Fra LaRouche-bevægelsen, 19. juni 2015: 

Netop, som Lyndon LaRouche indledte sin femte, historiske ’Fireside Chat’[1]  med det amerikanske folk og med sin udbredte organisation torsdag aften, som forberedelse til et nyt præsidentskab, gjorde hans udtalelse om den græske krise fra i går et dybt indtryk på nogle vigtige ledere i hele verden. Ingen ud over LaRouche har turdet sige, at en ny, græsk drakme ikke nødvendigvis vil falde i værdi, men rent faktisk kunne stige, fordi det er eurosystemet, der er slået fejl, ikke Grækenland

Samtidigt bevægede kampen for Grækenland sig mod en beslutning. Angela Merkel arrangerede endnu en på forhånd fejlslagen forhandlingsrunde ved på en barsk måde at fordømme grækerne over for det tyske parlament onsdag. Da Eurogruppens finansministre igen nægtede at give Grækenland en høring og afbrød deres eget møde, blev der indkaldt til et hastemøde mandag for Eurogruppens regeringsledere, som en sidste chance for Grækenland til at underkaste sig.

Den europæiske Centralbank er i færd med at arrangere et stormløb på de græske banker i forsøg på at tvinge Tsipras-regeringen i knæ. ECB-repræsentant Benoit Coeure sagde, at de græske banker muligvis ikke kunne åbne på mandag.

LaRouche sagde:

»Det er sådan, man kollapser et banksystem. Grækerne har måske kun nogle få dage at handle i.«

»Elementer i det transatlantiske område, inkl. USA, er bankerot. Derfor er hele den græske udvikling afhængig af, at euroen drives bankerot. Og den eneste måde at gøre det på er ved simpelthen at lukke skidtet ned og bygge en ny, økonomisk struktur.«

Den græske premierminister Tsipras ankom til Skt. Petersborg i går for at deltage i Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum og for at mødes med Putin.

LaRouche sagde:

»De vil orientere sig mod Asien. Det græske system vil blive semi-europæisk, orienteret mod Asien.«

»Deltagelse i Ufa vil være meget nyttigt«, sagde LaRouche.

»Det vigtigste kommer i USA. Det betyder ’Obama ud!’ På dette grundlag, ved at gøre dette ordentligt, er krisens afslutning forhånden. Wall Street er bankerot; bare afskriv det som en bankerot ting. Det er simpelt hen en svindelinvestering.«

»Det problem, vi har, er, at Obamaregeringen stadig lurer der. Fjern den regering, og få en anstændig regering. Eller få noget i gang, der vil føre til en anstændig regering.

Det ville være en stor forbedring af verdenssituationen.«

Obama bragte øjeblikket for en rigsretssag imod ham meget nærmere i går ved at tvinge ’Fast Track’ igennem Repræsentanternes Hus i alliance med republikanerne imod demokraterne, i samarbejde med John Boehner og Mitch McConnell snarere end sit eget parti. Han gjorde det i en sammensværgelse med republikanere, udelukkende gennem republikanske stemmer, og demokraterne er fuldstændigt rasende på ham.

Der behøves kun ét kongresmedlem, eller et af partierne, for at indlede en rigsretssag imod Obama. Dette er den passende anledning til at gøre det.

Helmut Schmidt: Annuller gælden.

Den tidligere tyske kansler, Helmut Schmidt, krævede en slettelse af store dele af den ubetalelige, græske gæld, under et 12 min. langt interview med det halvofficielle, græske presseagentur, ANA-MPA. Dette kommer blot få dage efter Schiller Instituttets konference i Paris, hvor Lyndon LaRouche pegede på, at Helmut Schmidt, sammen med tidl. kansler Gerhard Schröder og udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, spiller en hovedrolle i at forhindre faren for krig, for hvilken den græske krise kunne fungere som udløser.

Alt imens Schmidt sagde, at en uorganiseret Græxit kunne føre til en katastrofe, så sagde han også, at Grækenland aldrig skulle have tilsluttet sig Eurozonen, og at, hvis det stadig havde drakmen, kunne problemet være blevet løst på en lettere måde. Men han var bestemt mht. gælden. På et spørgsmål om annulleringen af den græske gæld med London-gældsaftalen for Tyskland i 1958 som model, svarede Schmidt.

»Jeg må sige, at jeg mener det er helt udelukket, at Grækenland skulle blive i stand til at tilbagebetale sin gæld. Det meste af gælden bør annulleres.«

Mht. spørgsmålet og krigsskadeerstatninger til Grækenland sagde han, at eftersom Grækenland ikke deltog sammen med USA, England, Frankrig og Sovjetunionen, der sammen med Tyskland indgik aftalen »2+4« om ikke at modtage krigsskadeerstatninger, med Sovjetunionens betaling som eneste undtagelse, sagde Schmidt, at den græske finansministers synspunkter om dette spørgsmål ikke i alle tilfælde kan anses for at være helt forkert.

»Jeg mener ikke, at disse krav om kompensation er blevet afsluttet legalt og politisk.«

Alt imens han sagde, at det var en fejltagelse, at Grækenland gik med i Eurozonen i 1991, og i Maastricht, så sagde han, at det retrospektivt kunne korrigeres på en koordineret måde, men hvis det sker på en uordentlig måde, vil det få ødelæggende virkninger, og han tilføjede,

»Visdommen hos Grækenlands kreditorer er ikke overvældende stor.«

Han fremkom dernæst med sit eget forslag og sagde,

»vi har brug for en europæisk investeringsplan til gavn for Grækenland, som ikke kun kan blive finansieret fra Tyskland, men også fra Tyskland, og ligeledes en aftale om afskrivning af en stor del af Grækenlands akkumulerede gæld.«

Han gjorde det ligeledes klart, at det er »nonsens« at sige, at det tyske folk er blevet »åreladet« af Grækenland, hvilket er, hvad tyskere hver dag læser i løgne-medierne … Forespurgt om, hvordan han ser fremtiden for Europa i lyset af den græske krise, sagde han, at man må se bredere på det og sagde, at det ikke kun er mht. Grækenland, at Europa har handlet i indbyrdes uoverensstemmelse, men også mht. Rusland og konflikten i Ukraine. Han nævner også ISIS i Irak og Syrien.

»Der er mange problemer, der presser Europa, og for hvilke der, på nuværende tidspunkt, ikke tilbydes løsninger.«

Eurozone frembringer kun trusler

Gårsdagens møde mellem 19 europæiske finansministre i Luxembourg for at drøfte den græske krise, gav intet resultat bortset fra flere vrede trusler og krav om, at Grækenland totalt skal underkaste sig deres morderiske diktater.

Donald Tusk, formand for Europarådet, meddelte umiddelbart efter mødet, at han ville indkalde alle Eurozonens statsministre og premierministre til et hastemøde i Bruxelles mandag, den 22. juni. »Tiden er inde til at drøfte den græske situation på højeste, politiske niveau«, sagde han, rapporterede Financial Times i går eftermiddag.

Den hollandske finansminister, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, der var ministermødets formand, brokkede sig over, at der endnu ikke var en aftale i sigte og beskyldte den græske finansminister Varoufakis for at have præsenteret »for få tiltag, der var troværdige og seriøse«, rapporterede Associated Press. Tiden er ved at løbe ud, og tiden er nu inde for grækerne til at indgive »nye« forslag i løbet af de næste par dage, råbte han. Inden mødet gentog Dijsselbloem, at gældssanering »ikke lå i kortene«. Financial Times rapporterer, at Dijsselbloem for første gang havde indrømmet, at, for at Grækenland kunne få frigivet de 7,2 mia. euro, det søger om, skal landet acceptere en tredje forlængelse af bailout-programmet.

Administrerende direktør for IMF, Christine Lagarde, krævede på sin side mere mord. Hun advarede om, at Grækenlands forslag »ikke kan være røgslør og spejle«, men må være »troværdige«. Ifølge rte.ie. websiden erklærede hun, at Grækenland ikke vil få ekstra tid til at betale de 1,6 mia. euro, det skylder Fonden ved månedens slutning.

»Der bliver ikke nogen ekstra betalingsfrist«, hvæsede hun.

»Jeg har en betalingsdato, der hedder den 30. juni. Hvis det ikke er betalt til den 1. juli, så er det ikke betalt. Ingen frist på en måned eller to, som jeg har hørt; betalingsfristen er den 30. juni.«

Græsk gældsrapport udelukket i medierne

Den græske gældskommissions rapport, der erklærer hele bailout-gælden for »odiøs« og »ubetalelig«, er bogstaveligt talt blevet udelukket i de største, engelsksprogede, internationale medier. Selv Grækenlands engelsksprogede aviser har udelukket det. Kathimerini, den førende, neoliberale avis, inkluderede en linje om det, begravet i en artikel om et andet emne. Men Gældskommissionsrapporten er på hele blog-sfæren på utallige websider og i udstrakt grad dækket i spansksprogede medier, både i Spanien og Latinamerika. Flere websider, såsom Centret for Forskning i Globalisering, blandt andre, offentliggjorde den Detaljerede Opsummering eller kortere opsummeringer af hvert kapitel.

Internationale medier er fulde af rapporter om det faktum, at guvernøren for Bank of Greece, Yannis Stournaras, i bankens officielle rapport indskød en advarsel om, at hvis Grækenland går i betalingsstandsning, ville det blive smidt ud af Eurozonen og EU. Hans rapport blev afvist af parlamentet, så snart den blev indgivet, af formand Zoe Konstantopoulou, som værende »uacceptabel« og et »udemokratisk« forsøg på »at skabe et fait accompli og forhindre et modforslag om gældssanering«.

Stournaras blev udnævnt af den tidligere regering som en belønning for, som finansminister i 2012-2014, hver dag at kysse bagdelen af EU-kommissionen/ECB/IMF-Trojkaen. Han anses for at være en idiot og en lakaj for det europæiske oligarki, og er totalt miskrediteret.

Selv Ambrose Evans-Pritchard kalder, i sin klumme i går i Daily Telegraph, Stournaras’ påstande for »tåbelige« og siger, at EU ikke ville vove at smide Grækenland ud. Evans-Pritchard sagde, at Stournaras’ handling, når han skal forestille at være en »neutral« skikkelse, »fortæller os meget om råddenskaben i institutionerne«.

Onsdag aften samledes tusinder af græske demonstranter på Syntagma-pladsen med bannere, der anklagede EU-ledere for at være »lånehajer« og »pengeafpressere«, for at sende Athen-regeringen et budskab om, at dens mandat er at indtage en hård holdning over for kreditorerne.

Yderligere græsk interesse i BRIKS

Onsdag, aftenen før den græske premierminister Alexis Tsipras’ deltagelse i Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum den 18.-20. juni, sagde Panagiotis Roumeliotis, den græske regerings BRIKS-rådgiver, til Sputnik, at Grækenland både var interesseret i at gå med i BRIKS’ Nye Udviklingsbank og også ville være interesseret i at deltage i BRIKS-topmødet i Ufa, Rusland, den 9.-10. juli.

»Selvfølgelig er vi interesseret i at deltage i Ufa-topmødet; det ville være en stor anledning til at fortsætte vores drøfteler med de russiske myndigheder om skabelsen af den Nye Udviklingsbank og bankens virkemåde, og hvordan Grækenland kunne blive et aktivt medlem.«

Sagde Roumeliotis.

Mht. de anti-russiske sanktioner bekræftede Roumeliotis, der nu er i Skt. Petersborg, ligeledes over for Sputnik, at

»Vores regering har en klar holdning til dette: Den er imod sanktioner … Vi bør på europæisk niveau forsøge at arbejde på at overvinde vanskelighederne og de politiske og økonomiske problemer for at etablere og forstærke relationer med Rusland.«

Viceforsvarsminister, og medformand for den russisk-græske, interstatslige kommission, Costas Isychos, kunne dårligt være mere fremme i skoene med sine bemærkninger til Sputnik i går:

»Det græske selskab, der besøger Skt. Petersborg under ledelse af premierminister Alexis Tsipras, anser dette for at være en fremragende mulighed – Jeg ville endda sige, en historisk mulighed. Det åbner et vindue for Grækenland i et område, hvor vi har traditionelle forbindelser – historiske, religiøse, økonomiske og så fremdeles.«

Jeg mener, at BRIKS’ Udviklingsbank synes at være et alternativ … [IMF er]

»et monopol, der har ført til tragedier og katastrofer for tusindvis af mennesker i de seneste årtier … Vi står selvfølgelig ikke med noget i hånden endnu, det er endnu meget tidligt; det er stadig ved at blive dannet, og vi har ingen praktiske måder at analysere BRIKS-udviklingsbanken på, men i teorien er der muligheder, der giver os vinding.«

Tsipras forventes at mødes med den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin den 19. juni på sidelinjen af konferencen. Tsipras’ energiminister Panagiotis Lafazanis er inkluderet i delegationen, eftersom Turkish-Greek Stream-gasledningen forventes at være øverst på dagsordenen for drøftelserne.

I takt med, at relationerne mellem Rusland og Grækenland udvikler sig, vil det halvofficielle nyhedsagentur Athens-Macedonian News Agency (ANA-MPA) underskrive en samarbejdsaftale med Rossiya Segodnya – forældreselskabet til Russia Today. ANA-MPA skriver, at aftalen tilsigter en »opgradering af relationerne mellem Rusland og Grækenland«. De to agenturer vil i fællesskab gennemføre programmer, der dækker nationale og internationale nyheder, samt yderligere specifikke områder for samarbejde mellem Grækenland og Rusland inden for energi, handel, investeringer, turisme og kultur. Kontrakten blev underskrevet af MPA’s præsident og generaldirektør, Mihalis Psilos og generaldirektøren for Rossiya Segodnya, Dmitry Kiselev.

[1] Præsident Franklin D. Roosevelt talte hver søndag aften til det amerikanske folk over radio, døbt ’Fireside Chat’.  Det kan stærkt anbefales enhver, der er interesseret i denne uforlignelige periode i amerikansk historie – og i verdenshistorien – at studere disse taler her: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/fireside.php

Fhv. tyske kanslere Helmut Schmidt og Gerhard Schröder, samt nuværende udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, angriber konfrontationspolitiken over for Rusland.

Se indslaget her

Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche: … Af denne grund, så vel som også pga. den voksende frygt for en stor krig, der truer med at udvikle sig ud af NATO’s og USA’s provokationer mod Rusland og Kina – vinder Kinas politik med den Nye Silkevej, og i særdeleshed den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings tilbud om en inkluderende »win-win-politik«, stadig større tiltrækning. Hvis Churchills udsagn om, at, i politik er der ingen venner – hvilket tydeligvis bekræftes af NSA – men kun interesser, er sandt, så tjener det Europas interesser bedre at samarbejde med BRIKS-nationerne.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

… Jeg stiller op, fordi vi netop står ved en afgørende skillevej. Vi befinder os – både Danmark, men også Europa og verden som helhed – i en utroligt farlig situation. Vi står over for et finansielt kollpas, der er langt større end det, der rystede verden i 2007-2008. Som nogen måske vil huske, så advarede jeg faktisk dengang om det.

København, 28. maj 2015 – »Win-win med BRIKS, ikke kollaps og krig«, med et billede af Verdenslandbroen og kandidaten, lyder vore valgplakater, der sættes op i Danmark (se: www.sive.dk), efter at statsminister Helle Thorning Schmidt i går udskrev valg til Folketinget. Valget finder som bekendt sted om tre uger, den 18. juni.

Fire aktivister fra Schiller Instituttets Venner, med Schiller Instituttets formand, Tom Gillesberg, i spidsen, stiller op som kandidater uden for partierne. I Københavns Storkreds stiller Tom Gillesberg op, i Københavns Omegns Storkreds Christian Olesen, i Østjyllands Storkreds Poul Gundersen og i Nordjyllands Storkreds Hans Schultz. I går og i dag blev der hængt 750 valgplakater op i København, og i hver af de to jyske storkredse kommer der 200 plakater op.

Dette vil direkte sætte Schiller Instituttets/LaRouche-bevægelsens kampagne for at få Europa og USA til at gå med i BRIKS, i stedet for finansielt og økonomisk sammenbrud og krig, på den politiske dagsorden i Danmark. Allerede i dag blev Tom Gillesberg kontaktet af et af de større medier, der bad om et interview.

Stay tuned på www.sive.dk for dækning af vores valgkamp.

26. maj 2015 – De fortsatte rapporteringer indikerer, at den bankerotte euro er ved at gå ned, og Grækenland er ikke årsagen, selv om en græsk betalingsstandsning kan blive udløsermekanismen. Den voksende panik over den overhængende, græske betalingsstandsning hos visse personer i den tyske og franske regering – og i Obamas Hvide Hus – repræsenterer ganske enkelt, at de ved, at eurosystemet er ved at gå ned. De kan ikke længere udskyde det uundgåelige. Grækenland betyder ganske enkelt, at Wall Streets og [City of] Londons år med at udsætte afskrivningen af værdiløs gæld i deres regnskaber, er forbi. »Markederne er illikvide!«, jamrer de. Nej: Banksystemerne er insolvente. Euroens sammenbrud er over hele Europa. En græsk webside, DefenseNet, tilføjer i dag det stød, at 26,5 billion dollar i udenlandske valutaderivater vil nedsmelte sammen med euroen.

Tilbage den 18. februar udstedte stiftende redaktør for EIR, Lyndon LaRouche, en international erklæring om det, han kaldte »den græske gældssvindel«, der gav kraftig støtte til den nye, græske regering. Erklæringen viste, at den »Græske bailout«, som den bedragerisk blev kaldt, fra 2012, var den sidste, større bailout (redningspakke) til London- og eurosystem-bankerne.

»Udplyndring udgør ikke legitim gæld«, sagde LaRouche dengang. »Gælden er illegitim, den kan ikke betales, og den er frugten af en kriminel virksomhed under anførsel af London, som fuldstændigt må lukkes ned, hvis verden skal overleve de kommende måneder uden udbruddet af en generel krig i Europas centrum. Dette må anbringes højt og tydeligt på hvert eneste dørtrin i USA. Hvis man ønsker at undgå Tredje Verdenskrig, så er det, hvad man må gøre.«

Denne vurdering fra LaRouche bekræftes nu, som reelle hændelser.

I valg i denne weekend afviste endnu to europæiske befolkninger – Polen og Spanien – Wall Streets og Londons dødbringende nedskæringspolitik, som er blevet dem påtvunget med hjælp fra de aktuelle, korrupte, tyske og franske regeringer.

Denne fascistiske nedskæringspolitik er en fejlkalkulering, der har truet Grækenland, og hele verden, med massedød. Den afvises af europæiske regeringer, mens Kina og BRIKS tilbyder dem økonomisk vækst og teknologisk fremskridt gennem deres nye udviklingsbanker. Den væltes af pinden i Latinamerika i et voksende partnerskab med Kinas derværende infrastruktur- og industriinvesteringer, der fokuserer på store projekter for højhastighedsjernbaner, havne og energiprojekter.

Hvad med USA? Kan fornægtelsen af ferskvand – og fødevareproduktion – i Californien af guvernør Jerry Browns diktater ændres? Vandet er der; Brown må afsættes, og teknologierne til at producere det indføres. Kan vi udvikle et landsdækkende højhastigheds-jernbanesystem her, som Kina har gjort det, på et årti? Kan vi give beskæftigelse og uddannelse inden for produktionssektoren til, især, Amerikas unge mennesker og skabe den nationale kreditinstitution, der kan sætte dette i værk?

Dette betyder, at Obama, der går ind for krig, skal smides ud. Hvis det amerikanske system kan sættes tilstrækkeligt hurtigt i bevægelse til at fjerne Obama, kan vi ændre nationens politik.

»Kina er hastigt i færd med at ændre det verdensøkonomiske landkort … og at bidrage til en vækstcyklus uden fortilfælde«, erklærede Alicia Barcena, direktør for FN’s Økonomiske Konference om Latinamerika og Caribien (ECLAC), i går entusiastisk, som vært for en konference om ECLAC i Santiago, Chile, med deltagelse af Chiles præsident Michelle Bachellet og den besøgende, kinesiske premierminister Li Keqiang. Konferencen havde den passende titel: »Mod en ny æra af økonomisk samarbejde.«

Chile var det sidste ben på Lis tourné til fire lande i Sydamerika, og han meddelte, at hans regering ville opfordre kinesiske selskaber til at deltage i bygningen af en »tunnel mellem to oceaner«, der forbinder Chile og Argentina, under Andesbjergene, og som ville være nøgleelementet i en transkontinental jernbane, der forbinder Atlanterhavet og Stillehavet gennem Chile, Argentina, Paraguay og Brasilien. Blot få dage forinden havde Kina, Peru og Brasilien underskrevet et forståelsesmemorandum om en forundersøgelse af en anden, mere nordligt beliggende transkontinental jernbane tværs over Sydamerika.

Det bør bemærkes, hvor langt, og hvor hurtigt, tingene har udviklet sig i Sydamerika på under et år, siden BRIKS-Unasur-topmødet fandt sted i Brasilien i juli 2014. Som vi dengang bemærkede, havde Argentina anført vejen tidligere i foråret ved at være det første land, der brød med det synkende, transatlantiske system og ved at alliere sig med BRIKS, og nu følger størstedelen af Sydamerika efter.

Det britiske Imperium og deres marionet Obama ’are not amused’, men de har ikke ret mange kort på hånden, som de kan spille ud med for at standse dette fremvoksende Nye Paradigme, bortset fra at lancere en atomar, Tredje Verdenskrig – og naturligvis ved at bruge den totalt miskrediterede, såkaldte »Duggan-affære« i forsøg på at bagtale Lyndon LaRouche, der har været en af de drivende, intellektuelle kræfter bag Verdenslandbroen, der nu er under opførelse af BRIKS og deres allierede.

Som optakt til indeværende års BRIKS-topmøde i Ufa, Rusland, den 8.-9. juli, tager lignende, strategiske udviklinger nu form omkring Grækenland og Europa – men forløbet vil blive anderledes end i Sydamerikas situation, erklærede Lyndon LaRouche i dag. Denne udvikling involverer USA direkte – samt faren for, at præsident Obama vil lancere en atomkrig på kort sigt.

Grækenlands regering gør det fortsat klart, at de har valgt at udbetale lønninger og pensioner til deres forarmede befolkning snarere, end de vil fortsætte med at betale IMF og landets øvrige kreditorer for gæld, der for størstedelens vedkommende er illegitim. Hvis Grækenland virkelig ikke betaler sit 300 million euro store afdrag til IMF den 5. juni, så vil landets 30-dages afdragsfri periode – efter hvilken en officiel betalingsstandsning kunne blive erklæret – udløbe den 5. juli … tre dage før BRIKS-topmødet åbner i Ufa!

Vil Angela Merkel og kompagni virkeligt være dumme nok til at skubbe Grækenland ud af Eurozonen? Hvis ja, så har Lyndon LaRouche gentagne gange advaret om, at det vil blive ikke Grækenlands, men hele det transatlantiske finanssystems død, som vel at mærke under alle omstændigheder er totalt bankerot.

I dag understregede LaRouche, at verden befinder sig på lynnedtælling til en potentiel atomkrig, hvis Obama ikke bliver fjernet fra embedet. Når Eurozone-systemet nedsmelter, vil dette tvinge krisen til USA som hovedscenen. Wall Street og relaterede institutioner vil gå ned, og hvis Obama fortsat sidder i præsidentembedet, vil verden have kurs mod krig.

Martin O’Malleys kommende annoncering den 30. maj af sit kandidatur til USA’s præsident, understregede LaRouche, vil forandre alt i dette land.

Hillary Clinton vil ikke klare det; hendes kandidatur vil ikke fungere. Republikanerne har også store problemer. Så når sammenbruddet af det europæiske system kommer, vil spørgsmålet blive udfordret i USA. Hvilket betyder, at de næste par uger bliver afgørende.

I løbet af de næste tre uger vil nationer på diverse kontinenter blive direkte præsenteret for Lyndon LaRouches programmatiske alternativ til det nuværende folkemorderiske system: den 28. maj, på konferencen i Lima, Peru, hvor Helga Zepp-LaRouche og Kinas dr. Liu Youfa vil være talere; den 6. juni, på vores næste, store konference i New York City; osv.

Så nyd Det britiske Imperiums nederlag.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

16. maj 2015 – Præsident for Den europæiske Centralbank, Mario Draghi, samt herskerne i Bruxelles bliver ikke glade: Den schweiziske hær forbereder manøvrer til september med stabsøvelser og udstationering af 5.000 tropper, baseret på et »fiktivt« scenarie om, at Europa falder fra hinanden midt i en økonomisk krise. Som det er udlagt på websiden for den Schweiziske Hærs Territorium 2 Kommando, der skal gennemføre øvelsen, er scenariet det følgende:

»I et fiktivt fremtids-Europa, med nye lande og grænser, har en økonomisk krise taget magten. Virkningerne når også til Schweiz: knaphed på forsyninger, smugleri og kriminelle organisationer. Store forsyninger af olie, gas og korn er målet for sabotage og plyndring. Hertil kommer, at etniske konflikter udløser store bølger af flygtninge til Schweiz.«

»Bundesrat [det schweiziske føderale råd, det eksekutive organ] beordrer hæren til at forstærke grænsetropperne og de civile partnere i kantonerne (politi, brandvæsen og sundhedstjeneste). Hæren får ansvaret for at beskytte især sårbar infrastruktur for telekommunikation, elforsyning og fødevareforsyning.«

Den regionale Basel-avis Basellandschaftliche Zeitung indledte sin dækning den 13. maj: »Den schweiziske hærs lederskab har tydeligvis ikke den store tillid til fred i EU. Det er den eneste forklaring på, at de nu igen planlægger en øvelse for at forsvare farer som følge af et kontinent, der synker ned i anarki. En lignende øvelse i 2012, ’Stabilio Due’, var også baseret på en økonomisk krise i EU, med et Frankrig, der faldt fra hinanden med diverse krigsherrer, af hvilke en invaderer Schweiz’ Jura-region.«

Det siges ikke; men måske er årsagen til Schweiz’ manglende tillid til EU, dennes kriminelle og selvmorderiske inkompetence mht. indsatsen for at beskytte sine ’too-big-to-fail’-banker, det være sig Draghis pengetrykning i ECB, eller det Grækenland, som Trojkaen har gjort til offer.

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.))

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 – Fredagens forhandlinger for at overholde deadline for Grækenland til at opnå en aftale med Eurozonens finansministre om et gælds- og økonomiprogram endte i bitterhed, trusler mod Grækenland og selvbedragerisk plapren fra den transatlantiske flok om, at deres system, inklusive euroen, måske ville overleve en umiddelbart forestående, græsk statsbankerot.

Den maltesiske finansminister Edward Scicluna sagde kortfattet: »Jeg ville beskrive dagens møde som et totalt sammenbrud i kommunikationen med Grækenland.« Forespurgt, om EU ville gå med til at give delvis EU-finanshjælp til gengæld for et mere begrænset »reform«-program, sagde den hollandske finansminister Jeroen Dijsselbloem: »Nej.« Bloombergs kilder rapporterede, at finansministrene »slyngede skældsord imod den græske finansminister Yanis Varoufakis« og kaldte ham »en, der spildte tiden, en hasardspiller og en amatør«. Chefen for Den europæiske Centralbank Mario Draghi truede med, at ECB måske ville begrænse sin aktuelle finansiering af likviditet til de græske banker. (Der er aftalt et møde den 6. maj i ECB’s styrende råd).

Et uforudsigeligt element er imidlertid blevet introduceret gennem et timelangt, privat møde mellem det græske og tyske statsoverhoved, Alexis Tsipras og Angela Merkel, dagen før finansministermødet. Merkel kaldte drøftelserne »konstruktive«, men sagde, at de var blevet enige om at holde indholdet fortroligt. Tsipras talte om optimisme og betydelige fremskridt og sagde, »vi har tilbagelagt en god bid af vejen«.

Hvad så siden de to blev eller ikke blev enige om, så bekendtgjorde de bank-ejede finansministre, at de anser det for uacceptabelt, at statsoverhoveder vover at mødes uafhængigt for at drøfte nogen som helst politisk løsning, der berører bankerne. Den østrigske finansminister Hans Joerg Schelling var mest ligefrem: »Tsipras søgte at omgå finansministrenes autoritet mindre end 24 timer tidligere og talte sin sag med den tyske kansler og den franske præsident François Hollande på sidelinjen af et topmøde om immigration i Bruxelles. Under procedurerne inden for Eurozonen er det finansministrene, der skal godkende enhver udbetaling af hjælp, og Merkel sagde i sidste måned, at hun ikke er parat til at tilsidesætte denne kontrol.«

Deres offentlige vrede var rettet mod Tsipras, men dette hysteri reflekterer i realiteten deres bekymring for, at Angela Merkel skal bryde ud af rækkerne. Som førende økonom Lyndon LaRouche har understreget, så er Angela Merkel ingen heltinde, men hun er intelligent nok til at vide, at Tyskland ikke kan overleve, at Grækenland forlader euroen.

Med et utilsigtet humoristisk indslag i dette slagsmål udstedte Credit Suisse i dag en kommentar med overskriften »Grækenland: Dø en anden dag« og beroligede sig selv med, at Grækenland har likviditet til at overleve »i endnu en måned eller så … Og regeringen kunne strække det til juli, om nødvendigt, hvor ECB-lånene forfalder«.

Foto: Den græske finansminister Yanis Varoufakis

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

19. mrs. 2015 – Under sine seneste diskussioner med medarbejdere har Lyndon LaRouche på en meget levende måde kommunikeret sine egne, personlige, næsten århundredgamle overbevisninger med hensyn til, hvilken form for menneskelig organisation det er, der skal dannes, og som vi må være fuldstændig loyale overfor, og med hensyn til, hvad sandhed er, og hvad virkelighed er – alt sammen fuldstændig fremmed og uforståeligt i forhold til, hvad flokken siger og mener.

Det er ikke tilfældigt, at LaRouche i sine anskuelser har så meget til fælles med det tyvende århundredes største militære geni, hærchefen Douglas MacArthur, der, ligesom LaRouche, også er en rent amerikanske type, der allerede var berømt for at sige, og for så tidligt som i 1927 at bevise, at »amerikanere opgiver aldrig«.

Frazier Hunt, MacArthurs ven og levnedsskildrer, skriver følgende i sin bog fra 1954, »Untold Story of Douglas MacArthur«:

»Snart efter, at han havde overtaget kommandoen [over den amerikanske hærs afdeling på Philippinerne i 1928], kom adjudantgeneralen over afdelingen til ham med et tykt bind af stencilkopierede sider og forklarede, at staben havde samlet et kompendium af alle de forudgående [beslutninger], som de forskellige øverstkommanderende havde etableret, så MacArthur ville vide, hvad han skulle gøre, uanset, hvad problemet var. ’Vi tænkte, at De måske ville være interesseret i at have dette’, forklarede officeren stolt.

General MacArthur løftede det tykke bind. ’Det er et enormt arbejde, I har gjort’, sagde han. ’Hvor mange kopier er der?’

’Nøjagtig seks, sir’ svarede officeren.

MacArthur så ham direkte i øjnene, og der var ikke antydningen af et smil, da han sagde: ’Få samlet alle disse seks kopier sammen og brænd dem – hver eneste en. Jeg vil ikke være bundet af forudgående beslutninger. Når som helst, et problem opstår, vil jeg med det samme træffe en beslutning – omgående.’«

I en tilsvarende ånd afslørede LaRouches ven, senator Giulio Tremonti, tidligere italiensk finansminister, i går i Senatet den sande virkelighed om den såkaldte »græske krise« og sagde:

»Problemet er ikke, at Grækenland kom ind i Europa, men at Europa kom ind i Grækenland. Årsagerne til krisen er ikke, som nogle siger, relateret til det obskure og uigennemsigtige græske budget, en næsten uanselig entitet. Det virkelige, græske drama kom fra den private finansielle side, med begyndelse i euroen.«

LaRouche istemte:

»Præcis: det var der, de private banker begik al svindelen. Det er, hvad der åbent skal siges, for alt det her med … Schäuble er en skiderik: han vil ikke sige sandheden. Det er en ting, man ikke kan beskylde ham for: at sige sandheden.«

Tremonti fortsatte:

»I euforiske dimensioner, der tog deres begyndelse i 2002, blev en enorm kapitalstrøm udlånt af europæiske banker til det græske samfund, som gladeligt finansierede Olympiader, svømmebassiner og biler (sidstnævnte ikke just produceret i Grækenland) og diverse illusioner. I et årti har opstemtheden været bilateral, på skyldnersiden, men også på kreditorsiden, der indkasserede enorme strømme af renter. Og krisen kom skæbnebestemt. På basis af lovene for markedsøkonomi, hvis skyldneren går i betalingsstandsning, så gør kreditorerne det også. I Grækenlands tilfælde skete det modsatte. Og således har hjælpen til Grækenland, inkl., hvad vi generøst gav, hjulpet alle, og især de tyske og franske kreditorbanker; alle, undtagen grækerne. Efter den europæiske kur er den græske statsgæld steget, og det græske BNP er faldet. Og alligevel kræver Europa af Grækenland, på en tvangspræget måde, mere privatisering, mere liberalisering; hvis man ser på det græske folks aktuelle vilkår, ville end ikke Margaret Thatcher kræve sådanne forholdsregler!«

»End ikke Margaret Thatcher«, sagde LaRouche. »Det er godt. Det skal citeres – ofte.«

Tremonti fortsatte med at sammenligne Eurozonen med en dinosaur.

»Vidunderligt«, sagde LaRouche. »Det må bevares og opmuntres.«

De såkaldte grundlæggende europæiske værdier, sagde Tremonti, er ikke længere »de samme som i vores historiske tradition«, men de kommer snarere fra en

»før-kristen og hedensk fortid: Jeg vil gerne sige det tydeligt: [den romerske kejser] Elagabus ville, med sine værdier og sin livsførelse, passe perfekt ind i hoffet i Luxembourg«.

Ifølge historikeren B.G. Niebuhr er »navnet Elagabus brændemærket i historien frem for alle andre, pga. hans unævneligt afskyelige liv«.

»Det er perfekt«, sagde LaRouche. »Det er vidunderligt. Det er fremragende at citere.«

I mellemtiden holder lederne i Eurozonen møde i dag, hvor de forventes at forlænge deres økonomiske sanktioner mod Rusland, som ellers ville udløbe i juli måned.

»Sanktioner: det er virkelig en dum idé«, sagde LaRouche, »men det viser Nulands tankegang; og hun har under alle omstændigheder ’en tanke’.«

Efter topmødet har den græske premierminister Tsipras arrangeret et møde med den tyske kansler Merkel, den franske præsident Hollande, ECB’s Mario Draghi og formand for Eurozonens finansministre, hollænderen Jeroen Dijsselbloem; denne forsamling blev af LaRouche karakteriseret som, ’to, der måske kunne være fornuftige, plus to andre, der ikke vil være det.’

Merkel advarede korrekt journalister om ikke at forvente en løsning i aften, men LaRouche holdt den mulighed åben, at der måske kunne udvikle sig noget mere nyttigt af hendes planlagte møde mandag med Tsipras i Berlin. Fr. Merkel har sagt, at hun forventer, det bliver en god diskussion, om end med uenigheder.

»Et formelt møde har en særlig betydning«, forklarede LaRouche.

»Merkel har, til trods for alt, hvad hun er og ikke er, et vist ansvar for tyske anliggender. Derfor må hendes indledende erklæring om noget af denne art tages alvorligt. Hun har ændret sin politik fra et bestemt punkt; det betyder sandsynligvis mere end andre ting.«

I mellemtiden bliver Obama, helt korrekt, ydmyget over hele verden pga. hans arrige og forgæves kamp for at sætte en stopper for den Asiatiske Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), som Storbritannien, Tyskland, Italien og Frankrig netop har tilsluttet sig imod hans instruktioner.

»Alle disse udtalelser imod Obama bør citeres og fremstilles hele tiden. Man må ydmyge denne son-of-a-bitch, for det vil være med til at få nogle folk til at komme til fornuft«,

sagde LaRouche.

Samtidig er der et massivt tiltag i gang imod Medicare, Medicaid og Sociale ydelser (i USA primært til alderspensioner og invalidepensioner, -red.), inklusive invalidepension, i Washington. Der er planlagt flere nedskæringer til hospitalerne og lægernes praktikuddannelse på hospitalerne. LaRouche sagde, at vi må offentliggøre disse planlagte nedskæringer: formålet er at få dem ud af Wall Street.

Foto: General Douglas MacArthur

Følgende er en dansk oversættelse af E.I.R. STRATEGIC ALERT fra den 11. marts 2015.

E.I.R. Strategic Alert er udgivet hver uge af EIR’s europæiske hovedkontor i Wiesbaden, Tyskland på engelsk, tysk, fransk, og italiensk. Ring venligst til EIR’s kontor i København for information om abonnementspriser på +45 35 43 60 40. 

NATO eskalerer provokationerne rettet direkte mod Rusland

Medens våbenhvilen í Ukraine stort set ser ud til at holde, bestræber Obama Administrationen, fulgt af et antal ”allierede” regeringer, sig straks på med endnu en ”sag”, mordet på oppositionspolitikeren Boris Nemtsov, at ramme Rusland og Præsident Putin, som for at bekræfte at orkestreringen af krisen i Ukraine bare var et muligt middel at benytte.

Samtidig eskalerer den militære aktivitet. Den 4. marts sejlede fire NATO-skibe ind i Sortehavet for at gennemføre anti-lufts- og anti-ubådskrigsøvelser. Rusland holder øvelser i samme region, idet de tester kampfly tilhørende Sortehavsflåden for deres evner til at udføre forsvarsoperationer.

Desuden meddelte det russiske forsvarsministerium den 4. marts, at der også ville blive afholdt luftforsvarsøvelser i det ”Sydlige Militære Distrikt”, som grænser op til både Ukraine og Sortehavet, der ville omfatte 2000 tropper.

Medens sådanne militære øvelser ikke er usædvanlige, udgør det forhold, at Nato’s og de russiske tropper er så tæt på hinanden dog en alvorlig fare for en direkte konfrontation. Især på et tidspunkt, hvor Obama-regeringen og Nato-ledelsen dramatisk optrapper deres retoriske krig mod Præsident Putin.

Den retorik kom til fuld udfoldelse på Capitol Hill (den amerikanske kongres) i sidste uge, med erklæringer fra udenrigsministerens sekretær, Victoria Nuland, Georgiens tidligere præsident Mikheil Saakashvili (nu rådgiver til Ukraines præsident Poroshenko) samt anti-Putin fanatiker Garry Kasparov. Nuland pressede på for flere sanktioner mod Rusland, og især flere våben til Ukraine.

Hun fik begrænset modstand, bortset fra Repræsentant Dana Rohrabacher, en demokrat fra Californien, som beskyldte hende for at ville sabotere Minsk-aftalerne. Det amerikanske diplomatis opgave er at opnå fred i Ukraine, sagde han, ”ikke at modarbejde og ydmyge Rusland igen og igen”. Nulands fremtræden for Kongres-komiteen skete samtidig med en aktion på Capitol Hill af aktivister fra den ukrainske Congress Committee of America, en Bandarist-frontgruppe, som pressede på for at starte krig mod Rusland.

Allerede før de farlige krumspring på Capitol Hill og på Sortehavet havde højtstående russiske embedsmænd gentaget advarsler om, at Rusland har udbygget kapaciteten til at besvare enhver militær provokation strategisk. Den 1. marts gav generalmajor Andrei Burbin, chef for den Centrale Kommandopost for Ruslands Strategiske Missilstyrker (SMF), en usædvanlig briefing, der understregede, at Rusland er klar til at anvende deres strategiske atomvåben, hvis landet bliver angrebet. Medens USA moderniserer deres atomvåben i Europa under den vildfarelse, at de ville være i stand til at gennemføre en ”begrænset” atomkrig mod Rusland og eventuelt Kina (Prompt Global Strike), er Ruslands svar at understrege meget klart, at Rusland vil gengælde ved at bruge den fulde kraft fra deres interkontinentale ballistiske missiler, SMF.

LaRouche udfordrer Obamas falske anklager mod Putin.

Lyndon LaRouche fordømte den falske anklage mod Putin for mordet på politikeren Boris Nemtsov nær Kreml om natten den 27. februar. Ikke uventet hoppede de fleste vestlige medier straks på chancen til at anklage Kreml for at fjerne oppositionen.

Præsident Obama tilsluttede sig anklagen mod den russiske præsident i et Reuter-interview den 2. marts, og alene det bør medføre hans afgang fra posten, sagde LaRouche. Og i og med at Obama indrømmede at han ikke vidste, hvem der havde beordret drabet, tilføjede han. at Nemtsovs mord var en ”indikation på et klima, i det mindste internt i Rusland, hvor det civile samfund, uafhængige journalister, folk der prøvede at kommunikere på Internet, følte sig truet, var indskrænket”. Den amerikanske præsident fortsatte med at påstå, at den russiske stat kontrollerer alle medier i landet.

(Idet man nok skal undlade billige sammenligninger, er det dog værd at bemærke, at disse betragtninger kommer fra en leder af et land, hvis egne borgere er underlagt betydelig mega-overvågning, og endog tortur og drab med droner, hvor grundlæggende civile rettigheder undertrykkes betydeligt under Patriot Act, siden angrebet den 11. september, og hvor journalister såvel som wistleblowers er blevet mere chikaneret af den amerikanske regering under Barack Obama end på noget andet tidspunkt i nyere tid).

”Det betyder, at Obama må gå af,” sagde LaRouche. Verden står nu overfor en trussel om en global atomkrig, og det er total uansvarligt af præsidenten for De Forenede Stater at tillade udbredelsen af en rapport af denne karakter og at nægte at kommunikere civiliseret med en anden statsleder.

Efter Hollande bryder Renzi også med ”Isoler Putin”-fronten

Den 4. marts blev Italiens Premiere Minister Matteo Renzi den anden leder fra et Nato-land til at besøge Moskva siden udbruddet af krisen i Ukraine, efter den franske præsident Francois Hollande.

Tre emner dominerede Renzis samtaler med Vladimir Putin: Ukraine-spørgsmålet, Libyen-krisen og bilaterale økonomiske forhold.

Før mødet havde Renzi mødt 130 italienske forretningsfolk i den italienske ambassade, der havde tegnet et dramatisk billede af de økonomiske skader, som sanktionerne havde forvoldt.

Om Ukraine gentog Renzi sit forslag om at anvende Sydtyrol-modellen, til at løse problemet. Sydtyrol (Alto Adige) er en italiensk region med en ”speciel status”, som tillader brede regnskabsmæssige privilegier og et tosproget styre.

Det Libyske forhold er særlig presserende for Italien. Libyen hærges af en borgerkrig, som kunne føre til en udbredelse af ISIS dertil. Hvis Libyen lander i totalt kaos, kunne Italien miste en vigtig olieleverandør og blive oversvømmet af tusinder, hvis ikke millioner af flygtninge. Dertil kommer truslen om terrorisme. På det seneste har Italien nærmet sig Egypten, der får hjælp fra Rusland, som nu støtter den internationalt accepterede regering i Tobruk politisk og militært imod den fraktion i Tripoli, der domineres af det Muslimske Broderskab.

Hvis de aktuelle forhandlinger om at forene regeringerne i Tobruk og Tripoli, som ledes af FN’s specielle udsendinge, Bernardino Leon, mislykkes, vil Renzi-regeringen være parat til at gå videre med en plan B ved FN’s sikkerhedsråd. Plan B inkluderer opbakning til den militære løsning, som ledes af Egypten, med støtte og leverancer og en ”koalition af villige” til at opbygge en flådebaseret blokade. Renzi har inviteret Rusland til at deltage i en sådan blokade.

Vil Grækenland afsløre Draghis bluf.

Som forventet bekendtgjorde Den Europæiske Centralbanks ledende bestyrelse den 5. marts udstedelsen af En billion Euro som ”Kvantitative Lettelser”, i et program som kaldes Public Sector Purchase Program (”PSPP”), i endnu et desperat forsøg på at redde finanssystemet med en flodbølge af likviditet.

Desværre, med mere end 2 billioner Euro- lån på bankernes bøger, som intet producerer, vil denne indsprøjtning ikke stoppe marchen mod katastrofen.

Samtidig meddelte ECB præsident Mario Draghi, at hans bank vil fortsætte med at straffe ikke bare Grækenland, men også Cypern. Han sagde, at ECB ikke vil genoprette muligheden for at grækerne kan anvende deres obligationer som sikkerhed, med den begrundelse at grækerne ikke har en aftale med Eurogroup. Cypern var udelukket, fordi de ikke fik etableret den lov om tvangsauktion, som deres kreditorer forlangte, hvilket ville have tvunget husejerne på gaden.

Om klagen mod Grækenland erklærer visestatsminister Yiannis Dragasakis, at det er løgn, idet han henviser til aftalen af 20. februar, som forlængede Grækenlands beføjelser med grundplanen for finansfacilitetsmekanismen. Den aftale blev oven i købet bekræftet med stort flertal i den tyske Bundestag.

ECB ’s påstand er endnu et blufnummer, med dets krav om at den græske regering komplet

underkaster sig det europæiske finansielle oligarki eller forlader Eurozonen. Medens Grækenland uden tvivl ville klare sig bedre i sidste tilfælde, ville deres afgang signalere forspillet til euroens kollaps, som Cypern, Portugal, Spanien, Italien og Irland snarest ville følge.

Athen har en plan B

Bare få timer før ECB’s vedtagelse sagde Grækenlands finansminister Yanis Varoufakis ved en sammenkomst organiseret af Græsk-Fransk Handels- og Industrikammer, at der er en plan B, hvis landet ikke kan få finansiering. Selvom han ikke gav nogen detaljer, står ”B” i plan B i virkeligheden for BRICS. I virkeligheden, bare en dag senere, blev det meddelt, at visestatsminister Dragasakis og udenrigsminister Nikos Kotzias snart vil besøge Kina for at forberede et officielt besøg af statsminister Alexis Tsipras i maj. Ligeledes i maj vil Tsipras aflægge sit første officielle besøg i Rusland for at møde Vladimir Putin.

Den 2. marts, i et interview med Sputnik News, gentog Udenrigsminister Kotzias, at Grækenland kunne agere som brobygger mellem Europa og Rusland. Om Grækenland og Rusland sagde han: ”Der har aldrig været krig imellem os; der har aldrig været modsatrettede kræfter, vi har aldrig haft nogen negative modsætninger, som der eksisterer mellem EU’s medlemsstater. Det betyder, at vi er det land, der kunne spille rollen som brobygger”. Kotzias talte også imod sanktioner, idet han sagde, at Rusland burde integreres i den europæiske sikkerhedsarkitektur.

Om de andre lande i BRICS noterede Kotzias, at Grækenland er ”specielt forbundet med lande som Indien (i oldtiden), Kina (da vi var to store civilisationer og kulturer – Kina i Asien og Grækenland i Europa gennem tre–fire tusinde år) og Rusland, med hvem vi altid har haft dybe historiske, kulturelle og religiøse bånd”.

Syrizas parlamentsmedlem Kostas Lapavitsas går helt ind for at forlade Eurozonen. Han skrev i The Guardian, at han opfordrer til en total afmontering af Eurozonen for at redde både Grækenland og Europa.

”Eurozonen kan ikke reformeres, og den kan ikke blive en ”venlig” monetær union, som støtter arbejdende mennesker. Grækenland må lægge en hel række muligheder på bordet, og man må være forberedt på at tage helt ekstraordinære likviditetstiltag for at være sikker på at kunne løse

alle eventualiteter, hvis befolkningen var klar. EU har i realiteten allerede påtvunget landet en katastrofe….”

Labavitas, en økonom, håber, at Syriza ”endelig vil medvirke til at redde Europa til afskaffelse af den absurditet fællesmønten er blevet”. Så ville stramningspolitikken kunne ophæves ” på hele kontinentet”.

”Bail-In” i Østrig viser ECB-politikkens tåbelighed

Med ECB’s introduktion af ”kvantitative lettelser” på 1 billion Euro, og med gennemførslen af den første ”bail-in” i sagen om den østrigske ”dårlige bank” HETA har vi påbegyndt en ny fase i EU-politikken. Begge tiltag, beregnet til at redde systemet, har en destruktiv karakter. Hvis ECB-politikken gennemføres, vil den ødelægge værdien af penge, medens ”bail-in”-metoden er et dobbeltægget sværd, som mange analytikere, der er bekymrede for tilbageslag på obligationsmarkedet, har advaret om.

Ironisk er det, at de samme værdier som ECB støtter, som f. eks. ”Asset Backed Securities” og ”Covered Bonds”, kommer i fare på grund af ”bail-in”-mekanismen.

Den 1. marts blev likvidationen og misligholdelsen af den 9 milliarder euro store gæld bekendtgjort. Eftersom disse giftige værdier i denne dårlige bank — resterne af sidste års Hypo Alpe Altria Banks konkurs — var garanteret af regeringen og Kärnten-provinsen, mistede regeringen i virkeligheden de 9 milliarder euro, fordi de nægtede at forlænge garantien for yderligere tab. Regeringen brugte den nye Eurozone ”bail-in” lov til at påføre tab for bankkunders indestående.  det er første gang det er sket (ikke engang på Cypern).

Den østrigske beslutning har fremkaldt ildevarslende ligheder med kollapsen af Creditanstalt i 1931, som startede den store depression. Denne nye konkurs vil helt sikkert få international opmærksomhed. Den bayerske delstats regering har meddelt, at den vil udfordre beslutningen om denne ”bail-in”, fordi den står til at miste 800 millioner euro.

Hypo Alpe Adria var ikke en indskyderbank, og derfor blev ingen indskydere ramt af denne ”bail-in”. Alligevel kan tabet skabe panik på obligationsmarkedet, hvis der spredes en opfattelse om at obligationsinvesteringer ikke længere er sikre i Eurozonen. EU’s ”bail-in”-regulering er som et vandfald, der starter med aktier og usikrede obligationer, men kan også involvere sikrede værdier, som f.eks. dækkede obligationer, hvis ”bail-in-massen ikke er tilstrækkelig. Det er lige netop det der diskuteres i forbindelse med den dårlige Heta bank.

Den eneste løsning vil være en europæisk gældskonference, der også skal omfatte en bankopdeling, som foreslået af EIR.

Elizabeth Warren: Frihandelsaftalerne er en stor gave til de multinationale.

Den amerikanske demokratiske senator Elizabeth Warren er i stigende grad talsmand for det voksende antal amerikanere, som ønsker en Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling, og som ønsker at straffe Wall Streets forbrydelser. Den 25. februar kom hun ud med en fordømmelse af et andet projekt, som Obama-administrationen energisk skubber på, Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

Det er en søster-aftale til Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), omfattende EU og USA, og som energisk bekæmpes i Europa.

Det primære mål med Senator Elizabeth Warrens leder-kommentar i Washington Post – bortset fra de hemmelighedsfulde forhold forhandlingerne føres under – er tilliden til den overnationale

juridiske kommission kendt som ”Investor-State Dispute Settlement,” eller ISDS. Det er et fælles forhold i begge traktater og et af de mest kontroversielle i EU.

Warren skrev, at ikke alene ville ISDS ”ødelægge spillebanen” i de multinationales favør, men endnu værre, underminere national suverænitet. I det tilfælde at et multinationalt selskab er utilfreds med den eksisterende lovgivning i det land hvor de opererer — det kunne være om bankseparation, lov om minimumsløn, forbud mod kemiske gifte — vil selskabet kunne tage uoverensstemmelsen, ikke til det relevante lands retssale, men til en international voldgiftsafgørelse, hvis afgørelse ikke kan appelleres, og hvis afgørelse træffes af erhvervsadvokater.

Som Senator Bernie Sanders har påpeget, skrives disse frihandelsaftaler i virkeligheden af ”lederne af de multinationale selskaber, som står til at profitere enorme summer” på aftalerne, medens de amerikanske lovgivere, som repræsenterer det amerikanske folk, bliver holdt udenfor.

I EU har nogle europæiske parlamentarikere, efter svære bestræbelser, opnået begrænset adgang til dokumenterne, imod at de måtte sværge på aldrig at videregive et ord af hvad de har læst.

Som svar på Warrens kronik svarede Det hvide Hus straks, at ”ISDS vil ikke og kommer ikke til at kræve ændringer i noget lands love eller regulativer”. Men senatorens påstand var ikke, at der blev pålagt ændringer af nogen love, men at en stor bank eller et stort multinationalt selskab ville kunne påstå, at disse love uretfærdigt havde skadet deres interesser, og at de hindrer frihandel, og som følge af det ville de blive belønnet med ”millioner – og måske endda milliarder af dollars som erstatning”, hvilket skatteyderne kommer til at betale.

Senator Warren nævnte nogle få sager som var kommet under ISDS’ behandling. Et fransk firma havde stævnet et egyptisk firma for at have hævet minimumslønnen, et svensk firma havde stævnet Tyskland for at ville udfase atomkraft, et hollandsk firma havde sagsøgt den tjekkiske stat for at undlade ”bail-out” af en bank som var delvis eget af firmaet. Philip Morris forsøger lige nu at bruge ISDS til at forhindre Uruguay i at indføre nye regler, med det formål at reducere rygning.

Det kan evt. ende med at ISDS bliver taget ud af TTIP, men et andet meget kontroversielt aspekt af det er forslaget om at harmonisere regulativerne for forskellige produkter, hvilket i virkeligheden ville kunne forhindre noget europæiske land i at indføre standarder, som var uacceptable for en anden enhed (jfr. følgende artikel).

TTPI: En perfid ”variabel aftale”

Det råd, sammensat af repræsentanter fra EU og USA, som skal regulere aftalen, skal beslutte hvilke fremtidige lovændringer, fra begge sider, der er i overensstemmelse med traktaten. Det gør den til en ”variabel aftale”, som Giorgio Garbasso fra Delors Foundation har afsløret:

”TTIP vil højest sandsynligt involvere en institutionel udvikling med skabelse af et transatlantisk laboratorium. Sådanne transnationale enheder er hvor og hvornår man sammen kan udarbejde og diskutere om reguleringen løser det samme problem, og om de besluttede forholdsregler er i overensstemmelse med reglerne.

Men der er en risiko. Den transnationale platform af reguleringsenheder tillader ikke længere kun at vælge de løsninger eller politikker, som deres befolkninger foretrækker, men også i overensstemmelse med de amerikanske modparters ønsker (og visa versa). Denne risiko for usikkerhed i reglerne rejser straks spørgsmålet om demokratisk legitimitet og respekt for vore politiske valg.

Derfor er det vigtigt at være opmærksom på denne risiko ved et teknokratisk system af transnationalt samarbejde. TTIP er en ”variabel aftale” og ender ikke med en underskrift. Når de

første parametre er fastlagt, begynder den at leve sit eget liv…. Det er en nøgle, der vil åbne flere døre end vi er i stand til at forudse”.

Medens den ukrainske økonomi kollapser – planlægger oligarkerne deres ”genrejsning”

Den 2. marts blev der i Wien præsenteret et ”Nyt Agentur til Modernisering af Ukraine” (AMU) for offentligheden, med det formål at rekonstruere Ukraines finans- og økonomiske politik indenfor de næste 200 dage. Initiativet lyder rigtig godt i betragtning af Ukraines forfaldne økonomi, indtil man forstår, at den 500 millioner euro store finansiering bliver leveret af tre berygtede ukrainske oligarker: Dmitri Firtash, Rinat Akhmetov og Viktor Pinchuk. De er blandt de oligarker der har profiteret mest på de økonomiske og sociale ulykker gennem de seneste 20 år.

AMU, som skal ledes af Østrigs tidligere finansminister, kommer til at nyde samarbejde med prominente vesteuropæere: tre tidligere EU-kommissærer: Peter Mandelsohn, Guenter Verheugen og Stefan Füle, tidligere tysk finansminister Peer Steinbrueck, tidligere tysk forsvarsminister Rupert Scholz, tidligere fransk udenrigsminister Bernard Kouchner, tidligere leder af fransk industri Laurence Parisot og tidligere polsk statsminister Wlodzimierz Cimozewicz.

Den kendsgerning at en af grundlæggerne er den franske ”intellektuelle” Bernard Henri-Levy, en ledende kupmagere på Maidan for et år siden, er nok til at diskreditere dette initiativ.

Meget interessant at det blev bekendtgjort bare to dage før Victoria Nuland, USA’s vice udenrigsminister for europæiske og eurasiske anliggender, fremlagde de angiveligt lyse udsigter der er for Ukrainskøkonomi i Komiteen for Udenrigsaffærer.

Nuland, som dirigerede kuppet i Ukraine, hævdede, at det nye parlament har vedtaget ”vigtige, men besværlige, reformer” for at stabilisere økonomien og derfor fortjener mere hjælp fra IMF og andre internationale donorer.

Men realiteten i Ukraine er anderledes. Økonomien kollapser med stigende hastighed, med inflation som forventes at blive mere end 25 %, og så knappe forsyninger af grundlæggende behov, at regeringen fra 25. februar har indført rationering i forretningerne på madolie, mel og sukker. Man må ikke købe mere end 2 flasker solsikkeolie og 2 pakker boghvede per kunde, og afhængig af forretningen, fra 2 til 5 kilo mel og sukker.

Endvidere kommer de nye lån fra IMF med strenge betingelser: med nedskæringer i sociale ydelser og stigning i forbrugernes energipriser, som steg næsten 300 % i februar. Den nationale mønt, Hryvnia, er faldet i værdi, hvilket får folk til at hamstre fødevarer og købe elektronik som en modforanstaltning.

Ukrainerne vil sikkert snart bede Victoria Nuland, som blev filmet sidste år, da hun gik rundt på Maidan og uddelte småkager, om nu at bringe noget med mere substans til at dæmpe sulten.

”Et bælte, En rute”

er vigtigst på kinesernes dagsorden, siger udenrigsministeren

Ved en diskussion med journalister den 8. marts blev den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yi meget konkret spurgt om, hvad det vigtigste fokus for den kinesiske udenrigspolitik i 2015 ville være. ”Der vil være et fokus og to hovedtemaer”, svarede han. Det primære fokus vil være en meget omfattende udvikling af ”Et Bælte, En Rute”-politikken for at ”fremme infrastruktur og samspil” langs det Økonomiske Bælte og Silkevejen og dermed tjene til ”at genoplive det eurasiske kontinent som helhed”.

De to temaer, forklarede Wang, vil blive ”fred og udvikling”. I den forbindelse noterede han, at mødet i Konferencen om Samspil og Tillidsskabende Forhold i Asien (CICA) og APEC-mødet sidste år fik ”meget støtte fra mange lande” og havde gjort et ”dybt indtryk”.

Da han blev spurgt om ”Et bælte, En Rute”-programmet kunne sammenlignes med Marshall-planen, indikerede Wang, at der var behov for et nyt paradigme. Det er både meget ældre og meget yngre end Marshall-planen, sagde han. Skønt født i ånden af den urgamle ”Silkevej” var det også født i den aktuelle tid med globalisering, forklarede han. ”Det kan ikke betragtes som en kold krigsmentalitet. Det vil skabe synergi for andre udviklingsinstitutioner. For at bruge en musikalsk analogi skal ”Et Bælte, En Rute” ses som en symfoni med delene fremført af alle relevante lande, sagde han.

Om effekterne af sanktionerne mod Rusland sagde udenrigsministeren, at ”det kinesisk-russiske forhold ikke var dikteret af internationale omskiftelser”. I år vil bilateral handel komme op på 100 milliarder dollars. Der vil blive påbegyndt en østlig rute for en olieledning, og der vil blive underskrevet en aftale om en vestlig rute. Det er begge landes plan at samarbejde om olie og gas og atomkraft-energiproduktion, såvel som højhastighedsjernbaner.

Idet han noterede, at både Kina og Rusland var permanente medlemmer af FN’s sikkerhedsråd, sagde Wang, at de ville fortsætte samarbejdet med at ”sikre fred”, og begge vil ”holde mindehøjtideligheder for at fejre sejren over fascismen”.

Han noterede senere, at ”Kina er altid en konstruktiv enhed til at udvikle en verdensorden” og ”de første til at underskrive FN’s charter. Idet han sammenlignede FN med et skib, sagde han, at Kina ”ønskede at samarbejde med andre passagerer for at sikre, at skibet er stabilt og bevæger sig i den rigtige retning”.

Baggrund: Årsagen til at Amerika har behov for en ny renæssance.

I sin vurdering af udsigten til at USA under Præsident Obama styrer mod selvdestruktion, har Lyndon LaRouche gentagne gange insisteret på, at der ikke er nogen ”praktisk løsning” på problemet. Det må løses ud fra det højeste udgangspunkt for menneskets egentlige rolle i samfundet.

Problemet er ikke bare, at Barack Obama er en marionetdukke, som styres af finanskartellet i City of London og Wall Street, der er håbløst bankerot; eller at disse kræfter er engageret i en vanvittig leg om atomkrig mod Rusland; eller at de tror de kunne vinde en ”begrænset” atomkrig – skønt disse tre faktorer alle er rigtige.

Men det reelle problem, insisterer LaRouche, er næsten alle amerikaneres underdanighed overfor ”populære meninger”, ”den offentlige mening”, som medfører at de accepterer sådanne ledere. Endvidere, at denne underkastelse stammer fra en afvisning af at mennesket har en højere og bredere funktion i hele solsystemet, hvilket tillader mennesker at tro, at de kan finde et ”hyggeområde”, hvor de kan overleve, indenfor et samfund som er dumt nok til at lade depraverede oligarkiske eliter regere.

Resultatet af dette er, at politiske debatter i USA kontrolleres af tankedræbende sociale ”meninger”, domineret af populistiske emner som f.eks. homoseksuelles rettigheder, abort, ”statens rettigheder” o.s.v. Debatniveauet i Kongressen og i valgkampagner er barnligt, omhyggeligt skabt til at dække over den realitet, at de bliver kontrolleret af toppen af finanseliten, som ikke tillader en reel debat om løsninger, afledt af Amerikas egentlige, originale formål.

Det var ikke altid sådan.

I det lys insisterer LaRouche på, at Amerika må gå tilbage til sine originale rødder som en republik. Selv om vi ikke her kan dække dette emne fyldestgørende, noterer vi, at LaRouche især har understreget kardinal Nicholas af Cusas virke (1401-1464) for at iværksætte Renæssancens kulturelle og videnskabelige revolution i, som bygger på den historiske mission, som tidligere blev defineret af Jeanne d’Arc, så vel som udviklingen af disse ideer af Johannes Kepler (1571-1630). Alle tre bidrog til at omdanne den statiske økonomi og sociale organisation i Europas feudale imperier. Grundlæggerne af den Amerikanske Republik, især Benjamin Franklin og Alexander Hamilton, som var ansvarlige for udformningen af USA’s konstitution, og de økonomiske principper der var indarbejdet heri, kom direkte fra denne tradition.

De handlede på højere principper end ”praktisk politik”, fordi de forstod, at menneskets sande identitet ” er baseret på det han eller hun bidrager til menneskehedens fremtid”, og intet mindre, sagde LaRouche. En nation som ikke indarbejder dette koncept i dens ledelsessprincipper er dømt til at reducere en stor del af sine borgere til at blive slaviske ofre for sanseindtryk, der altid vil underkaste sig de regerende magter for at overleve. Intet mindre end en sådan kamp vil lykkes i dag, siger LaRouche.

16. mrs. 2015 – Grækenland er blevet bannerfører for BRIKS i Europa. Med den Europæiske Union, der nægter at dreje af fra vejen, der fører til selvødelæggelse, skaber initiativet for økonomisk udvikling under anførsel af Brasilien, Rusland, Indien, Kina og Sydafrika (BRIKS) et magtfuldt alternativ, som Grækenland er parat til at gå med i. Grækenland og resten af Europa har valget mellem Plan A (død ved kvælning) og Plan B (tilslutning til BRIKS for overlevelse og økonomisk udvikling). Grækenland kan, med sine særlige bånd til både Rusland og Kina, fungere som en bro mellem Europa og BRIKS.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Siden fredag, den 6. mrs., i Concord, New Hampshire, USA, har tidligere guvernør Martin O’Malley promoveret sin forsøgsvise opstilling til at blive nomineret til demokraternes præsidentkandidat omkring det centrale spørgsmål om genindførelsen af Franklin Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-lov fra 1933, der blev væltet i 1999.

»Vi bør udbrede det her overalt«, sagde LaRouche i dag.

 »Både Glass/Steagall og det faktum, at O’Malley stiller op med det. O’Malley har rejst spørgsmålet, og enhver, der er modstander af denne politik, må anses for at være et mangelfuldt valg til præsidentkandidaturet. O’Malley er i øjeblikket den eneste, der er kvalificeret til at blive præsidentkandidat. De andre bliver nu nødt til at forklare deres standpunkt om dette spørgsmål. Man kan ikke i al evighed føje Wall Street for at tækkes dem.«

Hvad er problemet i USA? Det er, at den finansielle side af sagen, ud fra Washingtons standpunkt, ikke er i overensstemmelse med USA’s interesser. Problemet er det samme i Europa: pointen er, at visse interesser ønsker at beskytte deres finansielle interesser, også selv om disse finansielle interesser nu er ved at blive værdiløse.

Se på hele den europæiske affære. Europa er rent faktisk i gang med at voldtage Grækenland, og det har de gjort i nogen tid. Og det gør forbandet ondt, hvis man ikke går med på det. Så folk kerer sig ikke det mindste om verden; de kerer sig udelukkende om deres egne, smålige, vulgære interesser.

Tiden er inde til at opløse Eurozonen. Den skal bare opløses. Man skal give dem besked om, at tiden er inde til at opløse den, med den begrundelse, at denne institution ikke ved, hvordan man opfører sig. Tiden er inde til at skaffe sig af med den, fordi den er ved at blive ligesom en arrogant slyngel. Den har intet retmæssigt krav på myndighed over andre nationer.

Det, som Europa gør i sit system med hasardspil, betyder, at det er umuligt at få fred i Mellemøsten eller nogen andre steder. Det betyder, at hvis Grækenland trækker sig ud, på den ene side, så vil Eurozonen kollapse. Men det modsatte virker på samme måde. Hvis de bliver, vil den disintegrere under vægten af deres tilstedeværelse.

Det hele er et falskneri. Det her har ingen værdi: dette banksystem. Og de skal se at komme tilbage til amerikansk politik. Glem det faktum, at et par klovne nedstemte amerikansk lovgivning i 1999: Glass/Steagall skal genindføres. Vi må have denne genindførelse af Glass/Steagall og kaste den i hovedet på Kongressen og sige: »Dette falskneri er det, der var årsag til vore problemer.«

»O’Malley har ret«, sagde LaRouche.

»Det skal gøres. Det er det afgørende skridt. Det ville, selvfølgelig, sænke Wall Street. Det er hele pointen. Enhver, der fører kampagne på Wall Streets side, har ikke gjort sig fortjent til at blive valgt.«

Foto: Præsident Franklin D. Roosevelt underskriver Glass/Steagall-loven, der trådte i kraft den 16. juni, 1933.

Kammenos: Vi behøver en gældssanering, som Londonkonferencen i 1953

14. mrs. 2015 – Den græske forsvarsminister Panos Kammenos har et langt interview i dag med Bild-Zeitung, Tysklands førende sensationsblad, hvor han pointerede, at det ikke er hans regerings plan, at Grækenland skal forlade euroen og vende tilbage til drakmen, for hvis landet gjorde det, ville andre lande, som Spanien, Italien og sluttelig endda Tyskland, følge efter. Grækenland har heller ikke brug for en tredje »redningspakke«, fordi de to forudgående pakker kun var til gavn for bankerne, ikke befolkningen. »Det, vi har brug for, er en nedskæring af gælden, som Tyskland fik det i 1953 på gældskonferencen i London. Nedskæringspolitik er den forkerte vej. Befolkningen i Grækenland har allerede mistet alt, og de mennesker, der stadig er i arbejde, har fået deres indkomst drastisk beskåret. Mine jagerpiloter tjener nu 1.200 euro om måneden; før krisen tjente de 2.400 euro om måneden, og det risikerer de deres liv for.«

På et spørgsmål om, hvorfor Grækenland, som medlem af NATO, tager kontakt til Rusland for at få hjælp, svarede Kammenos, at Grækenland har »mistet mange penge gennem sanktionerne, og 70 % af vore nationale landbrugsprodukter går til Rusland«. Turisme fra Rusland, der normalt udgør 25 % af al turisme i Grækenland, er blevet ramt. »Vi har brug for kompensation fra EU for det, eller også kan vi ikke længere, og vil ikke længere, deltage i sanktioner, der alene skader den græske økonomi.«

Panos Kammenos: Hvis EU og IMF ikke ændrer deres politik, vil Grækenland gå til BRIKS

14. mrs. 2015 – Hvis Den europæiske Union og Den internationale Valutafond afskærer Grækenland fra finansiering, vil landet vende sig mod BRIKS-landene, Brasilien, Rusland, Indien, Kina og Sydafrika, for finansiering. Dette blev sagt højt og tydeligt af forsvarsminister Panos Kammenos i et interview til Græsk Radio, hvor han advarede om, at Grækenland altid har et alternativ i BRIKS, hvis EU og IMF afskærer Grækenland. Han karakteriserede BRIKS som den største blok på planeten.

Grækenland ønsker at forblive i Eurozonen, men under nye betingelser, hvor landet genvinder sin nationale suverænitet og udvikler sin økonomi, sagde han. Kammenos sagde, at tiltag i retning af forsøg på at fordrive landet fra Eurozonen er illegale og tilsigter at presse Grækenland til at underskrive et tredje memorandum, hvilket ikke vil ske. Dette er det mandat, som regeringen har fået fra det græske folk. Så hvis finansiering blive afskåret, vil Grækenland blive nødt til at henvende sig til BRIKS. Kammenos sagde også, at Grækenland vil søge samarbejde med Rusland omkring sikkerhed og energipolitik, og især omkring Ruslands forslag om at bygge en gasledning til Tyrkiet, som dernæst forlænges ind i Grækenland.

Interviewet fandt tilsyneladende sted i går aftes og er nu spredt ud over hele den græske blog-sfære.

Varoufakis siger Nej til kvantitativ lempelse, Ja til produktiv investering

14. mrs. 2015 – I en tale på en konference i Cernobbio, Italien, erklærede den græske finansminister Yanis Varoufakis, at der burde være produktiv investering i stedet for kvantitativ lempelse, til spekulation.

»Kvantitativ lempelse er overalt, og der er optimisme i luften«, sagde Varoufakis. »Med risiko for at lyde som en lyseslukker … finder jeg det vanskeligt at forstå, hvordan en udvidelse af det monetære grundlag i vores fragmenterede og fragmenterende monetære union vil blive transformeret til en betydelig stigning i produktive investeringer. Resultatet af dette vil blive en oppustning af kapital, som vil vise sig at være uholdbar.«

Varoufakis foreslog en »alternativ« kvantitativ lempelse. »Vi har i Europa Den europæiske Investeringsbank (EIB). Lad os tænke os en alternativ form for kvantitativ lempelse, hvor EIB anmoder regeringerne om at føre en politik for en økonomisk investerings-genrejsning, som jeg gerne vil kalde Merkelplanen. Lad os tænke os, at den er 100 % finansieret gennem obligationer, der er udstedt af EIB, med ECB, der operer på de sekundære markeder, parat til at købe EIB-obligationer. Dette ville løse ECB’s operationelle problemer, for pludselig ville banken kun købe AAA-papirer uden at bekymre sig om forskellige statsobligationer, og ville samtidig, gennem at gen-lancere investeringer, undgå de nævnte problemer, som kvantitativ lempelse har haft andetsteds, og som vi i stigende grad vil få i Europa, med oppustede priser på værdipapirer.«

Det ser ud til, at en stor del af medierne ikke har dækket hans forslag om at bruge EIB til det, der rent faktisk ville være en europæisk »New Deal«, som Varoufakis tidligere har foreslået. De fleste medier har, på linje med deres sensationsjournalistik imod Grækenland, fejlciteret ham for at få de til at se ud, som om Grækenland var i færd med at kapitulere over for kravene fra landets såkaldte »europæiske partnere«. En stor del af pressen hævder, at han sagde, Grækenland er parat til at udskyde eller endda droppe reformer for at vinde »tillid« fra sine partnere. Et mere nøjagtigt citat er at finde i et Reuters telegram, hvor han klargør, hvad han sagde, »Vi har aldrig sagt, at vi vil frafalde nogle af vore løfter, vi sagde, at vore løfter vedrører en fireårig valgperiode«, sagde han til reportere på sidelinjen af konferencen. »De vil blive udfaset på en optimal måde, der er i harmoni med vores forhandlingsstandpunkt i Europa og også med den græske stats budgetstandpunkt«, sagde han.

I mellemtiden gabte den tyske finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble igen op og sagde, at en Græxit, eller græsk exit af Eurozonen, ikke kunne udelukkes, hvilket har ført til et nyt udtryk, Græxident, en utilsigtet græsk exit.

Som respons på Schäubles erklæringer sagde Pierre Moscovici, EU-kommissær for Økonomiske og Monetære Anliggender, til Der Spiegel, at muligheden af en græsk exit ikke bør overvejes. »Alle i Europa er sikkert enige om, at en Græxit ville være en katastrofe – for den græske økonomi, men også for Eurozonen som helhed«, sagde han. »Hvis et enkelt land forlader denne Union, vil markederne omgående spørge, hvilket land, der bliver det næste«, sagde Moscovici. »Og det kunne blive begyndelsen til enden.«

Foto: Statsminister Alexis Tsipras’ nydannede regering aflægger ed foran den græske præsident, Karolos Papoulias, i præsidentpaladset i Athen den 27. jan. 2015. Tsipras ses yderst t.v.

14. mrs. 2015 – Den tidligere guvernør for Maryland, Martin O’Malley, skaber i øjeblikket store overskrifter i USA, fordi han er den første kandidat fra det Demokratiske Parti, der hidtil entydigt har erklæret, at han stiller op til præsidentvalget, og at den første forholdsregel, som han ville gennemføre som præsident, er genindførelsen af Glass/Steagall-bankopdelingsloven. Denne meddelelse kunne vise sig at blive et afgørende vendepunkt for hele den amerikanske politik, for herefter vil alle andre kandidater – og selvfølgelig også Hillary Clinton – blive målt op mod denne målestok, om han/hun er parat til at forsvare det almene vel med Glass/Steagall, eller om han/hun accepterer Wall Streets kriminelle system.

Af strategisk betydning var ligeledes den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeiers intervention i Washington, hvor han under samtaler med den amerikanske udenrigsminister John Kerry og i en tale for tænketanken CSIS indtrængende advarede mod levering af tunge, amerikanske våben til Ukraine, fordi dette ville optrappe konflikten til en ny fase, hvor man ikke længere kunne vende om. Hvis Ukraine fik amerikanske våben, ville Rusland til gengæld udruste separatisterne med flere våben, og balancen ville forblive den samme, men på et højere niveau; men konflikten kunne komme ud af kontrol, og ville ikke være til gavn for nogen, og slet ikke ukrainerne. Ikke en eneste militær løsning i nyere tid havde været succesfuld, og der var intet alternativ til den møjsommelige proces med diplomatiske forhandlinger, iflg. Steinmeier.

Samtidig advarede tidl. kansler Helmut Schmidt om, at konflikten i Ukraine truer med at blive til en ’varm krig’, hvis Vesten forsømmer at tage Putins berettigede bekymringer i betragtning. Iflg. Schmidt blev den grundlæggende fejl, der har ført til denne krise, skabt for et kvart århundrede siden i Maastricht, da EU’s udvidelse mod øst blev besluttet.

Steinmeier kritiserede i Washington også de nye lovforslag fra 47 senatorer om yderligere sanktioner mod Iran, som kunne medføre fiasko for slutfasen af »5+1-forhandlingerne« om det iranske atomprogram, en fiasko, der ville få katastrofale følger for hele Mellemøsten og måske endda hele planeten. Dette indbragte ham et udbrud fra den uudsigelige senator McCain, som Steinmeier til gengæld klandrede for at tilhøre »diplomatiets Neville-Chamberlain-skole«.

Fælleselementet mellem O’Malleys meddelelse om, at hans første embedshandling som præsident ville være genindførelsen af Glass/Steagall-bankopdelingsloven, og Steinmeiers intervention i Washington mod de truende våbenleverancer fra USA til Ukraine, består i, at begge handlinger ganske vist endnu ikke løser den strategiske, eksistentielle krise, men dog viser et potentiale til at løse den.

O’Malleys fokus på de dramatiske hårde livsbetingelser, som spekulanternes og Wall Street-storbankernes profitgriskhed har haft som konsekvens for befolkningen, og nødvendigheden af at rehabilitere den oprindelige Glass/Steagall-lov, er ikke betydningsfuldt for 2016, men for lige nu. For ECB-chef Mario Draghis beslutning om, hver måned at pumpe 60 mia. euro(!) – i alt 1,2 bio. euro frem til september 2016 – ind i finanssektoren, og dermed atter »redde« bankerne, der er i en elendig forfatning, på bekostning af borgerne, afspejler det transatlantiske finanssystems desperate tilstand. Den samtidige beslutning om at forværre den græske regerings akutte pengenød gennem det skærpede handikap mht. nu at måtte benytte nødkreditter, efter at de græske banker allerede var blevet udelukket af den »kvantitative lempelse« med opkøb af statslån, betyder ikke andet, end at enden på Eurozonen er nær.

For Draghi frygter tydeligvis, at en imødekommenhed over for Grækenland gennem mildere betingelser ville have signalvirkning for Italien, Spanien, Portugal og Frankrig om også at smide Trojkaens nedskæringsdiktatur over bord! Og Grækenland hænger på hele den transatlantiske sektors absolut ubetalelige derivatboble. Netop derfor er finanssektorens og mediernes hysteri og aktuelle, næsten racistiske hetz mod et lille land, der kun udgør 1,6 % af Eurozonens BNP, så overproportioneret voldsom. Og kun således kan det forklares, at Schäuble konkurrerer med McCain om, hvem der kan komme med de største fornærmelser.

Den eneste mulighed for at standse finanssystemets truende, ukontrollerbare sammenbrud er netop ved at genindføre Glass/Steagall-loven, hvis ophævelse i 1999 blev mulig gennem en udspekuleret operation fra Det britiske Imperiums side imod Bill Clinton. Det var først efter ophævelsen af Glass/Steagall-bankopdelingsloven, der havde muliggjort en 70 år lang stabilitet i det amerikanske, og også det transatlantiske, banksystem, at det kom til disse uhyrlige spekulationsprofitter og den stadig større kløft mellem rig og fattig, som vi ser i dag. Med O’Malley er Glass/Steagall igen kommet på dagsordenen.

Det hjælper, at den græske europaparlamentariker Notis Marias har opfordret til indførelsen af Glass/Steagall-loven i Europaparlamentets plenumforsamling. For først, når USA og Europa har befriet sig for den enorme vægt af henved to bia. i udestående derivater, og en dermed forbundet statsgæld, gennem en lovreguleret reorganisering af bankvæsenet, er der en chance for at forhindre både det truende kollaps og faren for krig.

Det nye økonomiske system og finanssystem, som BRIKS-staterne og frem for alt Kina har skabt i løbet af det seneste halvandet år med politikken for den Nye Silkevej, og, i løbet af de seneste seks måneder, med diverse nye banker, der udelukkende er orienteret mod at finansiere realøkonomien, vokser i mellemtiden stærkt. I mellemtiden har 50 stater gjort det klart, at de vil samarbejde med BRIKS-staterne. Den 6. marts bekendtgjorde den kinesiske finansminister Lou Jiwei, at 27 stater allerede ønskede at deltage i oprettelsen af den Asiatiske Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB) som stiftende medlemmer.

Storbritannien meddelte sidste torsdag, at det vil blive det 28. medlem. Inden for halvanden time angreb Det hvide Hus dette skridt fra briterne med, at det ikke var blevet aftalt med USA og var et yderligere udtryk for en fortsat imødekommenhed over for Kina. Briterne har rent historisk altid placeret sig i alle lejre – og frem for alt, i den vindende lejr!

Den eneste chance for at imødegå det truende, ukontrollerede finanskollaps og den akutte fare for en »varm krig« i Europa, som Helmut Schmidt siger, og som ifølge sagens natur ville udvikle sig til en global, termonuklear verdenskrig, ligger i de europæiske nationers og USA’s samarbejde med BRIKS-staterne om opbygningen af den Nye Silkevej, til at blive til en Verdenslandbro, der forbinder folkeslag og kontinenter. For kun på denne måde kan springet fra de formentlige geopolitiske interesser, der allerede har ført til to verdenskrige i det 20. århundrede, erstattes med et konkret grundlag for et nyt paradigme om menneskehedens fælles mål.

O’Malleys meddelelse demonstrerer, at den kampagne, som Lyndon LaRouche siden 2008 har ført for genindførelsen af Glass/Steagall i USA, og som de organisationer, der er forbundet med BüSo her i Europa, ligeledes har sat på dagsordenen, atter kan bringe Amerika tilbage til sin sande identitet som republik.

Steinmeiers intervention i Washington viser, at Tyskland og de andre europæiske nationer udmærket kan forsvare deres interesser, når det drejer sig om det eksistentielle spørgsmål og krig eller fred og, i dette tilfælde, om menneskeheden i fremtiden skal eksistere eller ej.

Storbritanniens beslutning om at arbejde med som stiftende medlem af AIIB understreger, at det også er ganske ligetil for de andre europæiske nationer at tage imod Xi Jinpings tilbud om at samarbejde om opbygningen af den Nye Silkevej og BRIKS-staternes nye finansarkitektur.

De første skridt til en bedre fremtid er taget.

Det, der nu er behov for, er en bred mobilisering af befolkningen, en massebevægelse for udvikling, for også at virkeliggøre dette eksisterende alternativ. Mange mennesker i er øjeblikket udmærket klar over faren for en stor krig, det beviser meningsmålinger, såvel som personlige samtaler. Det, som de fleste mennesker mangler, er håbet om at erkende et alternativ eller at kunne bidrage med noget til at bevæge verdenshistorien i en anden, mere positiv retning. Med O’Malleys præsidentskabskamp for Glass/Steagall, udenrigsminister Steinmeiers intervention i Washington imod krigspolitikken og Storbritanniens – af alle ting! – deltagelse i stiftelsen af AIIB viser, at de løsninger, som LaRouche og BüSo/Schiller Instituttet længe har foreslået, kan virkeliggøres.