltagere på konferencen! Det er mig en stor glæde at sende jer mine hilsner. I er samlet i dag i Australien, der ligger meget langt væk fra vores eurasiske kontinent, og I har et vidunderligt emne for jeres konference: helliget fred. I diskuterer nye, unikke investeringsprojekter, den Nye Silkevej, Verdenslandbroen. Og I er overbevist om, at der vil komme fred på Jord, og I har dedikeret jeres håb og forhåbninger til dette. Dette er vidunderligt! Og tro mig, det er, hvad alle, mentalt raske personer i verden ønsker.

Det er med stor beklagelse at jeg må sige, at mit land Ukraine i dag ikke er en del af denne proces. I mit land er der en borgerkrig i gang. Mit land er underkastet en overlagt, vedvarende og brutal ødelæggelse.

For ikke så længe siden, kun femogtyve år siden, var Ukraine at finde blandt de ti mest udviklede lande i verden, målt ud fra BNP pr. person. Ukraine producerede 2 % af verdens BNP på daværende tidspunkt. Ukraines BNP pr. person lå 11 % over verdensgennemsnittet. Ukraine havde flere end 360 større industrianlæg. Ukraine var et avanceret, agro-industrielt land. Vi havde fabrikker, der byggede raketter, vi havde skibsbyggeri og produktion af fly, biler og lokomotiver. Ukraine har mere end 20 % af verdens reserver af løssjord. Vi havde fremragende høstudbytte, og der var ingen, der sultede. Vi havde gratis uddannelse og gratis sundhedsydelser. Vi kunne have børn og give dem en opvækst i fuld tillid til, hvad morgendagen ville bringe.

Men Sovjetunionen blev ødelagt. Det blev ødelagt af Kommunistpartiets elite, der degenererede og ønskede at tage det i eje, der i realiteten var nationens fælles rigdom. De ønskede kun at sørge for deres egne børn og børnebørn.

Ukraine har eksisteret som uafhængig nation i 24 år. Hvad har mit land så fået ud af denne såkaldte uafhængighed? I dag repræsenterer Ukraines BNP kun 0,5 % af verdens BNP. Det var på 2 %, nu er det 0,5 %. Pr. person er Ukraines BNP US$ 4.000, mod verdensgennemsnittet på US$ 10.500. Det ligger således nu 60 % under verdensgennemsnittet. Vi lå på 11 % over verdensgennemsnittet, og nu ligger vi på 60 % under det.

Hvad skyldes dette? Det skyldes, at de økonomiske bånd til de fabrikker og regioner, sammen med hvilke vores økonomi var blevet udviklet i årtier, blev brudt. Det vil først og fremmest sige Rusland, Belarus og de tidligere Sovjetrepublikker. Tallene fortæller historien. Den forventede, gennemsnitlige levealder i vores land er faldet med to år i løbet af disse femogtyve år. Den var 72, nu er den 70. Mænd i Ukraine bliver i gennemsnit 62 år. Befolkningen er ved at uddø. I 1990 havde Ukraine en befolkning på 52 millioner mennesker. Nu er der 43 millioner tilbage, eksklusive Krim. Ukraine har mistet Krim.

Den primære årsag er den reformpolitik, der blev gennemtvunget af Den internationale Valutafond (IMF). Denne reformpolitik betød en privatisering af statslig ejendom, der overgik på hænderne af et nyt oligarki. Dette oligarki trives rigtig godt. Deres familier lider ikke under fattigdom. Reformpolitikken afsluttede statslig, lovmæssig regulering af eksport og import. Kommerciel bankvirksomhed bredte sig hurtigt, og bankmafiaen begyndte at tjene penge på Ukraines problemer. Bankmafiaen er heller ikke forarmet. Den lever ganske godt. IMF’s reformpolitik foreskrev en økonomisk model med billig arbejdskraft. Niveauet for eksistensminimum, mindsteløn og pensioner blev holdt nede, og det er grunden til, at det overvejende flertal af befolkningen er forarmet. Ifølge ombudsmanden for menneskerettigheder levede 80 % af den ukrainske befolkning i 2011 under den fattigdomsgrænse, som FN fastsætter for Central- og Østeuropa, samt lande i Fællesskabet af Uafhængige Stater. Denne fattigdomsgrænse udgør US$ 4,30 pr. dag. 80 % af den ukrainske befolkning modtog mindre end det, på daværende tidspunkt. Hvordan ser det så ud nu? Jeg vil fortælle jer, hvordan det står til nu.

Ukraine blev konfronteret med valget mellem enten at integrere sig med Rusland, Belarus og Kasakhstan – Toldunionen, eller med Den europæiske Union. Det, man måtte gøre, var at afveje og analysere disse forskellige valgmuligheder. Og de blev analyseret. En særlig arbejdsgruppe blev etableret, der inkluderede specialister fra Det Russiske Videnskabsakademis Institut for Økonomiske Prognoser og Det Ukrainske Nationalakademis Institut for Økonomiske Prognoser. Denne arbejdsgruppe beregnede omhyggeligt, hvad der ville være til størst fordel for Ukraine. Deres klare svar var, at integration i Øst med medlemmerne af Toldunionen ville være fordelagtigt og lovende, og rent faktisk ville kunne redde Ukraine. De viste, at hvis Ukraine gik med i Toldunionen, ville landet få en stigning i BNP på 18 % i løbet af ti år. Det ville udgøre den største stigning blandt noget medlem af Toldunionen. Rusland ville få en stigning på 16,8 % inden for denne tidsramme; Belarus, 16,1 %; Kasakhstan 14,7 %. Men Ukraine ville få en stigning i BNP på 18 %. Hvorfor? Fordi forhindringerne for salg af ukrainske varer i Rusland, Belarus og Kasakhstan ville blive fjernet. Priserne for disse produkter ville falde, og de ville blive mere konkurrencedygtige pga. de lavere omkostninger forbundet med at bringe dem ud på markedet. Desuden ville Ukraine modtage meget nødvendige investeringer i modernisering af sin industri.

Antager I, at dette blot var projektioner? Nej, det var det sandelig ikke. Lad mig give jer nogle præcise tal. I 2010 blev Janukovitj valgt til præsident for Ukraine. Hans image var, at han skulle være prorussisk og ville genetablere tætte kontakter med Rusland. I april 2010 blev Kharkovaftalen underskrevet, hvorved Rusland gav Ukraine en discount på prisen for naturgas. Alle håbede virkeligt, at der ville komme en intensiv, økonomisk integrationsproces mellem Rusland og Ukraine. Hvad skete der generelt i 2010? I 2010 voksede Ukraines handel med Rusland med 60,7 %, til et niveau på US$ 41,9 mia. Den russisk-ukrainske handel voksede, og Ukraine fik et kæmpestort marked for sine produkter. Ukraines industriproduktion steg med 11 % i 2010. Jeg taler om industriproduktion, der var kernen i den ukrainske økonomi. Det er grunden til, at Ukraines BNP voksede med 4 % i 2010. Det handlede ikke kun om, at bruttoeksporten til Rusland steg, men også om, at sammensætningen af Ruslands import fra Ukraine for 40 % ’s vedkommende bestod af højteknologiske produkter, og for 45 % ’s vedkommende af mellemteknologiske produkter. Med andre ord, så skabte dette en efterspørgsel af højt specialiseret arbejdskraft i Ukraine, så når vore børn gik ud af skolen og universitetet, var der en efterspørgsel efter deres kundskaber i økonomien. Det viste året 2010 meget klart.

Men ak, det selv samme år besluttede Janukovitj, efter sin indsættelse i embedet, at forråde alle. Han forrådte sine vælgere, der havde troet, at han ville sikre økonomisk integration med Rusland. Han bedrog Vesten, hvor han begyndte at eksportere sin hastigt voksende, personlige rigdom. Han begyndte at forsikre Vesten om, at han ville få Ukraines integration i Europa til at ske. Det er grunden til, at, i juli 2010, Janukovitj’ Regionspartiet, sammen med Kommunistpartiet og Litvin-blokken, som tilsammen udgjorde et koalitionsflertal i parlamentet, stemte for Ukraines europæiske integration. Dette blev vedtaget af Ukraines parlament, men det skete imod vort folks vilje. Det skete endog imod de løfter, som disse politiske kræfter havde givet. Hverken Regionspartiet eller Kommunisterne havde ført valgkampagne på en platform for at bryde båndene til Rusland og gøre fremstød mod Den europæiske Union.

Tværtimod havde vort folk i to folkeafstemninger, tilbage i 1991, stemt for at være sammen med Rusland og Belarus, og for at opbygge en ny, forbedret alliance. Men så trampede præsidenterne Kravchuk, Kutjma og Jusjtjenko, efterfulgt af Janukovitj, på det, som befolkningen havde stemt for. Janukovitj og Regionspartiet begyndte at opbygge den myte, at Europa ønsker Ukraine, og at Ukraine burde orientere sig mod Europa og integrere sig med EU.

I mellemtiden beregnede vore akademiske økonomer, hvis resultater i forbindelse med relationer med Rusland jeg allerede har nævnt, hvad Ukraine ville få ud af at integrere sig med Vesten. Det, de nåede frem til, det samme Ukrainske Videnskabsakademis Institut for Nationaløkonomiske Prognoser, var rædselsvækkende. For at integrere sig i EU, bare ind i den frihandelszone, der var påbudt i en Associeringsaftale, ville det koste 160 mia. euro at modernisere den ukrainske økonomi. Hvor skulle penge i denne størrelsesorden komme fra?

Da disse kalkuler, der viste, hvad Ukraine ville få ud af associeringen med EU, blev fremlagt for premierminister Azarov i efteråret 2013 og for præsident Janukovitj, så begyndte de også at rive sig i håret over, hvad der ville ske med den ukrainske økonomi. Det var selvfølgelig sent, at de begyndte at rive sig i håret. I tre år havde de cirkuleret myter om den økonomiske fremgang, som Ukraine ville opleve, hvis landet associerede sig med EU. De havde spredt reklame for denne euro-psykose i tre år. Men da den ukrainske regering, den 21. november, 2013, besluttede at udsætte underskrivelsen af Associeringsaftalen, så gik hele den operation, der var planlagt i forvejen, forberedt og betalt for af Vesten, og som involverede en temmelig betydelig del af den ukrainske befolkning, der havde satset på en orientering mod Vesten, i gang. Euromaidan gik i gang.

Den 29. november 2013 i Vilnius nægtede Janukovitj at underskrive Associeringsaftalen med EU. Den nat, 29.-30. november, 2013, ophørte det fredelige Euromaidan med at være fredeligt. I dag forstår vi alle, at dette scenario var planlagt forud, på vegne af, og betalt af, USA, og det blev udført af [Ukraines] præsidentielle stabchef, Lyovochkin. Pludselig brugte Berkut-specialstyrkerne upassende magt mod studenterne, der protesterede på den centrale plads. Selv om, ud fra hvad jeg ser om begivenhederne i Frankfurt den 18. marts 2015, så brød politiet på en meget hård måde optøjerne, hvor demonstranterne ligeledes havde brosten og Molotovcocktails og brændte bildæk af. Og hvad med Ferguson, Missouri? I USA tog man også hårdt fat på demonstranter, der protesterede over nedskydningen af en sort mand. Men i Kiev greb demonstranterne den 1. december 2013 køller, kæder, Molotovcocktails og brosten, og de gik til angreb mod folk fra politiet, fra Berkut-specialstyrkerne, der denne gang var ubevæbnede. De havde ikke engang politistave. Vesten, især USA, forbød Janukovitj at bruge magt. De forbød det.

Det var dernæst, den 21. februar 2014, de vestlige lande – udenrigsministrene fra Tyskland, Frankrig og Polen – der, sammen med Janukovitj og oppositionens ledere Jatsenjuk, Klitjko og Tjagnibok, tog ansvaret for at underskrive en aftale om, at Janukovitj skulle gå af, og der skulle komme en ny regering i Ukraine. De påtog sig ansvaret for at gøre det til en fredelig overgang.

Men hvad skete der så i vores land? Selv før den 20. februar var der våben på Maidan. Der var nedskydning af både demonstranter og Berkut-folk, udført af mystiske snigskytter, hvis identitet endnu i dag ikke er fastslået. Således fremkom de »Himmelske Hundrede« skudofre.

Hvad var så det næste, der skete i Ukraine? Så de vestlige lande ikke, i løbet af vinteren 2014, at nazister havde overtaget magten på Euromaidan i Kiev? Det var partier og politiske kræfter, der åbenlyst prædiker en nazistisk ideologi. De skjuler det ikke og proklamerer »Ukraine frem for alt!«, »Ukraine for ukrainere!«. De bruger Bandera-slogans. Stepan Bandera var agent for Hitlers efterretningstjeneste, Abwehr. Han samarbejdede med nazisterne og organiserede sine folk til at yde Hitler hjælp. Ved den Internationale Militærdomstol i Nürnberg, hvor de tyske fascister blev retsforfulgt, blev deres hjælpere også dømt. Artikel 6 i Nürnbergdomstolens charter sagde, at de medskyldige skulle dømmes og straffes. Men i dette tilfælde kom tilhængerne af Bandera og Shukhevych med deres sorte-og-røde, pronazistiske flag, og deres svastikaer – enten ligefrem det nazistiske hagekors, eller Wolfsangel, et andet nazi-symbol – og med portrætter af Bandera, Konovaletes og Shukhevych, der også var agenter for Abwehr; og med slogans, som opfordrede til at »gi’ Moskali’erne kniven«, hvilket er en nedsættende, ukrainsk term for russere, og »hæng kommunisterne«. Det var sloganet for dem, der marcherede på Maidan. Disse symboler kunne ses, ikke blot i Kiev, men både før og efter kuppet bredte de sig i hele Ukraine. Og de vestlige lande bemærkede dem ikke.

Fra den 23. februar til den 5. marts 2013 blev det muligt for vores delegation af ledende repræsentanter for nogle ukrainske venstrepartier at turnere i Europa, hvor de besøgte Frankrig, Tyskland og Italien. Dette blev arrangeret af vore kolleger fra LaRouche-bevægelsen. Jeg er meget taknemmelig over, at de gav os mulighed for at holde dusinvis af møder, pressekonferencer og interviews. Takket være medlemmer af Europaparlamentet fra det italienske Liga Nord blev det muligt for mig at afholde en pressekonference den 26. februar i Europaparlamentet. Allerede på dette tidspunkt forklarede vi, hvad det var, der skete i Ukraine. Allerede dengang advarede vi om truslen om borgerkrig og opløsning af landet, der kunne føre til Tredje Verdenskrig. Og jeg opfordrede dengang Berlin, Moskva og Paris til at forene deres indsats: især disse tre centre – Berlin Moskva og Paris – til at forene deres indsats og forhindre nazisterne i at overtage Ukraine. At hjælpe med at forbyde alle neonazistiske partier og bevægelser i Ukraine.

Hvis det var sket på dette tidspunkt, ville de efterfølgende rædsler i Ukraine ikke være sket: hvor dusinvis af mennesker brændte ihjel levende i Fagforeningsbygningen i Odessa den 2. maj, 2014. Da man åbnede ild mod en fredelig demonstration i Mariupol den 9. maj. Da Krim, efter at set dette nazistiske kup, forlod Ukraine. Da Donbass rejste sig til modstand, og hvor blodet stadig flyder. Endnu i dag. Der er 50.000 døde, hundreder tusinder af invaliderede, og to millioner flygtninge, inklusive dem, der har forladt landet af politiske grunde. Det er ikke en lille pris, man har betalt for dette forfatningsstridige, neonazistiske kup i Ukraine!

Dette er en tragedie for hele nationen; det er ikke kun Donbass, der lider. Ukraine som helhed er blevet tappet for sin styrke. I 2014 faldt Ukraines BNP med 7 %. Industriproduktionen faldt med 10,7 %. Alene i januar 2015 faldt industriproduktionen med yderligere 21 %. Den nationale valuta er blevet devalueret med to tredjedele. I dag er Ukraines reserver af guld og fremmedvaluta kun US$ 5,5 mia. For et år siden var de US$ 24 mia. Der er ikke engang nok til at dække tre måneders import, hvilket er standard-mindsteniveauet. For Ukraine er det US$ 9 mia., men landet har ikke reserverne til at dække det.

I mellemtiden tigger Ukraine om den seneste almisse fra IMF. Den 11. marts besluttede de at udlåne US$ 17,5 mia. Men ikke det hele på en gang, snarere hen over tre år. I 2015 kommer der US$ 5 mia., som allerede var opbrugt den 13. marts, og yderligere US$ 5 mia. ved årets slutning. I alt US$ 10 mia. Men i 2015 har Ukraine betalinger til udenlandsgæld på US$ 11 mia.! Så lånet fra IMF dækker ikke engang afbetalingerne på gælden.

Og hvad er så lånebetingelserne? De er absolut monstrøse! Ukraine gik ud af året 2014 med den største nedgang i sin naturlige befolkning i verden. Vi har verdens næst værste dødsrate. Men for den naturliglige befolkningstilvækst, der defineres som forskellen mellem dødsraten og fødselsraten, har vi den værste nedgangsrate i verden. Og det var for sidste år. Hvad vil der ske i år, under IMF’s drakoniske betingelser? Tænk over det: for at opnå disse elendige milliarder af dollars gik Jatsenjuk-regeringen, det ukrainske parlament og Ukraines præsident med til en pludselig, brutal stigning i forbrugsafgifterne. Prisen for naturgas vil stige med 3,3 gange. Elektricitet vil blive 3,5 gange så dyrt. Varme – 72 % i år. Varmt vand – 55 %. Koldt vand – 15 %. Hvordan skal folk betale det? Jeg vil gerne have, at I forstår, hvad mindsteeksistensniveauet for indkomst i Ukraine er, for lønninger og pensioner, fastsat ved lov. Disse niveauer blev fastsat i december 2013 for 2014-statsbudgettet, der forudsatte, at de ville blive indeksreguleret for inflation. Men det gjorde den nye regering ikke, de indeksregulerede ikke betalingerne, selv om inflationen i 2014 var 24,9 %, den højeste inflationsrate i verden. Mindsteeksistensniveauet for indkomst, fastsat for Ukraine i december 2013 og stadig i kraft, modsvarede, på det tidspunkt, $ 152 pr. måned for en person. Men med devalueringen af den nationale valuta med to tredjedele siden da, modsvarer mindsteeksistens-indkomsten nu $ 49 pr. måned. Mindstelønnen er $ 51. Mindstepensionen er $ 40. Det er, hvad statsbudgettet giver en pensionist pr. måned –$ 40.

Den gennemsnitlige, månedlige pension i Ukraine modsvarer $ 60. Hertil kommer, at det er en del af IMF-pakken, at pensioner skal pålægges en skat for at finansiere forsvarsudgifterne.

Den tid, som en person skal have arbejdet inden for tungt, fysisk arbejde, for at være kvalificeret til at få pension, er blevet sat op med 5 år. Ancienniteten for professionelle, før de kan modtage pension, er sat op. Det er et stort anslag mod vore pensionister! Jeg erkender, hvilken byrde de er for IMF. Vi har 14 millioner pensionister, en tredjedel af befolkningen. IMF ser frem til, at Ukraines pensionister dør, så hurtigt som muligt. Og ikke kun pensionisterne! Også arbejdende mennesker. Se på lønningerne. Den gennemsnitlige timeløn i Ukraine i dag er 0,2 euro, dvs. tyve eurocents i timen. Den gennemsnitlige timeløn i EU er 23 euro. Kan man overhovedet kalde det en løn? Det er derfor, vort folk bliver syge og dør.

Fødevarepriserne stiger så meget, at folk ikke kan spise ordentligt. Og oveni alt dette kommer så de planlagte stigninger i forbrugsafgifterne. IMF kræver nedskæringer i omkostningerne til uddannelse. Antallet af højere læreanstalter i Ukraine er blevet skåret ned med 60 %. Antallet af skoler bliver skåret ned med 5 %.

IMF krævede stop for subsidier til den agro-industrielle sektor. Hvordan skal landmændene overleve? Hvordan skal de så afgrøderne? Beregningen går ud på, at de vil blive tvunget til at sælge deres jord. Landbrugsministeriet har sat tre fjerdedele af landbrugsejendommene i Ukraine til salg under privatisering. De vil blive opkøbt af DuPont, Monsanto og deslige, billigt, så de kan dyrke deres genetisk modificerede afgrøder her, og oversvømme Europa og verden med dem.

Dette er, hvad man gør mod Ukraine: krig, død, sult og fattigdom. Hvad vil Europa få ud af det? Hvad står Europa til at vinde? Forstår europæerne virkelig ikke, at krigens flammer nu vil blusse endnu mere op, og at den tilsyneladende lokale krig i Ukraine så vil føre til en verdenskrig – til en konflikt med Rusland? Hvorfor vil man gøre dette?

Jeg håber inderligt, at fredelige initiativer vil sejre. Jeg håber inderligt, at dette mareridt i Ukraine kan standses, og at Ukraine vil få mulighed for at bruge sit enorme potentiale, sine intellektuelle, industrielle og videnskabelige kapaciteter. De findes stadig væk. Menneskene er stadig i live. Jeg håber, at Ukraine kan vende sig mod opbygning af ting, og, sammen med Rusland, og Europa, og Kina, bygge nye landbroer, og den Nye Silkevej, og programmet for at udvikle Månen, og så videre.

Det er, hvad jeg ønsker for mit land, og for hele menneskeheden.

Sluttelig vil jeg gerne sige noget – for jeg er ikke fysisk til stede i Australien, men der er en person der, der ligner mig meget, og som derfor er blevet kaldt min søster: [medlem af CEC’s Eksekutive Komite] Gabrielle Peut. Jeg vil gerne sige dette til hende:

’Min kære Gabby, jeg er glad for at tale til dig. Jeg tror, vi vil mødes mange flere gange i fremtiden.’

Det tror jeg på.«

8. april 2015 – Grækenland og Rusland har indgået aftale om at bringe de politiske og økonomiske relationer til et nyt niveau i kølvandet på bilaterale møder i Moskva mellem den besøgende græske premierminister Alexis Tsipras og den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin. Drøftelserne var centreret omkring økonomisk samarbejde, især inden for energi- og infrastrukturområdet. Den varme atmosfære og drøftelserne om samarbejde på alle niveauer står i skarp kontrast til EU’s anti-russiske politik og markerer endnu et skridt i Grækenlands proces frem mod de facto at blive integreret i BRIKS-systemet.

Tre aftaler blev underskrevet, af hvilke den ene drejer sig om samarbejde mellem Grækenland og Rusland i 2015, inklusive handel og finansiering. Den anden aftale er en erklæring, der mindes 70-året for afslutningen af Anden Verdenskig, og en tredje aftale var et memorandum, der erklærer 2016 for »Året for Grækenland og Rusland, og Året for Rusland og Grækenland«, med forskellige kulturelle begivenheder og initiativer om samarbejde.

Under pressekonferencen adresserede begge ledere krisen i Europa, forårsaget af situationen i Ukraine. Tsipras opfordrede indtrængende til et stop for sanktionerne mod Rusland og sagde: »For at komme ud af denne dybe krise må vi lægge denne ondskabsfulde cyklus med sanktioner bag os.«

Som modargument til de vestlige propagandaløgne om, at den russiske præsident bruger Grækenland imod EU, sagde Putin: »Om mytologi og trojanske heste osv.: Spørgsmålet ville være relevant, hvis det var mig, der gik til Athen«, svarede Putin en reporter, der spurgte til EU’s frygt. »Vi tvinger ikke nogen til at gøre noget som helst. Vi vil ikke bruge noget som helst inden for EU til at løse, på en fragmenteret måde, spørgsmålet om at forbedre relationerne med den europæiske blok som helhed«, fortsatte Putin.

Af årsager, som han indikerede i sin erklæring, meddelte Putin, at han ikke ville gøre Grækenland til en undtagelse i Ruslands embargo mod fødevareimport fra EU og sagde, at sanktioner ikke kan løftes for blot et enkelt land.

Desuden sagde Putin, at den græske side ikke tilnærmede sig Rusland for finansiel hjælp.

Energi var et hovedemne i drøftelserne, især den foreslåede Turkish Stream-gasledning fra Rusland til Tyrkiet og herfra videre til Øst- og Centraleuropa. »Vi har naturligvis drøftet udsigterne til en virkeliggørelse af det store infrastrukturprojekt, som vi kalder Turkish Stream – et hovedprojekt for transport af russisk gas til Balkan, muligvis til Italien, og til landene i Centraleuropa«, sagde Putin under pressekonferencen.

»Denne nye rute vil opfylde europæernes behov for brændsel og vil give Grækenland mulighed for at blive et af hovedcentrene for distribution af energi, og kunne være med til at tiltrække betydelige investeringer i den græske økonomi«, sagde Putin og tilføjede, at Grækenland årligt kunne tjene hundreder af millioner euro fra gastransit.

Tsipras på sin side sagde, at Athen er interesseret i at tiltrække investeringer i konstruktion af gasledningerne på sit territorium, til håndteringen af gassen, der kommer gennem Turkish Stream.

Tsipras blev ledsaget af den græske energiminister, Panagiotis Lafazanis, der var i Moskva for mindre end to uger siden, og desuden af sin udenrigsminister, Nikos Kotzias.

Kotzias fløj direkte til Moskva fra et møde i Budapest mellem udenrigsministrene i Ungarn, Serbien, Tyrkiet og Den Tidligere Jugoslaviske Republik Makedonien (F.Y.R.O.M.), hvor de underskrev en politisk hensigtserklæring til støtte for Turkish Stream-gasledningen. Man aftalte at holde fremtidige møder for at drøfte detaljerne i foretagendet. Det næste ministermøde forventes at blive i juli måned, men bilaterale forhandlinger vil begynde tidligere. (Det bør bemærkes, at fire ud af fem lande, der deltog i Budapest-mødet, nemlig Ungarn, Grækenland, Serbien og F.Y.R.O.M., er en del af »Kina-Europa Land-og-Hav Ekspreslinjen«. Dette projekt er sponsoreret af Kina for at udvikle en transportkorridor fra den græske havn i Piræus, og ind i Centraleuropa, gennem disse fire lande.)

Den 9. april er endnu en fuldt besat dag for Tsipras, hvor han skal holde møder med formanden for Statsdumaen, Sergei Naryshkin, den russiske premierminister Dmitry Medvedev og Patriark Kirill for Moskva og hele Rusland.

Foto: Kort over den planlagte rute for den nye, Turkish Stream-gasledning gennem Tyrkiet og videre til Grækenland. Putin meddelte i dec. 2014, at Rusland havde stoppet alle planer om South Stream-gasledningen, også vist på kortet, pga. af blokering fra Bulgarien/EU.     

Præcis, som Lyndon LaRouche advarede om i webcastet 3. april, så fører præsident Obama en politik, der er gunstigt stemt over for saudierne og udbruddet af en storkrig, med begyndelse i Den persiske Golf. Obamaregeringen optrapper våbenleverancer til Saudi Arabien for at støtte bombekampagnen imod Yemen. Amerikanske militærrådgivere er i færd med at udarbejde et »fusionscenter« i Riyadh, hvor de planlægger optrapningen af den saudiske intervention i noget, der faktisk er en intern uoverensstemmelse i Yemen. Saudierne hævder, at de udkæmper en surrogatkrig imod Iran i Yemen og lyver om, at houthierne simpelt hen er iranske stedfortrædere. Dette er et komplet svindelnummer, men det saudiske svindelnummer tilsigter at udløse en storkrig.

LaRouche advarede om, at, med P5+1-aftalen med et Iran, der er på vej frem, må saudierne holdes i skak og få besked om at blande sig udenom. Enhver tolerance over for saudisk geskæftighed vil føre til en krig, der eskalerer og ikke kan standses. Ved at give militær, logistisk og efterretningsmæssig støtte til de igangværende saudiske operationer gør Obama præcis det, som LaRouche advarede om, at han ville gøre. Dette er opskriften på global krig.

Det, som Obama i stedet skulle tvinges til at gøre, er at frigive de 28 [hemmeligstemplede] sider fra den oprindelige fælles Kongresundersøgelse af 11. september.

Verden skal vide, hvad saudierne og deres britiske, royale partnere i virkeligheden er. Uden den anglo-saudiske alliance ville der ikke være noget al-Qaeda, ingen Islamisk Stat og stort set ingen terrorisme. De udførte 11. september-angrebene for at hjælpe Bush og Cheney med at etablere et diktatur i USA.

Denne Obamas skamfulde opførsel, hvor han støtter saudierne militært, og hvor han dækker over saudierne ved at lægge låg over de 28 sider, er endnu et bevis på, at han er uskikket som præsident, og aldrig nogen sinde har været skikket til det. Han er mere eller mindre lige så dårlig, som hele Bush-familien tilsammen.

Obamas største forbrydelse er hans opførsel over for Rusland, en opførsel, der også har bragt verden til randen af krig – en potentiel atomkrig. Gennem Victoria Nuland og andre fører Obama krig mod Rusland og støtter åbenlyst neonazister i Ukraine. 

Angrebene på den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin drejer sig ikke bare om Rusland. Det drejer sig om det voksende, russisk-kinesiske, globale partnerskab, et partnerskab, der, sammen med Indien, repræsenterer kernen i BRIKS-bevægelsen for et nyt, globalt paradigme.

Den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yi var i Moskva tirsdag, 7. april, for at mødes med både udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov og præsident Putin for at forberede præsident Xi Jinpings besøg den 8. maj, i anledning af højtideligholdelsen af 70-året for sejren i Anden Verdenskrig. Putin og Wang Yi bemærkede, at alene i løbet af de seneste to år har Rusland og Kina underskrevet 107 fælles aftaler, der hovedsageligt involverede internationale infrastruktur-projekter. Præsident Putin gjorde det klart, at Rusland agter fuldt ud at støtte Kinas Nye Silkevejs-initiativ.

Se LPAC-video: »Storm over Asia« 

Onsdag mødtes præsident Putin også med den græske premierminister Tsipras, hvor han gjorde det klart, at Grækenland er velkommen som partner i BRIKS-initiativerne. (fremhævelse ved red.) Grækenland vil spille en central rolle i Turkey Stream, den nye gasledning ind i det sydlige Europa.

Idet han bemærkede de positive fremskridt i Putin-Tsipras-mødet, zoomede Lyndon LaRouche ind på Tyskland og bemærkede, at det er af afgørende betydning at se, hvordan Tyskland nu vil reagere over for Grækenland. Tyskland har på skamfuld vis indgået et aftalt spil med briterne og andre om at fremføre svigagtige anklager imod Grækenland. Mange inden for det tyske finansielle samfund er udmærket klar over, at Trojkaen og EU, med betydelig tysk medvirken, har begået et svindelnummer imod Grækenland. Den græske befolkning har gjort oprør imod denne svindel og stemt den aktuelle regering til magten for at befri Grækenland for denne svindel. LaRouche krævede, at Tyskland standser denne svindel og rent faktisk lancerer en fuld undersøgelse af, hvordan svindelen/udplyndringen af Grækenland blev udført. Bare fordi regnskabet udviser gæld, betyder det ikke, at denne gæld er legitim. I Grækenlands tilfælde var det et totalt svindelnummer.

I sin ugentlige dialog mandag, 6. april, med LPAC’s Komite for Politisk Strategi, fremlagde LaRouche en standard for et levedygtigt præsidentskab. Han identificerede Martin O’Malley som den eneste kandidat, der hidtil er fremkommet, som viser kvalifikationer til at bestride jobbet. Obama har tydeligvis, lige fra begyndelsen, aldrig været kvalificeret og burde aldrig have haft mulighed for at komme ind i Det Hvide Hus, undtagen på turistpas. Det, der nu er en presserende nødvendighed, er, at der nedsættes et team af erfarne og kvalificerede folk, der kan etablere et præsidentskab, et præsidentskabsteam, der rent faktisk kan adressere de aktuelle, overhængende kriser.

Et sådant team kan samles omkring O’Malley. Det må gøres, for uden en sådan omgående indsats er USA dømt til undergang. Alene ferskvandskrisen i de vestlige stater vil, hvis der ikke gribes ind nu med handling, gøre det af med USA. Hvis det ikke lykkes at løse ferskvandskrisen i Californien, vil der komme massehungersnød i USA i takt med, at fødevareforsyningen bryder sammen. Galninge som [Californiens] guvernør Jerry Brown (’LaRouche: Hvis det er ’brunt’, så skyl det ud!’) promoverer rationering af vand og anden »grøn« galskab. Obama er endnu værre. Han har ignoreret ferskvandskrisen i Californien i hele sin syv år lange embedsperiode og planlægger nu et topmøde fra Det Hvide Hus om klimaforandring og sundhed – et komplet svindelnummer.

Forslag til fordybelse:

EIR-Efterretningsteam: Hvem står bag planerne om en opsplitning af Rusland? 

7. april 2015 – Aftenen før sit første officielle besøg i Rusland i morgen gav premierminister Alexis Tsipras et langt, eksklusivt interview til TASS’ førstevicedirektør, general Mikhail Gusman. Gusman spurgte Tsipras, hvad han ønskede at opnå under sit besøg, og Tsipras svarede:

»Dette er en mulighed for at etablere et nyt grundlag for russisk-græske relationer«, som ville inkludere samarbejde inden for områderne »økonomi, energi, handel og landbrug … Det er min overbevisning, at Grækenland, som medlem af EU, kan fungere som en bro, der forbinder Vesten og Rusland«.

På spørgsmålet om sanktioner genbekræftede Tsipras sin regerings opposition mod sanktioner i princippet, og mod Rusland i særdeleshed.

»Jeg er uenig i sanktionerne«, sagde han. »Jeg mener, at de udgør en vej, der ikke fører nogen steder hen. Jeg fastholder, at der må være en dialog, der må være diplomati. Løsninger på store problemer skal søges ved forhandlingsbordet. En økonomisk krig som en fortsættelse af en rigtig krig er en håbløs politik. Jeg går ind for diplomati … Første gang, jeg deltog i EU-topmødet, henvendte jeg mig til alle vore partnere og modparter – både premierministre og statsoverhoveder – med disse ord: ’Kan I venligst fortælle mig: Hvordan ser I en fremtidig sikkerhedsarkitektur i Europa? Ser i denne arkitektur med Rusland som oppositionen, eller med Rusland involveret i processen med en dialog og forståelse?’ Mange gav mig ikke noget svar. Som jeg ser det, er svaret klart: en ny sikkerhedsarkitektur i Europa må nødvendigvis inkludere Rusland.«

Som kommentar til næste måneds festligholdelser i anledning af 70-året for sejren over nazisterne sagde Tsipras:

»Dette jubilæum er af særlig betydning for det russiske folk og det græske folk. Som jeg allerede har sagt, så har vore to folk smedet broderlige relationer, fordi de kæmpede sammen på afgørende vigtige tidspunkter i historien. Grækenland og Rusland er de to lande, der betalte mere end de andre med deres blod i kampen mod nazisterne. Dette er en integreret del af vores fælles grundlag, af vore landes og folks fælles rødder, der delte samme skæbne … Lad os se, hvad der kan gøres for at gøre relationerne mellem de to lande og de to folk mere meningsfulde i afgørende spørgsmål. Vi er fælles om en fremragende fortid med fælles kamp og med at følge en fælles vej, så vi kan få en værdig fremtid«.

Tsipras advarede om, at højtideligholdelsen også er vigtig pga. den fremvoksende fascisme i Europa:

»Truslen om en ny fremvækst af sådanne mørke kræfter, menneskefjendskhed, had folkeslagene imellem, racisme og andre former for totalitarisme lurer atter over Europas horisont. En fælles front imod fremvæksten af fascisme er en bydende nødvendighed i dag.«

Sluttelig sagde Tsipras til Gusman:

»Jeg skal have nogle meget vigtige møder med præsident Vladimir Putin, premierminister Dmitry Medvedev og patriarken Kirill for Moskva og hele Rusland. Jeg skal også tale foran en studenterforsamling på et af de centrale universiteter. Fra dette standpunkt mener jeg, at mulighederne for udvekslinger og samarbejde på uddannelsesniveauet mellem græske og russiske universiteter er et vigtigt aspekt af styrkelsen af vore gensidige relationer. Fælles rødder, fælles kamp, fælles tro og også kultur. Jeres land har virkelig en rig kultur. Og græsk kultur er verdenscivilisationens vugge. Jeg mener, at vi kan få meget meningsfulde bånd og styrke båndene mellem vore to lande inden for disse sfærer.«

Hele interviewet kan læses på http://tass.ru/en/world/787571

Foto: I et eksklusivt interview til TASS’ førstevicedirektør, general Mikhail Gusman, talte den græske PM om udsigterne for russisk-græske relationer og kritiserede EU’s sanktioner mod Moskva.

5. april 2015 – Ifølge en artikel i RT.com sagde vicechefen for Ruslands Luftforsvarsstyrker, generalmajor Kirill Makarov, til Russisk Nyhedstjenesteradio, at Rusland er i færd med at tage aktive skridt til at imødegå den potentielle trussel fra et førsteangreb, som USA, under visse betingelser, muligvis kunne beslutte at udføre.

»Det er netop for at bekæmpe disse luftværnskapaciteter, at vi opbygger luft- og missilforsvaret i Ruslands system«, sagde Makarov og understregede, at det russiske lederskab anser dette for at have den allerhøjeste betydning.

»Med en vis grad af vished« kunne man skønne, at, »under visse betingelser«, kunne disse amerikanske militære kapaciteter blive opstillet til brug mod mål i den Russiske Føderations territorium, sagde Makarov. Ruslands nye militærdoktrin har konceptet om Prompt Global Strike på listen som en af hovedtruslerne mod Ruslands sikkerhed, sammen med NATO’s militære opbygning langs de russiske grænser.

For at imødegå denne trussel er Rusland i færd med at udvikle en ny generation af mobile jord-til-luft missilsystemer – S-500 – der bl.a. er designet til at opfange supersoniske mål. Alt imens missilet til systemet »stadig er under udvikling«, så siger Makarov, at når det først er færdigt, vil det være i stand til at opfange ethvert tænkeligt ballistisk eller aerodynamisk mål.

I mellemtiden har Rusland gennemført succesfulde afprøvninger af et nyt, mere langtrækkende, styret missil til den nuværende generation S-400 jord-til-luft missil, som succesfuldt ramte sit mål«, sagde Makarov.

Alt imens den russiske hovedstad har en næsten 100 % ’s beskyttelse mod alle former for luftangreb, så arbejder, iflg. generalen, Luftforsvarsstyrkerne for at sikre Ruslands fjerntliggende grænser.

I det arktiske område har Rusland allerede opstille luftforsvarsmissil- og artillerisystemer. Forsvarsministeriet har også planlagt at udstationere MiG-31 interceptor-fly for at beskytte russiske skibe, der sejler langs den nordlige søvej. »Vi har allerede placeret Pantsir-systemer [i det arktiske område]. Der er planlagt opstilling af MiG-31 på Ruslands arktiske flyvestationer«, sagde Makarov.

En ny, fuldautomatisk radarstation er også i færd med at blive underkastet endelig afprøvning.

Foto: Der vil blive udstationeret russiske MiG-31 jagerfly til de arktiske flyvestationer for at beskytte havne og transportruter, siger vicekommandør for Luftforsvaret, generalmajor Kirill Makarov.