2. juni 2016 – Den dødbringende virkelighed, der fejer hen over hele Sydvestasien, Nordafrika og Europa som en konsekvens af Obamas krige, fortsætter – og accelererer. Den Internationale Organisation for Migration har netop udsendt sin rapport for første halvdel af 2016, der finder, at forsøgene på at krydse Middelhavet til Europa var de hidtil registrerede, mest dødbringende: 2.900 mennesker er hidtil døde, en stigning på 58 % sammenlignet med 1.838 døde i samme periode i 2015, og 743 i de første seks måneder af 2014. Af disse dødsfald fandt 2.500 af de 2.900 (over 85 %) sted i den mest farefulde, centrale Middelhavsrute til Italien. Den samme tendens ses i den totale migration i år: hidtil er henved 225.665 migranter i år ankommet til Italien, Grækenland, Cypern og Spanien over havet. Dette er en stigning på mere end 50 % over tallet for første halvdel af 2015, der lå på omkring 146.000.

Den Internationale Organisation for Migration beskriver sig selv som ”den ledende, internationale organisation for migration”, med 162 medlemsstater, og som arbejder tæt sammen med FN.

Titelfoto: 29. maj 2016 (New York Times): En kvinde hjælpes ombord på et italiensk flådefartøj. Frem til onsdag [i uge 21] er rundt regnet 41.000 migranter blevet reddet til havs i år, efter at have sejlet ud fra Libyen.

Fra samme artikel: ”Tre dage og tre sunkne skibe konfronterer atter Europa med flygtningekrisens rædsler, i takt med, at desperate mennesker forsøger at nå over til det europæiske kontinent og fortsat omkommer til havs. 700 mennesker fra tre sunkne både menes at være druknet, meddelte FN’s flygtningekontor søndag, i en af de mest dødbringende uger på Middelhavet i mands minde.”

Selve ideen om, at AfD skulle være opstået som en reaktion på euroens krise, flygtningekrisen eller ”politisk islam”, er fuldstændig fejlagtig. Den Konservative Revolution, den tradition, som det Nye Højre udtrykkeligt går ind for, og hvis tekster Götz Kubitscheks publikation Antaia udgiver, har eksisteret i en ubrudt fortsættelse, lige siden dens fremkomst som en reaktion imod ”Ideerne fra 1789” – således i 225 år gennem manifestationer, der i heldigste fald kun tilsyneladende ændrede sig.

Læs del I her 

27. maj 2016 – Horst Seehofers påstand om, at Angela Merkels fejlagtige immigrationspolitik forklarer den hastige vækst af Alternative für Deutschland (partiet Alternativ for Tyskland), er totalt simplificeret, og derfor forkert. Selvfølgelig var stigningen af antallet af flygtninge præcis det, som visse politikere ventede på, såsom ”leder” af AfD, Björn Höcke, der opildnede befolkningens sociale ængstelse ved hjælp af demagogiske argumenter. Flygtninge har selvsagt ikke tidligere indbetalt bidrag til sundhedsforsikringsfonde eller den sociale sikkerhedspulje, sådan, som et af AfD’s favoritmantraer lyder, for hvordan skulle de have kunnet det? Skulle de måske for nogen år siden have henvendt sig til den amerikanske eller britiske ambassade i deres land for at oprette en kredit som kompensation for den fremtidige ødelæggelse af deres hjem i geopolitisk motiverede krige?

Dette eksempel tydeliggør, at man kan tage en udtalelse, der, snævert anskuet, ikke i sig selv er falsk – nemlig den, at ”flygtningene aldrig har indbetalt noget til det sociale sikkerhedssystem” – og videreformidle en falsk information herigennem, falsk, fordi den reducerer en kompleks situation, såsom hvorfor, flygtningene i det hele taget blev flygtninge, ned til et meget snævert aspekt af situationen. Den første impuls bag fr. Merkels flygtningepolitik – da hun sagde, ”Vi kan klare det!” – var korrekt og i overensstemmelse med Genève-flygtninge-konventionen. Dér, hvor hun til syvende og sidst gik forkert, var, at, alt imens, hun igen og igen sagde, at man måtte eliminere årsagerne til flygtningekrisen, så sagde hun aldrig, hvad disse årsager var.

Antiislamisk Pegida-demonstration den 12. januar, 2015, i Dresden, efter skudepisoden på bladet Charlie Hebdo i Paris.

For at gøre dette måtte man være opmærksom på den rolle, som Saudi-Arabien spillede i angrebene den 11. september, 2001, såvel som også de krige, der var baseret på løgne, og som USA førte i Sydvestasien som angivelige repressalier for disse angreb, samt også det ”allierede” Saudi-Arabiens rolle i Tyrkiet, i finansieringen af diverse wahhabi-islamistiske organisationer, fra al-Qaeda til al-Nusra og ISIS, snarere end at forlade sig på disse to nationer for at dæmme op for flygtningestrømmen.

I lyset af det ramaskrig, der nu raser i USA over Saudi-Arabiens veldokumenterede støtterolle for terrororganisationer – man erindrer sig det amerikanske Senats enstemmige vedtagelse af Loven for Retfærdighed imod Terrorsponsorer (JASTA), og kampen for ophævelse af hemmeligstemplingen af de berømte, endnu hemmelige 28 sider fra Den fælles Kongresundersøgelsesrapport over 11. september – i lyset af dette er det sigende, at fr. Merkel fortsat er tavs omkring skandalen med saudiernes rolle. For, de faktiske ”årsager til flygtningekrisen” ligger i hele dette begivenhedskompleks.

Den anden fejltagelse, som fr. Merkel begår, er at nægte, sammen med Rusland og Kina at fremlægge et funktionsdygtigt perspektivfor genopbygningen af de befriede områder – indledningsvis Syrien, og dernæst hele Sydvestasien – og som kun kan gennemføres inden for den større ramme af Den Nye Silkevej.

Ifølge FN findes der allerede 60 millioner flygtninge eller fordrevne mennesker i hele verden. Lederen af Det Verdensøkonomiske Forum, Klaus Schwab, sagde for nylig i Davos, at, i tilfælde af, at der finder et yderligere fald sted i prisen på råmaterialer, kunne en milliard mennesker fra de sydlige lande begive sig ud på rejsen mod nord. I tilfælde af, at et ukontrollabelt kollaps af det transatlantiske finanssystem finder sted – hvilket er en reel mulighed i betragtning af centralbankernes negative rentesatser, samt debatten om ’helikopter-penge’ (ubegrænset pengetrykning, -red.), kunne dette tal stige endnu mere pga. den globale indvirkning heraf.

De europæiske forholdsregler, som fr. Merkel gik med til – nemlig at beskytte EU’s ydre grænser gennem Frontex-organisationen og forhandlingen af en hestehandel med den tyrkiske præsident Erdogan – er derfor ikke alene totalt ude af stand til at fungere, men de nægter også flygtningene den beskyttelse, de har ret til iflg. international lov. Disse forholdsregler afslører, at de ”europæiske værdier”, som EU konstant reklamerer højlydt med, for længst er blevet forvandlet til barbarisme. Det er sådan, resten af verden ser det. Kendsgerningen er, at hele verden lægger mærke til og diskuterer EU’s foragtelighed i dette spørgsmål.

For at understrege pointen: Den eneste måde, hvorpå vi kan afhjælpe den største, humanitære katastrofe, siden 2. Verdenskrig, er igennem en omfattende, økonomisk udvikling – en Ny Silkevejs-Marshallplan, om man vil – for hele Mellemøsten og Afrika, og som opbygger disse ødelagte lande, såvel som også de totalt underudviklede lande, og som giver de mennesker, der lever dér, et perspektiv for en bedre fremtid. For at gøre det, må vi gøre en ende på konfrontationen med Rusland og Kina og samarbejde med Rusland, Kina, Iran, Egypten og mange andre lande om sådanne udviklingsperspektiver. Rammen hertil er allerede på plads med Kinas Nye Silkevej og tilbuddet om et win-win-samarbejde.

Det er netop dette unikke perspektiv for en løsning, som AfD udelukker, på grund af partiets mildt sagt chauvinistiske ideologi. Frem for alt gør partiets tilknytning til neoliberale, monetaristiske dogmer det totalt ude af stand til at søge løsninger, endsige finde dem.

Den konservative revolution

Selve ideen om, at AfD skulle være opstået som en reaktion på euroens krise, flygtningekrisen eller ”politisk islam”, er fuldstændig fejlagtig. Den Konservative Revolution, den tradition, som det Nye Højre udtrykkeligt går ind for, og hvis tekster Götz Kubitscheks publikation Antaia udgiver, har eksisteret i en ubrudt fortsættelse, lige siden dens fremkomst som en reaktion imod ”Ideerne fra 1789” – således i 225 år gennem manifestationer, der i heldigste fald kun tilsyneladende ændrede sig.

Blandt de omfattende skrifter om dette emne finder vi Armin Mohlers let redigerede afhandling fra 1949, som første gang blev udgivet i bogform i 1950 med titlen, Den konservative revolution. Den udløste en storm af vrede på det tidspunkt, for den var, kun fire år efter afslutningen af Anden Verdenskrig, et forsøg på at behandle fascistiske ideer kvasi-akademisk, som om de ikke direkte havde forårsaget katastrofale resultater for Tyskland og for verden. I sin bog forklarede Mohler, at den ”Konservative Revolution” er et synonym for det, der almindeligvis kendes som fascisme.

Ifølge Mohler er de, der udtænker dette, små, intellektuelt livlige celler, højeksplosive sekter og løse kombinationer af eliten, der forbliver i baggrunden. De udarbejder programmerne ”oppefra”, som dernæst præsenteres med simple ord til masserne, der ser sig selv som nogen, der har fået en rå skæbne. Mohler beskrev forholdet mellem de intellektuelle og det jævne folk på følgende måde:

”Den overordnede gruppe holder sine masser sammen gennem organisatorisk tilknytning til en doktrin, der er tilpasset den jævne mand og indskrænket til kun at omfatte slagord, og giver kun mulighed for en plads til mere overlegne hjerner i det omfang, de tager del i at tæmme masserne og begrænse disses mentale evner til det esoteriske område. Men flertallet af dem, der besidder et intellekt over det gennemsnitlige, samles i små cirkler, der skaber genklang i form af en konstant, mental spænding, mener, at de selv er de eneste, der besidder den ægte viden og anklager den store gruppe for realpolitik, for at forråde ’ideen’”.

(Kursivering tilføjet)[1]

Mange ledende medlemmer af AfD ser Instituttet for Statspolitik (Institut für Staatspolitik), det Nye Højres tænketank, som Götz Kubitschek og Karlheinz Weissmann stiftede i 2000, som en form for sted, der ”skaber genklang i form af en konstant, mental spænding”. Optræningskurser afholdes her med jævne mellemrum og er blevet taget af 5000 mennesker. Björn Höcke refererer til dette institut som sin ”spirituelle manna”.

En opdateret nationalsocialisme

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung citerede en e-mail, som Bernd Lucke, der for nylig blev smidt ud af AfD, skrev til partiets eksekutive komite på det tidspunkt, hvor Kubitschek og hans hustru, Ellen Kositza, søgte at blive optaget som medlemmer. Kubitschek var dukket op ved Pegida- og Legida-begivenheder[2] iført en sort skjorte og brun jakke, skrev han. ”Enhver, der ikke ser en henvisning til de fascistiske bevægelser i Europa i 1920’erne og 1930’erne, er et fjols.” På det tidspunkt blev de begge nægtet medlemskab. I dag er Lucke ude, og Kubitschek anses af mange AfD-medlemmer som det intellektuelle lederskab.

I slutningen af sidste år gav Höcke et slående foredrag på instituttet, hvor han med forbløffende oprigtighed fremlagde den radikale, biologiske determinisme, der er typisk for det Nye Højre. Han sagde, at fr. Merkels vanvittige asylpolitik havde igangsat en ”selvforstærkende malstrøm”, og at vi måtte forsvare os imod asylansøgere, fordi Afrika producerer ”et befolkningsoverskud” på 30 millioner mennesker om året. Der må sættes grænser ved at nægte asyl således, at Afrika kan opnå en miljømæssig bæredygtig rate af befolkningstilvækst.

Ifølge Höcke er problemet, at Afrika og Europa har to forskellige strategier for reproduktion. Afrika har den livsbekræftende form for reproduktion, som der refereres til med et ”lille r”, mens Europa har en negativ strategi for elementær befolkningserstatning, som der refereres til med et ”stort K”. De har derfor to totalt forskellige strategier for reproduktion, der nu støder sammen over den optimale brug af Lebensraum. (Levesteder) 

Enoghalvfjerds år efter afslutningen af det nationalsocialistiske herredømme er det utænkeligt, at nogen skulle vove at påkalde en bestemt befolkningsgruppes ”overskudsbefolkning” og Lebensraum. Og at underkaste folks demografiske udvikling til ”miljømæssigt bæredygtige” niveauer, er nøjagtig den samme, inhumane holdning, der karakteriserer den grønne bevægelses miljøfascisme.

Höcke lånte tilsyneladende termerne ”lille r” og ”store K” fra de amerikanske miljøforkæmpere Robert MacArthur og Edward O. Wilson og deres teorier om koloniseringen af levesteder.[3] Den tankegang, der her kommer frem, er værre end racisme; den nægter en stor del af den menneskelige race sin faktiske menneskelighed, den egenskab, der adskiller menneskelige væsner som en skabende art fra alle andre livsformer, i betragtning af deres evne til at udøve skabende fornuft.

Tyske borgere, der er bekymret for vort samfunds udhuling, for vort lands sikkerhed, deres egen personlige fremtid og meget andet, bør under ingen omstændigheder begå den fejl at falde for ”doktrinen reduceret til slagord”. For skjult bag disse sætninger findes der et billede af mennesket, der er uforeneligt med europæiske eller tyske værdier (for så vidt som man forstår disse som omfattende humanismen hos Nicolaus Cusanus (Nikolaus von Kues), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Felix Mendelssohn, Friedrich Schiller og Albert Einstein), men som i stedet er i overensstemmelse med den racisme, der engang kastede vort land ud i katastrofen.

Fortsættelse følger.     

Foto: PEGIDA- demonstration i Dresden, Tyskland, 12. januar 2015, efter terrorangrebet mod det franske, satiriske blad "Charlie Hebdo" 7. januar 2015.  

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Kommer senere på dansk.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche Addresses Seminar in Copenhagen,
April 18, 2016 [unproofed draft]

We Need a New Paradigm for Humanity

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, thank you very much for this
kind introduction.
Dear Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen: I would like to
start my presentation with showing you a point of view which may
be unusual to discuss the strategic situation, but I think it is
quite adequate.
This is a time-lapse video where you can actually have a view
from space. This is the kind of view normally only astronauts,
cosmonauts, taikonauts have. They all come back from their space
travel with the idea that there is only one humanity, and that
our planet, which is very beautiful and blue; however, it is very
small in a very large solar system and an even larger galaxy, not
to mention the billion galaxies out there in our universe.
With that view comes, naturally, the question of the future.
Where should mankind be in 100 years from now, in a 1000 years,
in 10,000 years? Well, you have to exercise your power of
imagination. In 10,000 years, we probably are well beyond having
colonized the Moon, we have completed very successful Mars
missions, we will have a much, much better understanding about
our solar system, our galaxy, and we will have gotten a much
deeper understanding about the principle of our universe.
Just think, that it took 100 years before modern science
could confirm that Einstein's conception about gravitational
waves was correct. Ten thousand years of the past human history
has brought tremendous progress. But just think that this growth
can go on, exponentially. And since there is no limit to the
creativity and perfectibility of the human species, in 10,000
years we can have a wonderful world.
So, let's look from that view, into the future, to the
present, to have the right perspective.
Yesterday, the {New York Times}, in the Sunday edition, had
an article saying "The Race Escalates for the Latest Class of
Nuclear Arms," portraying in detail that the United States, and
Russia, and China are developing new generations of smaller and
less destructive nuclear weapons, which would make them more
useable. They quote in the article James Clapper, the Director of
the National Intelligence of the United States, that the world
has now entered a new Cold War spiral, where, basically, totally
different laws and rules govern, than it used to be the case with
Mutual Assured Destruction.
The previous NATO doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction
proceeded from the assumption that the destructive power of
nuclear weapons is so horrible, because it will lead to the
annihilation of the human race, that nobody in their right mind
would ever use it. And therefore, it was a deterrence that these
weapons would never be used.
This is now no longer valid. What they are now discussing,
openly, on the front page of the {New York Times}, is that what
we, for a very long time, only we and a few of military experts,
have said, namely, that these modernized tactical nuclear
weapons, like the B12-61, in combination with stealth bombers,
with hypersonic missiles, can actually lead to the winning of a
nuclear war.
Ted Postol and Hans Kristensen, very respected military
analysts, have detailed at great lengths, why the idea of a
limited nuclear war is completely ludicrous, and it is the nature
of the difference between thermonuclear weapons and conventional
weapons, that once you enter a nuclear exchange, that it is the
logic of such a war that all weapons will be used, and that will
be the end of mankind. We are closer to that possibility than
most people dare to even consider, because if they would, they
would not remain so passive as they are now.
This is why I want to make emphatically the point–and this
is the purpose of conducting meetings like this seminar and many
other conferences we are engaged in–that we have reached a point
in human history where geopolitics must be superseded with a
completely new paradigm. And that is why I started with the view
from space. We need a new paradigm, basically saying goodbye to
the very idea of geopolitics, which has caused two world wars in
the 20th century. That new paradigm must be completely different
than that which is governing the world today.
We have, right now, rising tensions in the South China Sea.
Policymakers and the neighboring countries are extremely worried
about what will happen in the period between now and the trial in
The Hague. You have the largest maneuver around North and South
Korea right now, where people in the region are extremely worried
that the slightest provocation could lead to an exchange of
nuclear weapons.
You have the NATO expansion up to the Russian border.
Countries like Poland and Lithuania are asking to have these
modernized nuclear weapons located on their territory, even that
makes them prime targets.
The United States is continuing to build the anti-ballistic
missile system which, supposedly, was against Iranian missiles,
but after the P5+1 agreement has been reached, it is obvious this
was always a pretext and the aim was always to take out the
second strike capability of Russia.
Then you have the entire region of Southwest Asia, still
being a terrible destruction and consequence of failed wars.
North Africa is exploding. You have new incidents between NATO
and Russia, all of a sudden in the Baltic Sea, which was, up to
now, a calm region where there are no conflicts, or, there have
been no conflicts.
In the Middle East briefing, discussing President Obama's
trip to Riyadh on the 21st of this month, they say that this trip
will open up a new page of NATO in the relationship to the Middle
East, that what Obama will try to establish is a new relationship
between NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.
So, we have a situation where the {New York Times}, also
yesterday, and I'm quoting these papers to say that these are not
some opinions of us, but this is now the public discussion, that
what is really at stake in the South China Sea is not so much the
fight around some uninhabited reefs and cliffs, or some tiny
islands, but it is the American effort to halt China's rise. And
not only China's rise, but that of Asia. China, Asia arising; the
trans-Atlantic region is in decline.
Just now, we are heading towards a new financial crisis, and
all signs are, that we are going into the same kind of crash like
2008. Already since the beginning of this year, $50 billion
corporate defaults were taking place, which is on the same level
like what happened in 2009.
What the United States is trying to assert under this
conditions, where the trans-Atlantic world is in decline or
marching towards collapse, to insist that nevertheless a unipolar
world must be maintained. The problem is, that unipolar world,
effectively, no longer exists. But still, what carries American
policy to the present day, is the Project for the New American
Century, the so-called Wolfowitz Doctrine, which is a neocon idea
which says that no country and no group of countries should ever
be allowed to challenge the power position of the United States.
In the age of thermonuclear weapons, the insistence to maintain a
non-tenable world order could very quickly lead to the
annihilation of civilization.
It is a fact: China has made an economic miracle in the last
30 years which is absolutely breathtaking. And it is continuing,
despite all the media rumors about China's economic collapse.
India has by now the largest growth rate in the world; it's above
7%. Many other Asian countries have explicitly formulated the
goal for themselves to be developed countries in a few years. The
Chinese economy right now is rebounding. They just announced that
in the next five years China is going to import $10 trillion
worth of imports. They will invest $600 billion worth of
investments abroad. Every day 10,000 new firms are being created
in China.
So, if you look at the development, especially since
President Xi Jinping announced in September, 2013 in Kazakhstan,
that the New Silk Road, the One Belt One Road, is put on the
agenda. In the Two and a half years since that time, more than
sixty nations have joined with China in this development. They
have created the New Silk Road, the Maritime Silk Road; these
nations have created a whole set of alternative
economic-financial institutions, such as the AIIB, which, despite
massive pressure from the United States not to do so, immediately
was joined by sixty founding members. The New Development Bank
also started just now its functioning. The New Silk Road Fund,
the Maritime Silk Road Fund, the Shanghai Cooperation Bank, and
many more. All of these were created because the IMF and the
World Bank had not invested in the urgently required
infrastructure.
These banks are now engaged in very, very impressive, large
projects. For example: China invested $46 billion in the
China-Pakistan corridor. When President Xi Jinping recently went
to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran, consequently Iran,
fool-heartedly, declared that they are now part of the One Belt
One Road, New Silk Road development. Greece is now talking about
that after China is investing in the Port of Piraeus, that Greece
will be the bridge between China and Europe. The 16+1, that is
the East and Central European countries, just declared that they
absolutely want to participate in China helping to build a fast
train system in these countries. Those projects which the EU has
not bid, China is now building. Part of it is, for example, the
Elbe-Oder-Danube Canal, which will connect the waterways of these
countries. When President Xi recently was in the Czech Republic,
President Zeman announced that the "Golden City" of Prague will
be the gateway between the Silk Road and Europe. Also, Austria
and Switzerland are now fully on board and see the benefits of
their country's joining with the New Silk Road.
When President Xi Jinping at the APEC meeting in October
2014 offered to President Obama to cooperate in all of these
projects in a "win-win" perspective, he not only proposed
economic cooperation, but he put on the agenda a completely new
model of international relations exactly designed to overcome
geopolitics. The new model is supposed to be based on the respect
for sovereignty, non-interference into the internal affairs of
the other country, respect for the different social system the
other country chooses to adopt. It would really be, in a certain
sense, a fulfillment of the principles which are laid out in the
UN Charter anyway.
How was the Western response?  Very, very ambiguous.  The
United States in spite of this, never really responded to
President Xi's offer.  They keep insisting on an unipolar world.
For example, in the TPP, like in the TTIP for Europe, it is said
very, very clearly, the U.S. sets the rules of trade for Asia and
not China.  Recently, the American Defense Secretary Ash Carter,
and also NATO commander General Breedlove, declared the enemies
#1 of the United States are, first, Russia, second, China, third,
Iran, fourth North Korea, and only fifth terrorism.
Now that is in spite of the fact that many other statesmen,
such as United States Secretary of State John Kerry and Foreign
Minister Steinmeier, and many others, have recently also stated,
that all crucial problems of the world cannot be solved without
the cooperation of Russia, and China.  For example, the P5+1
agreement with Iran, would never have come into being without a
constructive role of {both} Russia and China . Without Putin's
very intelligent intervention in the military situation in Syria,
this situation could not have come to the potential of a
political solution.
Also, apart from the military pressure, there is massive
pressure on the new institutions such as the AIIB and the New
Development Bank, to {not}  be outside of the casino economy but
to follow the "international standards."
Now, in these times of the Panama Papers, of the various
LIBOR scandals, of the money laundering of many of these banks,
it is a sort of laughable thing, what should be these
"international standards" of the Western financial system.
Now, let's be realistic.  At the IMF/ World Bank meeting
which just concluded in Washington over the weekend,  behind the
scenes there was complete panic, but nobody dared to speak about
it openly,  behind the scenes people were talking, what former
IMF boss Strauss-Kahn has said repeatedly, publicly, that we are
heading towards the "perfect political storm."  That if one of
the too-big-to-fail banks collapses, it will lead to a crisis
much, much worse than 2008.
At the recent Davos Economic Forum, the former chief
economist of the BIS William White said that the world system is
so utterly overindebted, that there are two roads only possible:
Either you have an orderly writeoff of the debt, like in the
religious Jubilee, so that you just say "these debts are not
payable," and you write them off, or it will come to a disorderly
collapse.
Now, the situation is all the more urgent, because unlike
2008 when everyone was talking about the "tools" of the central
bank, like interest rate reduction, rescue packages, bailouts,
all of these tools don't function any more. As a matter of fact,
when the competition for more zero interest rate, or even
negative interest rate, when into high gear in the last month,
when, for example, the Bank of Japan or the central bank of
Norway, or the ECB declared a zero interest rate policy, or even
a negative interest rate policy, it boomeranged!  It had the
opposite effect:   Rather than leading to more investment, in the
real economy, it led to a deflationary escalation of the
collapse.
When Mario Draghi, the chief of the ECB, recently announced,
"yeah, yeah, we have a discussion about helicopter money."  And
Ben Bernanke echoed it and said, "yes, now we need helicopter
money," meaning electronic printing of {endless} amounts of
worthless money, virtual money, they de facto announced that the
trans-Atlantic financial system is absolutely in the last phase.
Because after helicopter money comes only evaporation.
But this is only the most obvious of the crises.  Another
one, which is in a different domain, but equally systemic is the
refugee crisis in Europe.  Now,  I supported Chancellor Merkel
when she initially said, we can manage that,  we can give refuge
to these people, and for the first time, I was  saying "this
woman is doing the right thing."  I know there was a lot of
international criticism, but she acted on the basis of the Geneva
Convention on refugees, but it was the right thing to do.  But
the reactions from the other European countries, revealed an
underlying, basic flaw of the EU, a flaw which was not caused by
the refugees, but it was revealed by the first serious challenge,
that in the EU, as it has been conceptualized in the Maastricht
Treaty going up to the Lisbon Treaty, there is no unity, there is
no solidarity; and with the collapse of the Schengen agreement
which allows free travel within the internal borders of the EU,
the closing of the so-called Balkan routes, to prevent refugees
from coming, the basis for the European common currency is also
gone, because without the Schengen agreement, the possibility to
have the euro last is extremely dubious.
Now, with the recent response by the EU to basically have a
deal with Turkey, I mean, this is beyond the bankruptcy of the
whole EU  policy if you can top it.  At a point when the Russian
UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, presented the UN Security Council
with evidence that the Turkish government, is continuing up to
the present day to supply ISIS with weapons and other logistical
means, to then say, we pay Turkey EU6 billion, for what?  To have
them receive refugees; and Amnesty International has already
said, there is no guarantee that these people will be protected,
but rather that Turkey is sending them back to the war zones,
like Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.
So, if you look at the pictures of Idomeni, where the
Macedonian police are using tear gas against refugees who are
absolutely desperate; if you look at the fact that Greece is now,
rather than having refugee camps which would somehow process
these unfortunate human beings, they have, on pressure of the EU,
been turned into detention centers.  Pope Francis was just in
Lesvos, together with the Greek Patriarch Bartholomew, and this
Patriarch said, the present EU policy on the refugee crisis, is
the completely bankruptcy of Europe.  The Doctors Without Borders
left their job in Greece, because they said they cannot be
accomplices to the murderous policy of detention, where the
police decide who is a patient and not doctors.  Instead of
protecting the people running away from wars and persecution,
they are now being treated as criminals.
Immediately, days after this disgusting EU-Turkey deal, it
turned out that it's a complete failure, the so-called "European
values," human rights, humanism, well–they're all in the
trashcan, because now the refugees, obviously still fleeing for
their lives, go to Libya trying to get into small boats to Italy.
And just yesterday the news came that another 400 people drowned
in the Mediterranean.  And this will keep going on.  And it will
haunt the people who are refusing to change their ways.
Now, there is a new element in the situation which may cause
sudden surprises, and that is a program which was presented by
CBS, a week ago Sunday, in the so-called "60 Minutes" program
portraying the coverup, of the U.S. governments from Bush to
Obama, of the famous 28 pages omitted in the publication of the
official Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 by the U.S.
Congress; and as many people have said, and was said in this
program, this pertains to the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11.
Yesterday, {all} the U.S. talk shows, and all the U.S. media,
pointed their finger to the coverup of the Bush administration
and even to the present day of the present government, that there
is a coverup of criminal activity.
Now, the Saudi Arabian government reacted very unnerved, and
this was again reported in the {New York Times}, that they would
sell off $750 billion in U.S. Treasuries, if the U.S. would allow
a bill that would allow Saudi Arabia to be held responsible in
court, for their role in 9/11.  Now, that's not exactly a sign of
sovereignty, but of despair.  There are several U.S. Senators,
among them Mrs. Gillibrand from New York, who demand that this
whole question of the Saudi Arabian role in 9/11 must be on the
agenda when President Obama goes to Riyadh this week.  Which in
any case, may not happen, but it will not be the end of the story
because the genie is now out of the bottle.
OK:  How do we respond to these many, many crises? Well,
there is a solution to all of these problems.  The trans-Atlantic
should just do exactly what Franklin D. Roosevelt did in 1933, in
reaction to the  world financial crisis at the time.  Implement
the full banking separation — Glass-Steagall — and the whole
offshore nightmare which is being revealed in the Panama Papers,
and remember, that this firm Mossack Fonseca is only the fourth
largest of such firms, and 11 million documents still need to be
read through, and processed.  But we have to go back to the kind
of international credit system, as it existed in the Bretton
Woods system, before Nixon ended the fixed exchange rate in 1971,
opening the gate for  floating exchange rates and especially the
creation of offshore money markets for the unlimited creation of
money and other illegal operations as it now is coming out.
Then we need a writeoff of the absolutely unpayable state
debt, which has accumulated and ballooned after the bailouts of
2008 and afterwards. And we have to basically get rid of the
toxic paper of the whole derivatives markets, because they are
the burden which is eating up the chance for the investment in
the real economy.
Then, we need a Marshall Plan Silk Road; and the only reason
I'm  talking about a Marshall Plan, despite the fact that China
is {emphatic} that they do not want a Cold War connotation to the
New Silk Road, it gives people in the United States and Europe a
memory, that it is very possible to rebuild war-torn economies,
as it happened in Europe after the Second World War.
Now, with the ceasefire which was negotiated between Foreign
Ministers Kerry and Lavrov, you have now a still-fragile, but you
have the potential for a peace development in Syria, and soon
other countries in the region.  But it is extremely urgent, that
the peace dividend of this ceasefire is becoming visible for the
people of the region, immediately.  That is, there has to be a
reconstruction and economic buildup, not only of the territory
and the destroyed cities, but the entire region, has to be looked
at as one:  From Afghanistan to the Mediterranean, from the North
Caucasus to the Persian Gulf.  Because you cannot build
infrastructure by building a bridge in one country.  You have to
have a complete plan for the transformation of this region, which
mainly consists of desert.
Now, the idea is to have a comprehensive plan, greening the
deserts, building infrastructure, creating new, fresh water from
desalination of ocean water, of tapping into the water of the
atmosphere through ionization, and various other means. And then
build infrastructure corridors, new cities, and give hope to,
especially, the young people of the region, so they have a reason
not to join the jihad, but to become doctors, to become
engineers, to care for their family and their future.
Now this is not just a program any more, because  when
President Xi Jinping visited Iran about two months ago, he put
the Silk Road development on the agenda for this region.  So, all
you need to do, is extend the Silk Road, and the first train has
already arrived in Tehran; you have to continue to build that
road, from Iran, to Iraq, to Syria all the way to Egypt.  Other
routes should go from Afghanistan, to Pakistan, to India. From
Central Asia to Turkey to Europe, and this obviously can only
work because the problem is so big, that all the neighbors of the
region, Russia, China, India, Iran, Egypt, but also the countries
which are now torn apart by the refugee crisis such as Germany,
Italy, Greece, France, and all other European countries must all
commit themselves to work on such a Silk Road Marshall Plan for
the reconstruction and economic buildup of the Middle
East/Southwest Asia, {and} all of Africa, because the economic
situation is equally dire in that continent.
The United States must be convinced that it is in their best
interest to cooperate in such a development, and stop thinking in
terms of geopolitics.  Now, the United States should only be
encouraged to cooperate in the development of these regions, but
the United States needs {urgently} a New Silk Road itself.
Because if you look at the condition, not only of the financial
sector in the United States, but especially the physical economy;
if you look at the social effects of the  economic collapse, like
the rising suicide rates, in all age brackets of the {white}
population, and especially rural women in the age between 20 and
40, the suicide rate is quadrupling and even beyond.  This is a
sign of a collapsing society.
Now, China has built as of last year, 20,000 km of fast
train systems.  Excellent, top-level technology fast-train
systems;  it wants to have 50,000 km by I think the year 2025.
How many miles of  fast train as the U.S. built?  I don't any.
But if the United States would join the New Silk Road and
participate  in the economic reconstruction, as Franklin D.
Roosevelt did it with the Tennessee Valley Authority plan, with
the Reconstruction Finance Corp. in the '30s, the United States
could very, very quickly be a prosperous country, and could again
be regarded by the whole world as "a beacon of liberty and a
temple of freedom," which was the idea of America when it was
founded.
So, the whole fate of the whole world will depend if we all
succeed to get the United States to go back to its proud
tradition of a republic, and stop thinking like an empire,
because that cannot be maintained in any case;  because all
empires in the whole history of mankind always disintegrated when
they became overstretched and collapsed.  There is not one
exception to this idea.
Now, therefore, let's go back to the idea from the
beginning:  Let's approach all problems in the present from the
idea, where is the future of mankind?  Where should mankind be?
Do we exist, or will we destroy ourselves.  And that requires a
change in paradigm, which must be as fundamental and thorough,
like the paradigm shift from the European Middle Ages to the
modern times.  And what caused that shift was such great figures
as Nikolaus of Cusa, but also Brunelleschi, Jeanne d'Arc, and
many others; but what they introduced was a rejection of the old
paradigm–scholasticism, Aristotelianism, all the wrong ideas
which  led to the destruction of the 14th century, and they
replaced with a  completely {new} image of man, man as an {imago
viva Dei}, which was a synonym for the unlimited creative
potential and perfectability of the human being.  It led to a new
image of man which created a blossoming of science, of modern
science, of the modern sovereign nation-state;  it made possible
the emergence of Classical arts.
And that is what we have  to do today:   We have to stop
thinking in terms of geopolitics, and we have to focus on the
common aims of mankind.  Now, what are these "common aims of
mankind"?  It is, first of all scientific cooperation to
eradicate hunger, poverty, to develop more and more cures for
diseases, to increase the longevity of all people.  We have to
study much more fundamentally, what is the principle of life?
Why does life exist?  How does it function?  What, really, is the
deeper lawfulness of our universe?  And that must define the
identity of human beings, which is unique to the human species.
And I have an idea of the future, which will be full of joy.
Because we will discover new principles in science and in
classical art, and we will create a new Renaissance.  As the
Italian Renaissance superseded the Dark Age of the 14th century,
what we have to do today, is we have to revive the best
traditions of all great nations and cultures of the world; and
make them known to the other one.  Have a dialogue of the most
advanced periods of Chinese, of European, Indian, African, other
cultures, and revive–and that is being done in China,
already–the great Confucian tradition, which is in absolute
correspondence with the best neo-Platonic humanist ideas of
Europe.  We must revive the great Vedic tradition in India, the
Gupta period; the Indian Renaissance of the late 19th to the 20th
century.  We must revive the Abbasid Dynasty of the Arab world;
the Italian Renaissance; the Andalusian Spanish Renaissance, the
Ecole Polytechnique in France, the great German Classical period.
The great Italian method of singing in Verdi tuning and the bel
canto method.  And if all of these riches of all the different
countries become the common good of all children of this planet,
and everyone can learn universal history, other cultures as if it
would be their own, I can already see how humanity can make a
jump, and how we can create the most beautiful Renaissance of
human history so far.
I think everybody who is thinking about these questions, has
a deep understanding, that we are at the most important crossroad
in human history. And it is not yet clear which way we will go,
but it is clear to me, that we will {only} come out of this
crisis if we mobilize the subjective emotional quality, which in
the Chinese is called {ren}; and the European equivalent, you
would call {agapë}, love.  And we will only solve this problem if
we are able to mobilize a tender, maybe even {passionate} love,
for the human species.  [applause]

Kommer senere på dansk.

Hussein Askary Speech in Copenhagen to the Schiller Institute-EIR
Seminar “Extend the World Land-Bridge to Southwest Asia and
Africa,” April 18, 2016

{Hussein Askary had fair number of graphics and charts, which he
used to illustrate his presentation.}

TOM GILLESBERG:  The next speaker is somebody very unique
and unusual,  Hussein Askary originally comes from Iraq and had
to get out under very nasty circumstances, as many others.  But
that became a blessing at least for our organization, because
Hussein, through Norway, ended up to become part of the
international LaRouche organization in 1994, and has since then
been contributing quite fantastically to our international work.
And he is one of the authors of the original {New Silk Road
Becomes the World Land-Bridge} report; but then also made a
decision, that this cannot simply stay in the English language,
or Chinese.  This also has to be in the Arabic language.  So
Hussein took it upon himself to translate this into the Arabic
language and then also of course, write some extra parts to it,
which is necessary for the present circumstances in Southwest
Asia to have.
This report just came out.  It was release on March 17, in
Cairo, in a meeting presided over by the Egyptian Transportation
Minister who then introduced Hussein, and the hope of course is
that this will become something read and studied and acted on in
the whole Arabic world, as well as the rest of the world.  So
Hussein?

HUSSEIN ASKARY: You have heard Helga today, giving a very
stern and sobering warning about the state of affairs in the
world, the dangers are very real to the world today. What I am
going to do, and please don’t misunderstand me, I’m not going to
give you a picture of how rosy and nice things are, either in
Southwest Asia, the so-called Middle East, or in Africa, but, as
they say in sports, you have to keep your eye on the ball. What
Helga just said, is that there is a new paradigm in the world,
which can lead to a completely different, and new world order.
And it’s that paradigm, within which myself, the Schiller
Institute, and the people we are talking to, we want to direct
their attention to that new paradigm.
I’m thankful to Leena Malkki for her beautiful singing, and,
especially, the {Aida} aria. It was actually performed at the
opening of the Suez Canal, the second Suez Canal, last year.
The idea of great projects, the idea of great challenges,
like Hela was explaining, this idea of being in space, looking at
the world from space, and, also, the idea of major projects, like
the Suez Canal, like the Three Gorges Dam in China, the New Silk
Road, the effect they have on people, is that they challenge
their imagination, and challenge their creativity, because they
represent major difficulties, major technical problems,
intellectual problems, that have to be solved, before you achieve
these major projects. And that transforms the idea of people. It
also gives people an idea of a creative constructive identity,
and the position of man in the world, on this Earth, and also in
the universe. That is why we try to work on these concepts of the
New Silk Road, the extension of the New Silk Road, to {inspire}
people to think outside of the box, outside of the box of
geopolitics, which Helga was trying to explain. We have to get
out of geopolitics. We have to act {human} again. But that has
practical implications. There are practical problems, and other
issues, and even scientific issues we have to resolve.
So, for those who are not familiar, this is the extension of
the New Silk Road. The New Silk Road has existed as the new
strategic policy of China since 1996, but we want to expand this
into a global collaboration, a blueprint, as Tom said, a concept
for peace and cooperation among nations. We have to connect the
Economic Belt of the Silk Road (the one with the yellow), which
is already being built. As Helga said, the first train arrived
from China to Tehran last month. There are projects going on in
Siberia. So there are trains going from Asia to Europe. There is
no problem with that. We need to extend it into the Southwest
Asia region, the so-called Middle East (I can explain later why I
say Southwest Asia, and not the Middle East), and into Africa,
and of course, into the Americas.
So, you can see that the red lines are where we have the
biggest deficits, the biggest deficits in infrastructure, both
transportation infrastructure, but also in other needs, deficits
in water, and deficits in electricity.
What is different in the Arabic part, which I rewrote
certain parts of it, like the Southwest Asia part, we also added
the Arabian Peninsula, also, to the idea of the connection to the
New Silk Road. This is no longer simply a Silk Road; this is the
World Land-Bridge, which can unite all the continents of the
world.
In 1996, I had the great fortune to work with Helga
Zepp-LaRouche and the team of {EIR} to make the first major study
of the New Silk Road, and it was that one which was adopted by
the Chinese government as the strategic policy of China. It was
also a thick report like this.
This work is being done, mostly in East Asia, Central Asia,
Iran, Turkey, Russia, all these nations are involved, but what is
lacking is the connection to the rest. So it has been 20 years
since that idea emerged, but there was no response from the
countries in the Arab world, for example, or in Africa.
Now, the idea with all these lines is not only about trade.
We want to warn people, that we are not talking about moving
goods from China to Europe. That’s not our concept. That’s a
byproduct. What we mean by the New Silk Road, the World
Land-Bridge, that we need to create development corridors: a
development corridor where you bring power, water, and technology
to areas that are landlocked, that are far from industrial zones,
and, explore the resources, human and natural resources of that
region, to develop new centers of economic activity. Like
landlocked nations, like in Central Asia, or the Great Lakes
region in Africa. That’s the concept. It’s not about trade,
although trade is an important aspect of this.
In 2002, Mr. Lyndon LaRouche, the American economist and
political leader, the husband of Mrs. LaRouche, was in Abu Dhabi,
in a conference about oil, and the role of oil in world politics,
and the future of oil.  And there were many ministers of oil
actually from the Arab countries — the gentleman to the right is
the energy minister of the United Arab Emirates — and Mr.
LaRouche shocked everybody, and said that the Arab countries, or
the Gulf countries, have to gradually stop exporting raw oil, and
actually use raw oil and gas as an industrial product, for
petrochemicals, plastics, where every barrel of oil will give
many times its value, rather than burning it as energy. He said
that you should use your position in the world, as a crossroads
of continents. You have to utilize that position as a crossroads
for world trade, but also, the connection between Africa, Asia
and Europe.
So I added these to the Arabic version, because I think that
this is a very unique area in the world,  not only that its
strategic location is very unique, no other part of the world has
that; you also have two-thirds of the world’s energy resources,
so-called, oil and gas in that region, but also, most
importantly, you have about 450 million people. Most of them are
young people. And actually, many of them have a good education.
You also have nations with a very ancient history and culture,
and a very historical identity, like Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and
so on, and they also have an idea of themselves as becoming key
players in the world, but we hope that they will become key
players in the world in the economic, scientific and cultural
sense.
The problem is that all these advantages have been turned
into disadvantages. So this region has become a center for global
politics, for global geopolitics, and that is why we see the
conditions we have in the whole Middle East region becoming like
this.
Our idea is, now we have this new situation with the Russian
intervention, the prospect, the possibility of having a peaceful
political solution in Syria, the prospect of uniting many powers
to fight ISIS and al-Qaeda, and so on, both in Iraq and Syria,
and also in Libya. But this should be followed, as Helga said, we
need a Marshall Plan, we need an economic development plan, to
establish peace on a true basis.
The reason I joined the Schiller Institute in 1994, was that
I was in Oslo, and I was working as a translator, and there was a
Palestinian children’s delegation coming with Yasser Arafat; and
I was going around with them, and, at that time, you had the Oslo
peace agreement. A week later, I saw a sign that the Schiller
Institute was having a meeting in Oslo. They had a very
interesting title. They said in the meeting that if you don’t
start with the economic development of the Palestinian people,
the people in Jordan, Syria, Israel, and so on, if you don’t base
the peace process on a solid economic basis, this whole thing
will fail. And the peace process is, of course, dead now, both
because of that, but also because of geopolitics which has
prevented reaching a true peace.
So, therefore, to establish true peace, we need an economic
and scientific program. Helga referred to president Xi Jinping’s
visit to the region in January this year. I consider this as an
historic turning point, actually, because at that point, in late
January, Saudi Arabia and Iran were at the point where there was
a big risk of a direct war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, because
of the beheading of a Shi’a clergy in Saudi Arabia, which led to
demonstrations, the burning of the Saudi Embassy in Tehran, and
so on. So the Chinese intervention came at a very crucial point,
where they said, “Look, all these religious conflicts and
problems you have with each other, can lead the whole world into
a disaster. Why don’t we work on our method? We offer you to join
the New Silk Road. We offer economic development, and technology,
and even financing, so we can connect all of your countries which
are in conflict with each other together into this global
process.” And this is very, very important. And nations in the
region have to really grasp that opportunity now, and, instead of
discussing the fate of President Assad, they should discuss what
kinds of economic projects they should work together on.
One of the issues that I didn’t mention, is that, for
example, even as Helga said, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, they can
join this, if they stop this other policy, because we also have
one of the largest concentrations of financial power in the Gulf
countries; the so-called sovereign funds of the Gulf Cooperation
Council countries is about $2 trillion. This can be transformed
into credit.
In the report, I propose the establishment of the Arab
Infrastructure Investment Bank. A bank which will be financed by
these rich countries, which would have a capital of $100-200
billion, and that capital will only be earmarked for
infrastructure and development projects.
So every nation has a role in this. And in the report, we
have also added, which is not in the English report, a plan, a
general outline for the reconstruction of Syria, by utilizing
Syria’s position also as a bridge for the Silk Road, both from
Asia, and from Europe, into Africa. We also propose the
construction of a Syrian National Reconstruction Bank, which is
very important. We have a very important chapter in the report
about how nations can internally finance major infrastructure
programs. Because, the big question, which comes all the time
when I am in Arab countries, or in Africa, is, they say “OK. This
sounds good. Who will pay for this? Where will the money come
from?” Actually, you don’t really need money, in that sense. You
can create the money, but you have to know where to use that
money. As Helga said, the central banks in Europe and the United
States are pumping massive amounts of liquidity into the
financial and banking system. But none of that is transformed
into technologies or projects, public projects, or housing
projects, or industrial projects in Europe or anywhere. So money
is being printed, but it is not being used.
But there is a method, which we call the Hamiltonian
national credit system, which every nation can actually
internally generate credit to finance part of its national
development plans, and this is one thing we put in the Syria
plan. Because every time there is a war like in Bosnia, in
Lebanon, and so on, you have donor conferences, where every
nation says that we will give you so much money, 100 million, 50
million, but there is no centralized idea about how to rebuild
the whole country. It all depends on donations, small drops which
come. We want something massive. We want something big. Foreign
governments should contribute to that by exporting technology to
Syria, for example, which Syria cannot afford to build, or afford
to buy, in the current situation.
Also, a part of our plan for Southwest Asia is to fight
against desertification, by managing and creating new water
resources, stopping the expansion of the desert. This is the
Iraqi Green Belt project to stop the effect of sand and dust
storms, which actually is a big problem for many cities in Iraq,
sometimes even reaching into Iran, by building a Green Belt,
planting trees in a large scale, a belt by using both ground
water and water from the rivers.  This is a kind of national
program which can unite the people of Iraq for an idea of their
future together. Not Sunni, Shi’a, Kurdish, Turkish, and so on,
and so forth. These are the kinds of projects, real physical
projects, which will challenge people to work together in a
country like Iraq.
Now, I took this Egyptian model, because in Egypt, you have
a very terrible situation, which is the accumulation of 30 years
of destructive economic and financial policies, mostly caused by
former President Mubarak’s and Anwar Sadat’s collaboration with
the IMF and the World Bank. There should be a shift in the way
Egyptians consider their economy. Because Egypt always waits for
the IMF or the World Bank, the EU or the United States to give
some money so that they can start something new. And usually
money does not go to large scale. Europe, the United States, the
UN, the IMF and the World Bank will {never} finance large
infrastructure projects. That’s the policy.  Small, small, small
is beautiful. That’s what they say.
But in Egypt, with the new leadership in Egypt, you have the
focus on mega-projects, which is a necessity. If you want to save
Egypt’s economy, Egypt’s entire infrastructure has to be built
from scratch again. There should be new industrial and
agricultural centers, which they are focusing on.
Using high technology, they try to attract the highest
levels of technology, and internal financing. You know, President
el-Sisi, when they wanted to build the Suez Canal, there was no
money, as usual, they said. So what he did was something unique.
He went outside the central bank. He went outside the budget, and
said, “I will go on TV, and I will tell the Egyptian people that
we want to build this canal. It’s crucial for our nation. We want
you to give the money.”
In 2013 I wrote a memorandum for Egypt, an Egyptian Economic
Independence Document, I called it. Actually, inside Egypt, you
can raise more than $100 billion, because there are resources
inside Egypt. People, even today, buy dollars. They take part of
their salary, and buy dollars or gold, and keep it at home, so
that financing disappears from the system. It’s not reinvested in
the system. People keep their money because of the unstable
economic situation.
But if you encourage the Egyptian people with this kind of
national development projects, which will put their kids to work,
unemployed young people, they would come out with the money. And
this is what el-Sisi did. I wrote at the time, that they should
build a National Development Bank, not just one fund for the Suez
Canal, as they did. But as soon as President el-Sisi came on TV
and said, “We want to build this canal, but we don’t have the
money. We want the Egyptian people to pay for it.” So they went
out, and in one week they raised $8 billion. And people were
queuing late into the night; I met a banker last year, who said,
“We had to stay open into the night, because people were queuing
at the banks to buy the bonds!” Egyptians are real patriots. They
love their country, but if they are encouraged by good
leadership.
Of course, the Suez Canal is not giving back what was
supposed to be already from the beginning, because world trade
has collapsed. The level of transit in the Suez Canal has gone
down, not because of Egypt’s policy, but because the world
economy is going down. Global trade has been collapsing. But the
idea is to use the Suez Canal as a development zone. And this is
what I got from people in the Suez Canal Authority — that they
are not only thinking about transport of goods, but they want to
utilize that route to build new industrial zones around the
canal, like we showed in the development corridor idea. And, of
course, Egypt has a very key role, both in the Arab world — it’s
the most important Arab country — and also in Africa.
Now Egypt has one big problem — it’s the demographic
problem. People say that Egypt is overpopulated. That’s not true.
Egypt is not overpopulated. Cairo is overcrowded!  Ninety million
people live on only 5% of the land of Egypt; 95% of the land of
Egypt is empty. It’s not used, but it’s not overpopulated. The
United States and Europe have been financing the Egyptian
government with hundreds of millions of dollars for family
planning, so that women will have fewer children. But no projects
were built to expand Egypt’s economic potential to accommodate to
the new generations, so that they can have new agricultural and
urban centers out in the desert!
After I was in Egypt last year, I wrote a report for a major
economic conference in Egypt to attract investment; but these are
the ideas which came out of both the conference, and my
observations about Egypt’s role in the New Silk Road. In Egypt,
people were very negative to the idea of the New Silk Road,
because they said that the transshipment on the Silk Road will
take away trade from the Suez Canal — that shipments will go
from Asia to Europe by land, and we will lose. So there are a lot
of people in Egypt who are actually against the idea. But I was
telling people, “Look. It’s not about trade. If you have economic
development, you will need more Suez Canals to accommodate the
trade. But if the world economy is not growing, there is no
development, there will be no trade. And people will compete on
attracting trade into other areas.”
So the idea is to develop Egypt’s economy, but also
contribute to more development and more trade among nations. And
it’s in utilizing Egypt’s position to connect to Sub-Saharan
Africa, to North Africa, the Middle East, and to the Arabian
Peninsula. Interestingly, after I was in Egypt, last week the
Saudi King was in Egypt, and they decided to build this bridge.
At Sharm el-Sheikh, there is a connection over the Gulf of Aqaba.
I think that the Egyptian President invited the Saudi King to
support the building of this bridge between the Saudi territories
and southern Sinai, which will turn Sinai from an isolated area,
suddenly into becoming the center between two major economies.
There are now big problems in Egypt, because the President
made a terrible mistake by conceding sovereignty over the Tiran
and Sanafir islands to the Saudis. There was a dispute between
the two countries for many years, but President el-Sisi suddenly
declared that they are Saudi islands, and now there is a big
uproar in Egypt. And the mistake was that there was no public
discussion about it. The parliament didn’t have anything to say
about this. So, now there will be a review of the agreement.  But
the idea of this project is very important.
Now, for Egypt to get out of that demographic box, is for
Egypt to expand its economic activities into the desert. This is
the development corridor proposed by Dr. Farouk El-Baz, who is a
space scientist, and he is right now an advisor to the President.
And he designed this idea of creating the new valley, the new
Nile Valley, by building railways, roads, and new urban centers.
I added these green zones, because these are actually becoming
new agricultural areas that the Egyptian government wants to
invest in, by creating new farmlands — they are talking about 4
million acres of land, and settling young people into these
regions, and building new agro-industrial centers. But what is
needed is to extend the development corridor, the black line,
into the economic zones.
This is the Africa Pass. One of our Egyptian friends, an
engineer, presented this at our conference in 2012, it’s the same
idea, connecting Egypt to North Africa, to Europe, and into the
Great Lakes region of Africa. Now, the Great Lakes region
countries, like Rwanda, Burundi, the eastern Congo, Uganda, they
have massive problems of economic development, also because they
are very far from the transport corridors of the world.  We wrote
a series of reports two years ago about the cost of shipment of a
container. The Danish shipping company A.P. Møller-Mærsk has
statistics that the cost of a shipment of a container from
Singapore to Alexandria is $4,000, to Mombasa in eastern Kenya,
it becomes $5,000; but to the capital of Uganda, it goes to
$8,000, because there are no good roads to ship that container!
Into Rwanda and Burundi it reaches $10,600 per container. So they
cannot bear the cost of shipment of containers that maybe have
technology inside them, and machines, and that is a major problem
for these so-called land-locked countries. So you need to have
new lines of transport which will reduce the cost of the
transport.
Now these are ideas which the African nations, the African
Union, have had for many years. There are many very nice plans,
but the attitude of the rest of the world to Africa, because
Africa, by itself, does not have the technology, at least, to
build these projects, and there has been no willingness in
Europe, or the United States, to finance, or contribute to
building the projects proposed in any of these major reports, to
integrate the infrastructure of Africa and enhance economic
development. Because without infrastructure, you cannot have
economic development.
But some of these lines are now coming on the agenda, thanks
to the intervention of the BRICS nations, and also of China. For
example, the Cairo-Cape Town highway idea, President Jacob Zuma
of South Africa, presented this actually twice at the BRICS
summit in 2013 and 2014, and he said, “This is a crucial, a key
element in the development of Africa. We need to work with the
BRICS nations and China, Russia and India to build these
projects.” There are 400 road and rail projects involved in this.
But this is a big challenge, both in terms of financing, and in
terms of technology.
There is also the possibility of connecting the river
systems of Africa for river transport, like in Europe, the
Main-Rhine-Danube Rivers are an important transport artery, and
development artery. In the same way, you can connect the Nile to
the Great Lakes, to the Zambezi River through a number of canals,
and so-called trans-modal transport systems, where you can ship
from rivers to rail, and back to rivers, to lakes, and so on, in
an easy way.
Filling the gap which the United States and Europe have left
for many, many years, now the Chinese–.  Well, in Europe, we
have a very problematic and twisted relationship to poverty, to
poor countries, to underdeveloped countries. Europeans look at
Africa as a burden. It’s a problem. How do we solve this problem?
But the problem is that the whole focus has been on aid,
emergency relief, and so on, and so forth, but that really
doesn’t solve problems. I mean, people talk about genocide. In
Africa, every year there are 4 million children who die. Now,
talk about a war crime.  There are 700,000 children before the
age of five who die every year in Africa.  So, you cannot solve
these problems with small aid projects here and there. You need
to think big. You need to provide those people with adequate
transport, electricity, water systems, and this cannot be done by
so-called aid programs. In Africa 600 million people don’t have
access to electricity, out of 1 billion.
But you look at the Chinese, when they look at an
underdeveloped country, they see an opportunity. They see
potential. They see a “win-win” strategy — new markets, new
areas of development, and they should intervene in that
situation.
It is the same idea that President Franklin Roosevelt of the
United States had. All of his fights with Churchill were exactly
about this problem. Roosevelt told Churchill in the middle of
World War II, that you British are very stupid, because you suck
the blood of the Africans, and you get pennies, you get nothing,
by sucking their blood. But if you develop Africa, as independent
nations, as modern nations, as we did with the United States,
then you will gain much, much more; if you treat them as humans,
if you develop their infrastructure, schools and hospitals.
And this is exactly what the Chinese are thinking about. Out
of the problem, they see an opportunity. Prime Minister Li
Keqiang was in East Africa, and also Nigeria in May 2014, and
immediately said, “We want to help Africa to connect all the
capitals with railways,” which is a big deficit problem. And they
started from East Africa. And now there are projects being built
from Lamu, a new port, into the land-locked South Sudan, into
Uganda, into Rwanda and Burundi. And China is both financing
major parts of this, but also contributing to building it, to
solve the problems of the land-locked countries and the need for
development.
China recently completed, it’s not running yet, but part of
the railway is running, from Djibouti to Addis Ababa. There is an
old railway, which is not functional, built by the French
colonialists, but now there is a new, electrified railway, which
goes from Djibouti to Addis Ababa.
Two interesting things about this railway are, firstly, that
Ethiopia is always associated with famine and food problems. Some
of these problems still exist. These are on the way to being
solved, but to bring food from the ports to inside the country
usually took two months, because of the lack of infrastructure.
So starving people could not have food in time. Even if the food
existed in the port, coming from around the world to Djibouti, it
was almost impossible to bring the food to the people who needed
it. Now, that food can be shipped in 10 hours, to the capital,
and also to other areas. The other interesting fact about this
railway is that China is not just building the railway, and
financing it, but training and educating engineers and workers to
run these systems.
Now, Ethiopia has a massive infrastructure plan for
connecting all the major cities of Ethiopia, with the railway and
roads. The other thing about the railway is that it is all
electrified. And the Ethiopians will use all these new dams they
are building, to electrify the railway. So they don’t need import
oil, and gas and diesel to run the railway system. They will
domestically provide the energy to run the trains.
So, Ethiopia, I am very sure it will never be associated
anymore with famine and poverty. Ethiopia is a great nation, a
very proud nation. They have massive resources, but these
resources have been dormant, have not been utilized. But now,
with the Chinese intervention, and also India is active there,
these resources will be developed.
This is just a metaphorical picture. This is the
Mombasa-Nairobi railway being built by a Chinese and a Kenyan
worker. In Africa, the propaganda goes that the Chinese never let
the locals work in these projects. They bring their own workers,
they bring their own engineers, their own technology, they build
the thing, and then they leave. It’s not true. They always
involve local workers. They train them, because they cannot run
these systems; the locals will have to run these systems
themselves.
But they are also training the labor force in Uganda. They
are building an Army Corps of Engineers, so that the Army can
play a positive role in the development of the country.
Traditionally, the Army Corps of Engineers played a very
important role, even in advanced countries. So this is part of
the same project.
Another important infrastructure project for Africa is
Transaqua. Lake Chad is drying up, which is a known fact, and 30
million people are affected, because they live as fishermen, or
they have grazing land around the lake in Chad and Nigeria, and
Niger. All these countries are affected. There are 30 million
people around that region, and there will be massive migration
actually from the Lake Chad region. So there is an idea called
Transaqua, which was developed by one of our friends, an Italian
engineer, to bring 5% of the water from the Congo River, or the
tributaries of the Congo River, and build a 2,800 km.-long canal
into the Chari River, and then flow downwards into Lake Chad, to
refill the lake; but also to have a new economic zone, and build
the Mombasa-Lagos highway, which was one of the plans I showed
earlier.
So you can transform that part of Africa, which in people’s
minds is a complete jungle, into a new economic zone, but also to
bring water to the Lake Chad region.
Now, there are some other issues I want to address.   One of
the big deficits of course in Africa, is the energy consumption.
And as I said not everybody has that; the average international
level of energy consumption is about 2,800 [kw?] but that’s not
equal.  The only two countries which are exception are South
Africa and Libya, before that.  So the energy needs in Africa are
{enormous}!  I mean Africa has a lot of wealth, but also the
hydropower potential which has never been built.  But the
attitude of the Western countries, like the Obama administration,
they have something called “Power Africa Initiative,” that
certain nations in Africa will get energy provided.  But they’re
not talking about hydropower, they’re not talking about nuclear
power, they’re not talking about coal or gas or so on.  They’re
talking about so-called “renewable” or “sustainable energy.” And
the International Energy Agency has a criteria for access to
energy, which is a modern access to energy is about 100kw-hours
per year per person.  And this diagram shows very ironically,
that that amount will be consumed by an American in three days!
But they expect Africans to live with that for a whole year!
Here’s just one more ironical idea:  My refrigerator can consume
many times as much as an Ethiopian individual.
These are the criteria for President Obama’s Power Africa
plan, that the plan will eventually help these nations come to
this line, while the real needs are that big now, and they will
be that big in a few years.  So, all these ideas to help Africa
from the Obama administration, they’re not adequate!  It’s just a
complete bluff. It does not help, if you just look at the
numbers.
And this is also another irony of the Obama administration
policy. These are the sources of energy for the American people,
the American economy, and these are what the Obama administration
{doesn’t} want you to do.  So it’s “do as we say, not as we do.”
So the United States produced 37% of its energy from coal, that’s
forbidden for Africa; 30% produced by natural gas, that’s a very
suspicious policy, because there’s the carbon problem; 19%
nuclear — absolutely no nuclear for Africa; 7% hydropower — the
United States is very suspicious of hydropower projects, and so
on and so on.  So what is left is solar, so-called geothermal,
and biomass, which the United States produced only 0.1% of its
needs.  But that’s recommended for Africa. [laughter]
So anyway, the idea is that if Africa joins the new paradigm
shift, African nations, they have exactly, in African families
and African individuals, they have exactly the same needs as we
have; as we have in Europe or in the United States.  There is
absolutely no difference.  So they’re trying to convince the
Africans that they should just, maybe, if they’re lucky they
could get a lightbulb at home, so the kids can read, by having a
solar battery.  They will not bite!
I mean, if you bring electricity to a village, what people
will do, is not simply have a lightbulb, if you bring electricity
to a village,  — and one of our friends made a study in India —
is that people will start to want to use new devices.  They have
to have other appliances at home, you need to have a stove, so
women don’t have to many hours and cut trees and come home and
cook with the wood, and suffocate with the smoke.  Farmers will
have to have tractors.  They will need to have workshops which
use electricity; people will want to have TV sets, computers.
They want to build industrial projects.   They will need
refrigeration which is a big problem in Africa, because most of
the food produced in the Sub-Saharan goes wasted because there’s
no refrigeration.
So just to give yourself an illusion that you will provide
every African lightbulb, just forget about it!  Because the needs
of those people are so immense, and they will not give up on
their right to have a living standard which is similar to ours.
Why shouldn’t they have it?  And this is what — here, in the
ideology in Europe and the United States I know, they should not
have this kind of technology, they should not have this kind of
development in Africa, because that’s not “sustainable.” Which is
not true.  It is sustainable, if you provide the tools and the
technology to do that.  Actually in Africa, there are more
resources than in Japan or in the United States and Europe, to
sustain industrial development!
So the problem is in the policy.  The problem is how they
look at Africa, and how they look at the problem of poverty and
so on.   And that has also to change, exactly as we changed with
geopolitics, we have to change our attitude to the problems of
Africa, and have really the right methods to solving them, and
treating African nations as equal to us, and African families as
equal to us, and African individuals as equal to us.
Nobody here will give up their living standard, and live in
the forest — maybe some people who do, there are some Danes and
Norwegians… [laughter]  But we want to have education. We want
to have warm housing, we want to have clean water; we want to
have a future for our kids; we want to have trains which go on
time.  This is what the Africans want.  You know, there’s nothing
different, we’re all one human race!
So, when you design policy and you say, “No, Africans should
have ‘sustainable energy,’ not nuclear power,” then you are
breaking with that idea of a real human family and equality.  So
I think I’ll stop here. [applause]

Dias til talen:

Schiller Instituttet og Executive Intelligence Review holdt et seminar mandag den 18. april 2016 på Frederiksberg på engelsk.

Inkl. en diskussion om EIR’s specialrapport Den Nye Silkevej Bliver til Verdenslandbroen

Introduktion:Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark

Musik:
Fischerweise af Schubert
Ritorna Vincitor! fra Aida af Verdi
Leena Malkki, soprano fra Sverige
Dominik Wijzan, pianist fra Poland

Teksterne på originalsprogene med engelsk oversættelse 

Video: Introduktion og musik

Talere: Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Schiller Instituttets internationale præsident, kendt som “Silkevejsdamen” (via Skype video)

Video: Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Audio: Introduktion, musik og Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Afskrift: Et nyt paradigme for menneskeheden: Afskrift af Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale 

Forlæng Verdenslandbroen ind i Mellemøsten og Afrika: Hussein Askary, EIR’s Mellemøstredaktør, som lige har oversat den arabiske version af rapporten.

Den Nye Silkevej og den iranske rolle; Hr. Abbas Rasouli, først sekretær på Irans ambassade i Danmark.

Video: Hussein Askary og Hr. Abbas Rasouli.

Audio: Hussein Askary og Hr. Abbas Rasouli

Afskrift: Forlæng Verdenslandbroen ind i Sydvestasien og Afrika: Afskrift af Hussein Askarys tale 

Afskrift: Den Nye Silkevej og Irans rolle: Afskrift af Hr. Abbas Rasoulis tale

Mere om Den Nye Silkevej og Verdenslandbroen på dansk:

Specialrapport: Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Den Nye Silkevej fører til menneskehedens fremtid! Oktober 2014
Den kommende fusionsøkonomi baseret på helium-3. En introduktion til en kommende EIR-rapport om Verdenslandbroen.

Nyhedsorientering december 2014: Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen; Introduktion v/Helga Zepp-LaRouche

BYG VERDENSLANDBROEN FOR VERDENSFRED
Helga Zepp-LaRouche var taler ved et seminar for diplomater, der blev afholdt i Det russiske Kulturcenter i København den 30. januar 2015, med titlen: »Økonomisk udvikling og samarbejde mellem nationer, eller økonomisk kollaps, krig og terror? Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«. Nyhedsorientering febr. 2015.

Nyhedsorientering maj 2015 – Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Tale ved seminar i København: Den Nye Silkevej Kan Forhindre Krig

Tema: Den Islamiske Renæssance var en Dialog mellem Civilisationer, af Hussein Askary

Genopbygningsplan for Syrien: Projekt Fønix: Diskussionspunkter om Syriens genopbygning

Link: Homepage about the EIR report The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge
The English, Arabic and Chinese versions of EIR's report are available from EIR and The Schiller Institute in Denmark.
Prices for the 400-page report:
English: printed 500 kr.; pdf. 300 kr.; Arabic: printed 500 kr.; Chinese: pdf. 300 kr.
Please contact tel. 53 57 00 51 or 35 43 00 33, or si@schillerinstitut.dk

Invitation:
Terror in Europe, and elsewhere. Waves of refugees leaving countries racked by war and economic ruin, from Afghanistan to Africa. Threats of financial crash in the trans-Atlantic region. Dangers of escalating confrontation and war against Russia and China.  Is there any hope for the future?

The Schiller Institute and Executive Intelligence Review, led by the ideas and efforts of Lyndon LaRouche and Helga Zepp-LaRouche, have been working for decades to create a paradigm shift, away from "geopolitics," to a new era of cooperation between sovereign nations, based on an ambitious infrastructure-driven economic development strategy — a plan for lasting peace through economic development.

In 2013, this New Silk Road and Eurasian Land-Bridge strategy was adopted by Chinese President Xi Jinping, who called it the “One Belt, One Road” policy, which now includes agreements with 60 countries. In addition, the economic development alliance among the BRICS countries, and the establishment of new credit institutions, constitute an alternative in the making.

In December 2014, EIR published a ground-breaking special report in English, The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge, the sequel to its 1996 report, which elaborates the new set of economic principles needed for world economic development. The Chinese version was issued in 2015.

Now, if there is to be a solution to the heart-wrenching suffering of the people of the Middle East and Africa, and the effects of the crisis in Europe, the New Silk Road must be extended to those regions, on its way to becoming the World Land-Bridge. The recent negotiations led by U.S. Secretary of State Kerry (despite opposition from other factions in the Obama administration), and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, regarding Iran and Syria, have also helped to create the political preconditions for such a new “Marshall Plan” to immediately come into effect.

There are already moves in that direction. An example of “win-win” cooperation was demonstrated during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s recent visit to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran, where he confirmed China’s support for real economic development in the region, backed up by $55 billion in loans and investments.

And on March 17, the Arabic version of EIR's report was presented in Cairo by Egyptian Transportation Minister Dr. Saad El Geyoushi, and EIR Arabic desk chief Hussein Askary, who translated the report, at a well-attended launching at the Ministry. An expanded chapter on proposals to rebuild Southwest Asia is included.

The Copenhagen seminar will present the vision of a new paradigm, instead of geopolitics, terror, war and economic collapse.  Mustering the creative efforts of populations collaborating to rebuild their nations, is the only way forward.

We hope that you will be able to attend this important seminar, and join in the discussion about how this alternative can be brought about.

Links:

Introduction to the arabic-version of EIR's report by Helga Zepp-LaRouche (in English, Arabic and Danish)

Here are links to information about EIR's March 24, 2016 Frankfurt seminar, co-sponsored by the Ethiopian consulate, including the speeches of Helga Zepp-LaRouche and Hussein Askary.

Report about the Frankfurt seminar 

Helga Zepp-LaRouche's speech

Hussein Askary's speech 

Homepages:
Danish: www.schillerinstitut.dk
English: www.newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com
www.schillerinstitute.org
www.larouchepub.com/eiw
Arabic:  www.arabic.larouchepub.com/
Other languages: Click here

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Det seneste eksempel på denne, Den nye Silkevejs større tiltrækningskraft i forhold til den geopolitiske konfrontation med Rusland og Kina, har vi netop set i form af den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings besøg i den Tjekkiske Republik. Præsidenterne Xi og Zeman undertegnede en omfangsrig liste af aftaler inden for områderne højteknologi, infrastruktur og realøkonomi og fejrede den »Gyldne Stad« Prags rolle som »porten« ind til samarbejdet mellem Kina og Europa.

Netop dette samarbejde er ligeledes nøglen til løsning af flygtningekrisen, der blot har bragt frem for dagens lys, hvilket skrøbeligt fundament, EU er bygget på.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Foto: Prags astronomiske ur er et af de ældste og mest omfattende ure, der nogensinde er bygget. Det blev først installeret i 1410, og senere genopbygget af Mester Hanus i 1490. Den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings besøg i den Tjekkiske Republik, med underskrivelse af mange aftaler om samarbejde, fejrede den »Gyldne Stad« Prags rolle som »porten« ind til samarbejdet mellem Kina og Europa.

FRANKFURT, d. 23 marts, 2016 – Seminaret, ”Løsning af den økonomiske krise og flygtningekrisen med den Nye Silkevej!” organiseret af EIR i samarbejde med Generalkonsulatet for Etiopien i Frankfurt, blev overværet af et publikum på 75, bestående af repræsentanter for adskillige diplomatiske kontorer, af abonnenter og EIR-kontakter i regionen, og af omkring 10 syrere (studerende såvel som flygtninge, der afventer optagelse på universiteter). Adskillige kontakter kom så langt væk fra som Berlin og byer i Schweiz. Hen over eftermiddagen bød seminaret på præsentationer af Helga Zepp-LaRouche, formand for Schillerinstituttet; Hussein Askary, arabisk redaktør for EIR, Stockholm; Mehreteab Mulugeta Haile, generalkonsul for Etiopiens Føderale Demokratiske Republik; Marcello Vichi, forhenværende direktør for udenrigsafdelingen af Bonifica selskabet, forfatter af Transaqua-konceptet; Andrea Mangano, vicepræsident for det italienske selskab af vandingeniører og bidragsyder til Transaqua-skitseforslaget. Til det udvidede panel i anden del af seminaret, sluttede Mohammed Bila, Tchadsø-Bassin Kommissionen, og Ulf Sandmark, Schiller Instituttet Stockholm og Svensk-Syrisk Demokrati Komite sig til talerne. Seminaret blev ledet af Claudio Celani fra EIR’s europæiske center i Wiesbaden.

I sin hovedtale understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at det ikke vil være et akademisk seminar, men snarere en diskussion af det faktum, at i denne, for menneskeheden eksistentielle krise, der kommer til udtryk med flygtningekrisen, krigene, samt det finansielle sammenbrud, er der løsninger indenfor rækkevidde, som må realiseres nu. I kølvandet på terrorangrebene i Bruxelles i går, er det mere end passende at genkalde den tidligere amerikanske senator Bob Grahams udtalelse fra november sidste år, efter terrorangrebene i Paris, om, at var de klassificerede 28 sider fra den fælles kongres-undersøgelse af d.11. september blevet gjort offentlig tilgængelige dengang, kunne og ville sådanne grusomheder være blevet forhindret.

Det er hævet over enhver tvivl, at den russiske militærintervention i Syrien har ændret spillereglerne. Den har afsløret den rolle, som alliancen af Saudi-Arabien, Qatar, USA og Storbritannien har spillet til fordel for IS, og i særdeles Tyrkiet, hvis politikker er blevet hårdt angrebet af to tidligere amerikanske ambassadører i Ankara. EU aftalen med Tyrkiet om flygtninge er en parodi, der passer i det generelle billede af vestlige og amerikanske overtrædelser af menneskerettigheder, der netop er blevet udstillet i en kinesisk dokumentation. I modsætning til i Vesten, hvor der tales om vanvittige ”helikopterpenge” til redning af dets egne spekulative banker, repræsenterer det kinesiske ”et bælte, én vej’s” -initiativ et realøkonomisk tilbud om en win-win strategi. Det er ikke kun i Kinas, men også i andre landes interesse, at alene reel udvikling vil hjælpe med til at udtørre grundlaget for terrorisme. Enten arbejder Europa sammen med Rusland, Kina, Indien, Iran, Egypten og andre nationer om at lancere en Marshallplan for Syrien og Afrika, eller Europas bankerotte økonomi vil smadre mod muren, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

Idet Hussein Askary præsenterede EIR’s rapport om Verdenslandbroen i dens første arabiske oversættelse, påpegede han, at samtidig med at dette seminar afholdes i Frankfurt, finder også en anden begivenhed sted i dag i Yemen, hvor den arabiske rapport bliver præsenteret, under tilstand af fortsatte saudiske luftangreb på yemenitiske byer. Ideen om den Nye Silkevej omfatter mere end at bygge nogle få veje og jernbaner: det er et koncept om udviklingskorridorer, der forbedrer livet for 450 millioner mennesker i den sydvestasiatiske region, med Syrien som værende i centrum. Dette involverer megaprojekter for accelereret udvikling, finansieret af nationale udviklingsbanker, der er fri for forpligtelsen til betaling af gæld, som forlangt af de vestlige monetaristiske institutioner. I lighed med Egypten vil Syrien fokusere på industrielle zoner, transportkorridorer og landbrugsudvikling, med Kina til at vise vejen med dets massive infrastrukturelle engagement som for eksempel i Østafrika.

Den etiopiske generalkonsul fulgte op med en præsentation af sit lands økonomiske strategi, karakteriseret ved politikker, der har forbedret den gennemsnitlige indkomst pr. indbygger, forbedret befolkningens læse-/skrivefærdigheder og forbedret den offentlige sundhedstilstand siden 1990’erne. Med en påtænkt årlig vækst i BNP på 11 %, ønsker Etiopien at blive et middelindkomstland i 2025, hvilket skal muliggøres ved at give Etiopiere mulighed for at starte et landbrug eller en forretning til en pris, som mange i dag betaler til menneskesmuglere for at blive bragt til Europa som flygtninge. Etiopien selv, er det største flygtningeværtsland i Afrika, med 800.000 flygtninge fra Sydsudan, Somalia og Eritrea – et faktum, som ingen i Europa taler om. Etiopien vil blive transformeret fra at være eksportør af primær-produkter til en nation med højværdiproduktion og infrastruktur, og landets samarbejde med Rusland, Kina, Indien og Brasilien om togprojekter er vigtigt i den forbindelse.

Så gav Marcello Vichi en historisk gennemgang af diskussionen om Transaqua-projektet gennem de sidste 35 år, fra de første forslag blev præsenteret af Italiens Bonifica selskab 1982-1985, til afrikanske regeringer såvel som Forenede Nationer, der peger på en overførsel af vand fra den gigantiske Congoflod, som den eneste gangbare mulighed for genopfyldning af Tchadsøen. Forslaget er stort set blevet mødt med manglende interesse eller pessimisme med hensyn til dets chance for at blive realiseret, og det er blevet affejet som angiveligt ”storhedsvanvid”. Men den nylige flygtningestrøm har fået Europa til at gentænke dets syn på Transaqua-projektet, som altid har været mere en blot vand til Tchad – snarere en bredere ramme for udviklingen af hele Centralafrika. Det er den eneste mulighed, der kan tiltrække den unge generation af afrikansk arbejdskraft, og fjerne tilskyndelsen til at blive flygtning.

Andrea Mangano gav så en oversigt over, hvad Tchadsøen var for 35 år siden, og hvad den er i dag, hvor 90 % af dens vand er gået tabt. Den deler problemet med andre fordampende indlandssøer i verden, der ikke længere forsynes af deres traditionelle bifloder – Aralsøen, Urmia Søen, Tukanasøen, Det Døde Hav. Det eneste der kan forbedre situationen, er vandoverførsel og reduceret forbrug ved overrisling med nye teknologier. Dette gøres med Transaqua-projektet, der vil tappe 5 % af vandet fra de øvre bifloder til Congo floden, der ellers vil flyde ubenyttet ud i Atlanterhavet, med volumener 14 gange vandet i Tysklands største flod, Rhinen. Genfyldning af søen vil blive foretaget med konstruktion af infrastruktur, der vil give hele Centralafrika vandkraft, overrisling for landbrugskultur, og vandvejstransport, og lette regionen for dens nuværende situation som indlandsstat.

Mohammed Bila uddybede Transaqua-spørgsmålet i det udvidede panel, og påpegede den store igangværende migrationsbølge sydpå fra Chad siden den store tørke i 1973, under hvilken Chad søen allerede mistede 40 % af dens vand. Farmere og deres kvæg, der migrerede sydpå, vil ikke returnere til Chad, medmindre søen genfyldes, og medmindre terroristbevægelsen Boko Haram knuses.
Ulf Sandmark rapporterede om hans to besøg til Syrien i 2014 og 2015, hvorunder det blev indlysende klart, at rekonstruktionen af Syrien rent faktisk indebærer udvikling af hele den sydvestasiatiske region, og en integration i denne del af den Nye Silkevej – til hvilket syrerne stillede sig åbne. Og da ”Phoenix” genopbygningsplanen, udarbejdet tilbage i Stockholm, blev præsenteret for syrerne under det andet besøg, modtog den bred dækning i landets medier
Under diskussionen mellem tilhørerne og paneldeltagerne optrådte flere aspekter af, hvad der var blevet sagt i præsentationerne, rækkende fra den folkemorderiske tradition af det Britiske Imperium, der har saboteret reel udvikling i Afrika og Mellemøsten, håbløsheden af det monetaristiske system, og den forøgede trussel om termonuklear krig, hvis chancen for at skifte kurs i retning af samarbejde med den Nye Silkevej ikke tages af Europa og USA. Det er et kapløb med tiden, om at gå ind i et nyt paradigme, før det totale kollaps destruerer alting. Også – i modsætning til vestlig sort propaganda – at Kina ikke er engageret i Etiopien på grund af råmaterialer, eftersom Etiopien ikke har nogen, men i stedet er en reel partner for udvikling.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche insisterede gentagne gange under diskussionen på, at deltagerne i dette Frankfurt seminar tager en forpligtelse til at fyre op under de politiske beslutningstagere med hjem, for fundamentalt at få disse ting ændret, og at der nødvendigvis må skabes en virkelig massebevægelse for udvikling. Vichi kom med en passioneret appel om at være optimistisk, som et ”must” for folk, så at ting kan blive ændret. Et nyt og kreativt billede af mennesket, som det blev udviklet i den store italienske renæssance, er også påkrævet i dag, påpegede Celani. Sandmark insisterede også på, at den Nye Silkevej ikke kun er til studium for ingeniører, men er for alle og enhver ved at deltage i flere seminarer og lokalafdelingsmøder. Det første lokalafdelingsmøde om den arabisksprogede rapport i Yemen i dag, blev aktuelt præsideret over af landets ledende poet, tilføjede Askary.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Tak, og velkommen til. Alt imens dette seminar er helliget løsninger til verdens presserende problemer, kræver de dramatiske begivenheder naturligvis at jeg kommenterer dem. Og idet jeg berører disse forskellige eksistentielle trusler mod vor civilisation, ønsker jeg blot at sige, at løsningerne er indenfor rækkevidde, og afhænger helt og holdent af vore handlinger. Så dette er ikke noget akademisk seminar, men et udkald til virkeligt at gå over til at implementere, hvad vi vil præsentere i løbet af eftermiddagen.

Nu er det helt åbenbart vigtigt at korrigere nogle udlægninger af, hvordan visse udviklingsforløb bliver præsenteret for offentligheden. Og lad mig blot kort berøre, hvad der skete i Bruxelles i går, og som klart vedrører enhver – truslen fra terrorisme – hvilken nu præsenteres af de officielle regeringer, som at vi er nødt til at opgive datasikkerhed, at vi må have mere centralisering, at vi må opgiver friheder. Og jeg vil modsætte mig dette med henvisning til, at da angrebet på Charlie Hebdo fandt sted for godt et år siden i Paris, sagde tidligere formand for det amerikanske senats 9/11 kommission Sen. Bob Graham [D-FL], at hvis de famøse klassificerede 28 sider vedrørende Saudi Arabiens rolle i det oprindelige september 11.-angreb var blevet offentliggjort, ville Charlie Hebdo terrorangrebet ikke være sket.

I lyset af hvad jeg lige sagde, er også det faktum, at EU lægger alle sine æg i aftalen med Tyrkiet om at løse flygtningekrisen, totalt latterligt. Selv de neokonservative Eric Edelman og Morton Abramowitz, begge tidligere amerikanske ambassadører i Tyrkiet, sagde, at Erdogan-regeringen ikke fungerer, at det er et autoritært regime, der er ved at kollapse økonomisk, og som fører borgerkrig mod deres egen befolkning, nemlig Kurderne.

Så hvis EU derfor siger, at vi er nødt til at løse flygtningekrisen gennem en aftale med denne regering, mens FN højkommisæren allerede har sagt, at den massedeportation af flygtninge, der nu foregår, fra Grækenland til Tyrkiet er ulovlig. Og at det desuden ikke fungerer, idet der på førstedagen efter at denne aftale trådte i kraft, landede 1662 flygtninge i Grækenland, der søgte nye ruter, nye øer og især [ den syriske ] befolkning af flygtningene er meget bange for at blive sendt tilbage i armene på ISIS.

Nu har FN’s Menneskerettighedskommission samt Læger uden Grænser stoppet deres arbejde med flygtningene i protest, fordi de siger at det er uholdbart, og at det ikke fungerer. FN’s Menneskerettighedskommission sagde også, at de såkaldte ’hotspots’, der ifølge EU antages at løse flygtningekriser, er blevet gjort til detentionslejre. Familier har ikke tilladelse til at forlade deres indkvartering, der de facto er blevet gjort til fængsler.

’United Left’ i Spanien forfølger en kriminel retssag imod premierminister Rajoy på grund af hans forsvar af EU-Tyrkiet aftalen, idet man siger, at dette er en undladelse af at hjælpe, dette er deportation af mennesker, der har ret til, i det mindste, et check af, om de har ret til asyl, og dem kan man ikke bare sådan deportere.

Andre medier, som dem i Ungarn, der er under angreb af EU, siger, ”hvad skete der med de humanistiske rettigheder og værdier i den Europæiske Union?”

Vores præsident Joachim Gauck for indeværende på tur til Kina, hvorunder han bringer overtrædelser af menneskerettigheder i Kina op. Hvis det ikke var så tragisk for folk, der er ofre for EU’s politik, ville det være en farce.

Lad mig om Kina blot sige dette: Som svar på anklager om krænkelser af menneskerettigheder udsendte Kina deres egen rapport om overtrædelse af menneskerettigheder i USA, som går ind i fortsatte krige i Mellemøsten baseret på løgne og dræber med droner, og siger, at det i lyset af alt dette er latterligt, at USA stadig spiller rollen som dommer i menneskerettighedssager.

Så derfor, har man brug for at anlægge et andet synspunkt, end hvad, der præsenteres af medierne.

Den Nye Silkevej, som Schiller Instituttet har ført kampagne for igennem 25 år som vores svar på Sovjetunionens kollaps, er en komplet anderledes model. Den er baseret på, hvad præsiden Xi Jinping kalder ”win-win” politik: at lande samarbejder om fælles projekter på basis af indbyrdes interesse, komplet respekt for andre landes suverænitet. Naturligvis forfølger Kina det i sin egen interesse, men tilvejebringer så hvad der også er i de deltagende landes interesse.

Nu sagde Udenrigsminister Wang Yi fornyligt, at ”den Nye Silkevej er Kinas idé, men at den skaber muligheder for hele verden.” Og det er afgjort den nye model for relationer mellem alle lande. For indeværende går den kinesiske intra-asiatiske handel frem med høje vækstrater. Imidlertid lider relationerne med Europa og USA, ikke på grund af Kina, men på grund af den økonomiske og finansielle tumult indenfor EU og USA. Men det kinesiske lederskabs respons herpå er, at vende krisen til en mulighed ved at fremme den interne kinesiske økonomi til det næste kvalitative spring gennem innovation og skabelse af nye industrier samt opgradering af det teknologiske niveau af arbejdsstyrken, og ved den nyligt afsluttede Nationale Folkekongres, hvor man præsenterede den 13. femårsplan, brugte premierminister Li Keqiang ordet ”innovation” 61 gange i hans tale. Han sagde, at hans sigte er at vende Kina fra at være en kvantitets-forhandler til at være en kvalitets-forhandler, grundlæggende at gøre Kina til en videns-intensiv økonomi. Og hvis man for eksempel ser på et af kinesernes eksport-flagskibe, dets højhastighedstog, har Kina bygget 125 km. normal jernbane, men omkring 20.000 km. hurtigtog. De ønsker at have 50.000 km hurtigtog i år 2025, og vil forbinde hver større by i Kina med hurtigtogs-systemet.

Jeg kan fortælle jer, at jeg rejste med hurtigtog på forskellige måder i Kina: Disse tog kører med omtrent 310 km/timen, de løber meget jævnt, de ryster ikke, man hører ingenting. Det er en excellent teknologi, og det er et af Kinas eksport-flagskibe.

Så konceptet med bygningen af Ét bælte, én vej, hvilket i Asien også kaldes den ”asiatiske konnektivitet” er særdeles meget attraktivt. Det betyder grundlæggende særdeles høj teknologi. Wu Ji, som er direktør for CAS – det Nationale Rum Videnskabs Center, har netop sagt ”rumvidenskab er uadskilleligt fra Kina innovationsdrevne udvikling. Hvis Kina ønsker at være en stærk global nation, må det ikke alene forfølge sine egne umiddelbare interesser, det må også bidrage til menneskeheden. Kun på denne måde kan Kina opnå virkelig respekt i verden.”

Hvor avanceret det kinesiske rumprogram er, kan man for eksempel se af det faktum, Kinas næste månemission til næste år vil gå til bagsiden af månen, hvilket betyder at landingsfartøjer og månebiler vil lande der, hvilket aldrig har været gjort før. Og bagsiden af månen vil give et nyt vindue til rummet, fordi man der, fri for udstråling og støj fra Jorden, på en meget konkret måde kan udvikle en langt bedre forståelse af, hvad der foregår i det nære univers.

Nu, for bare to uger, eller 10 dage, siden, kom jeg tilbage efter en stor konference i New Delhi. Det var Raisina Dialogen, der nu overgår til at blive en årlig konference organiseret af den indiske regering, og der, kan jeg forsikre for, ønskede mange af talerne fra asiatiske lande, fungerende udenrigsministre, tidligere præsidenter, ledere af førende institutioner, alle ønskede de integration med Ét bælte, én vej – politikken, fordi de har indset, hvad den Nye Silkevej betyder for lande som Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan, at det indebærer, at de kan importere den kinesiske model for økonomisk udvikling, og gentage hvad Kina har gjort, med den rivende økonomiske udvikling, de har gennemgået i de seneste 40 år, i særdeleshed i de sidste 25 år.

Schiller Instituttet foreslog allerede for nogle år siden, nemlig i 2012, at den eneste måde hvorpå man stopper terrorisme, og nu i de seneste år, hvorpå man stopper flygtningekrisen, er ved at bringe udvikling til Sydvestasien, til Afrika. Fordi kun hvis man har et omfattende udviklingsprogram for de lande, der er blevet destrueret af krig eller mangel på udvikling, som det er tilfældet i Afrika, kun hvis metoden med den Nye Silkevej tages i anvendelse for Mellemøsten og for Afrika, kan disse problemer løses. Og dette er nu på bordet.

Jeg tror, at med besøget af præsident Xi Jinping i Teheran for fire eller fem uger siden, hvor han præsenterede den Nye Silkevej. Kort efter hans besøg ankom det første Silkevejstog fra Yiwu, i Kina, til Teheran med 32 containere, tror jeg og Xi Jinping sagde, at den Nye Silkevej er et koncept, der kan udvides til at omfatte hele den Sydvestasiatiske region. Irans præsident Rouhani sagde umiddelbart, at Iran ønsker et samarbejde. Ved denne konference i New Dehli, hvor jeg deltog, sagde den tidligere Afghanske præsident Karzai, at Afghanistan må blive et knudepunkt i den Nye Silkevej, og forbinde Asien med Europa, og andre ledende talere var inde på det samme.

Så dette var, hvad jeg til at begynde med, ønskede at sige.

15. marts 2016 – EU-topmødet har droppet klimaforandringer på sin dagsorden pga. flygtningekrisen. Aftalen om klimaforandringer fra Paris sidste december, skulle efter planen have været drøftet på todages-topmødet, der begynder den 17. marts.

En embedsperson sagde, at præsident for EU-Rådet Donald Tusk, som vil præsidere topmødeforhandlingerne, »ikke ønskede en [klima] diskussion«. Dette har formentlig mindre at gøre med hans bekymring for flygtninge end det faktum, at Polen producerer meget af sin elektricitet fra kul.

Avisen The Guardian rapporterer, at EU-kommissionen ikke var varm på at indlede diskussionen om klimaforandringer, der kræver yderligere reduktion af ’drivhusgasser’, af frygt for, at dette skulle blive til endnu et konfliktspørgsmål blandt de 28 EU-nationer.

Det er uvist, hvordan dette vil påvirke ratificeringen af Paris-aftalen, der begynder i New York i næste måned.

Den franske miljøminister Ségolène Royal har tidligere på måneden sagt, at Paris-aftalen ville være på dagordenen for EU-topmødet den 17.-18. marts og tilføjede, at den franske præsident François Hollande ville søge støtte fra sine lederkolleger.

Kommissionen havde ingen kommentar mandag, men har sagt, den vil være repræsenteret ved mødet i New York og har opfordret regeringer til at ratificere aftalen hurtigt.

Se også: vores dossier om Klimaforandringer/Mødet i Paris: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/category/nyheder/stop-den-groenne-kult/klimakonf-paris-2015/

14. marts 2016 – EU’s totalt manglende indsats for rent faktisk at gøre noget som helst ved flygtningekrisen er i færd med at forvandle Grækenland til et katastrofeområde i lighed med den Tredje Verden.

14.000 flygtninge er nu strandet i og omkring den i forvejen overbefolkede Idomeni-lejr på Grækenlands grænse til Den Tidligere Jugoslaviske Republik Makedonien (F.Y.R.O.M.), siger en talsmand for FN’s Flygtningehøjkommissariat (UNHCR).

»Vi ser nu menneskelig elendighed, når det er værst, i Europa. Disse forhold her på stedet i Idomeni er ganske enkelt umulige at leve under«, sagde den regionale talsmand for UNHCR, Babar Baloch. »Man kan simpelt hen ikke forestille sig, hvor slemt, det kan blive, og hver dag kommer der mere regn, og folk lider. Vi i UNHCR håber, at de græske myndigheder handler hurtigt … for, at blive her bare et minut længere er ikke en mulighed. Disse mennesker kan ikke holdes her ret længe under disse inhumane omstændigheder. De har brug for, at man tilbyder dem en vej ud af det her, og de er desperate. Man ser børn, der ryster af kulde, der går barfodet rundt på vejen her, i denne elendighed. Det overgår simpelt hen enhver forestilling.«

Der er henved 12.000 mennesker i lejren. NGO’er siger, at yderligere 2.000 andre mennesker må overleve på marker uden for lejren. De sanitære forhold har nået et katastrofalt, uhygiejnisk niveau, hvor dusinvis af børn er kommet på hospitalet for vejrtrækningsproblemer og et udvalg af virusser.

Den græske regering, der er i pengenød, sagde, at den håber inden for en uge at kunne overføre flygtningene til de andre modtagelsescentre. Chefen for den græske centralbank, Yannis Stournaras, sagde i søndags, at regeringen har forudset at bruge 600 mio. euro på flygtningekrisen. Dette beløb kunne hurtigt blive større, hvis Grækenland ender med at være vært for alle de 41.000 flygtninge, der er strandet dér.

»Dette estimat var baseret på den antagelse, at Grækenland blot skulle være transitnation, men hvis vi nu i stedet skal huse et stort antal flygtninge, må dette estimat revideres«, sagde Stournaras i går til den italienske avis Il Sole 24 Ore.

Organisationen for Økonomisk Samarbejde og Udvikling (OECD) sagde i sidste uge, at Grækenland ville behøve hjælp til at håndtere flygtningesituationen.

Alt imens Grækenland ikke modtager flere penge for at hjælpe med at klare flygtningekrisen, så kræver IMF, Den europæiske Union og ECB, at landet gennemfører flere nedskæringer, især af det græske pensionssystem, for at kunne betale sine kreditorer (bankerne). Selv Stournaras, der er kendt for at være en ’ja-mand’ for kreditorerne, klagede over, at kreditorerne ikke har holdt deres løfte om gældssanering. »Dette løfte er endnu ikke blevet opfyldt«, sagde centralbankieren. »Vi håber, at vore partnere og IMF vil være i stand til at opfylde løftet, for det var ikke blot et løfte, men en aftale.«

Foto/RT-Video: Flygtninge kæmper mod regnen i Idomeni-lejren, mens Makedonien fuldstændigt lukker grænsen, 9. marts.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

13. marts 2016 – I alle tre valg til forbundsdagen i dag (Rheinland-Pfalz, Baden-Württemberg, Sachsen-Anhalt), kom de stærke stemmeresultater til det ekstreme højrefløjsparti Alternativ for Tyskland (AfD) ikke som en overraskelse – de etablerede mediers anti-flygtningepropaganda er faldet som en appelsin i deres turban. AfD kom ind på en tredjeplads i Rheinland-Pfalz og Baden-Württemberg, med hhv. 11 % og 14 %, og endda på andenpladsen i Sachsen-Anhalt med 22 %, og denne udvikling gør de fortsatte koalitionsregeringer i alle tre forbundsstater umulige, fordi koalitionerne (SPD-Grønne i Rheinland-Pfalz, Grønne-SPD i Baden-Württemberg, CDU-SPD i Sachsen-Anhalt) tabte deres flertal i delstatsparlamentet, landdagen (Landtag). Alt imens en stor koalition med SPD og CDU stadig er mulig i Rheinland-Pfalz, så vil det afgjort kun blive muligt med en treparti-kombination i de to andre delstater – med AfD i oppositionen i alle tre stater, eftersom ingen af de andre partier ønsker en koalition med dem. Det faktum, at De Grønne kom ud som det stærkeste parti i Baden-Württemberg og lod både CDU og SPD langt tilbage, er i sig selv skamfuldt for det tyske, politiske system.

Det er værd at bemærke, at CDU, under anførsel af politikere i de tre stater, der distancerede sig fra deres egen kanslers holdning i flygtningespørgsmålet, mistede stemmer, i Baden-Württemberg med det meget dramatiske -12 %. Men det vil ikke rigtigt komme kansler Angela Merkel til gode, som har tabt kostbar tid for at løse flygtningekrisen med flere strategiske fejltagelser: med sin fortsatte pro-euro holdning, som er loyal over for den mislykkede, transatlantiske monetarisme, har hun satset sine jetoner på en illusorisk »europæisk løsning« på flygtningekrisen i næsten et helt år nu, og har således forpasset chancen for et politisk skift til fordel for Tysklands virkelige nationale interesse. Et sådant politisk skift ville have omfattet, at man forlod Atlanticisme og NATO-konfrontationisme, til fordel for et klart »ja« til Den Nye Silkevej og BRIKS; et sådant skift ville have omfattet at stoppe sanktionerne mod Rusland og at genoplive samarbejde med russerne, der ville have bidraget til en reel forbedring af situationen i Syrien og Ukraine. Og desuden har Merkel forsømt at skrotte sin finansminister Wolfgang Schäubles rigide politik med det »sorte nul« på budgettets bundlinje, der har været en hjælp til de private banker, men har blokeret for forbundsstaternes indgriben for at mobilisere den tyske økonomi og har drevet kommuner ud i voldsom gæld. Alt dette har været til stor ulempe for de gennemsnitlige tyske borgere og vælgere, af hvilke flere og flere er blevet fremmedgjort over for de etablerede partier og i stigende grad er blevet sofavælgere i løbet af de seneste år. Mange af disse er nu blevet en del af vælgerskaren for AfD, der ikke har noget perspektiv i deres politiske program, men kun raseri mod de etablerede partier og had mod flygtningene og andre udlændinge.

Det står endnu uvist hen, om Merkel kan fortsætte som formand for CDU og partiets kansler, og om hun kan fortsætte sit kandidatur i det nationale valg til parlamentet (Bundestag) i september 2017. Hendes modstandere internt i partiet har givet Merkel et ultimatum mht. dagene umiddelbart efter de tre valg ’Supersøndag’, som, sammen med den polarisering, som mediepropagandaen har båret ved til, vil øge den politiske ustabilitet i Tyskland, inklusive udbrud af politisk vold mellem tilhængere af »valgets vinder AfD« og dettes modstandere.

Selv om man løber mere og mere tør for muligheder, så kunne Merkel stadig vende tingene omkring og bevæge Tyskland tilbage til tillid til fremtiden, men for at gøre dette, ville hun være nødsaget til at fyre sine rådgivere og i stedet begynde at lytte til Helga Zepp-LaRouche, der gentagent har krævet et drastisk paradigmeskift i tysk politik, mod en kurs for Den Nye Silkevej.

»Dette er en uforbeholden katastrofe«, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche, formand for partiet Borgerrettighedsbevægelsen Solidaritet (BüSo) i Tyskland. »AfD er et beskidt, afskyeligt fænomen. Det var sådan, det skete i 1930’erne«, sagde hun og bemærkede ligeledes, at sådanne ekstreme højrefløjspartier eller endda fascistiske partier eksisterer over hele Europa. Denne fare, sagde hun, er resultatet af den fejlslagne politik i Europa mht. både flygtningekrisen og den økonomiske krise, og markerer slutningen på EU, der ikke længere har nogen som helst enhed.

13. marts 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Valgene i tre tyske forbundsstater søndag resulterede i en enorm kindhest til kansler Angela Merkel, iflg. meningsmålinger fra valgstederne, med det ekstreme højrefløjsparti Alternativ for Tyskland (AfD), der bygger på at fremme anti-flygtningehysteri, der kaprede 11 % og 12,5 % i hhv. Baden-Württemberg og Rheinland-Pfalz i vest, og ikke mindre end 23 % i staten Sachsen-Anhalt i øst. »Dette er en uforbeholden katastrofe«, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche, formand for partiet Borgerrettighedsbevægelsen Solidaritet (BüSo) i Tyskland. »AfD er et beskidt, afskyeligt fænomen. Det var sådan, det skete i 1930’erne«, sagde hun og bemærkede ligeledes, at sådanne ekstreme højrefløjspartier eller endda fascistiske partier eksisterer over hele Europa. Denne fare, sagde hun, er resultatet af den fejlslagne politik i Europa mht. både flygtningekrisen og den økonomiske krise, og markerer slutningen på EU, der ikke længere har nogen som helst enhed.

Ledende økonomiske og politiske personer i hele Europa, men i særdeleshed i Tyskland, har åbenlyst advaret om, at den sindssyge politik, der i sidste uge blev annonceret af Den europæiske Centralbanks, ECB’s, præsident Mario Draghi, både er et tegn på total desperation og en garanti for et totalt kollaps i allernærmeste fremtid. Draghis 33 % ’s forøgelse af den allerede massive pengetrykning under ’kvantitativ lempelse’, op til 80 mia. euro om måneden, parret med lavere negative rentesatser, er, som Zepp-LaRouche sagde i sidste uge, simpelt hen mere af den samme medicin, der forårsagede sygdommen. Hele det transatlantiske finanssystem er håbløst bankerot, og intet som helst, undtagen en politik for genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling for at lukke »for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned«-bankerne ned og afskrive den spekulative gæld, kan forhindre et ukontrolleret kollaps.

I USA er fascismens realitet endelig ved at blive tvunget ind i offentlighedens bevidsthed af den farlige hofnar Donald Trump. Men, som Tim Stanley fra det britiske Telegraph skrev i dag, alt imens det er sandt, at Trump gør fremstød for ulovlig og hadefuld demagogi: »Han tog ikke Amerika i krig i Irak på baggrund af usaglige beviser, etablerede Guantanamo i modstrid med menneskerettighedslove eller autoriserede tortur af fjendtlige kæmpere, stod i spidsen for den gigantiske NSA-operation med indsamling af data, lancerede en beskidt krig med droneangreb mod både terrorister og dem, der havde det uheld at leve i deres nærhed, underminerede den religiøse frihed hos ansatte, der ikke ønsker at støtte deres arbejderes sexliv, underkendte staternes ønsker mht. giftermål, tvang borgere til at købe sundhedsprodukter eller deporterede tusinder af illegale immigranter ved aggressivt at genne dem sammen.« Alt imens dette tydeligvis er en anklage mod Obama, så er det Trumps sandsynlige demokratiske modstander Hillary Clinton, der fører valgkampagne på baggrund af dette generalieblad med mord og kaos.

Hvor efterlader dette så USA? En ægte revolution af tankegangen kræves af dets borgere, omgående, hvis verden skal undfly det fremstormende helvede med global krig og økonomisk kaos. Lykkeligvis har Kina og Rusland søsat en redningsflåde og en mission for menneskeheden gennem BRIKS, Den Nye Silkevej, et internationalt rumprogram, en tilbagevenden til klassisk kultur, og »win-win«-relationer nationerne imellem.

Schiller Instituttets konference i Manhattan den 7. april må bringe verden sammen på baggrund af disse principper. Det er den opgave, som denne organisation kan og må gennemføre.

12. marts 2016 – Den tyske minister for udvikling Gerd Müller er i stigende grad ved at blive utålmodig over EU’s manglende forpligtelse over for at gøre noget som helst for de syriske flygtninge. I et interview med Münchner Merkur kritiserede han det faktum, at hverken EU’s betaling af 3 mia. euro til Tyrkiet, der var blevet lovet for allerede fire måneder siden, eller omfordelingen af 160.000 flygtninge fra Italien og Grækenland til resten af Europa, der også blev besluttet af EU for fire måneder siden, var kommet et skridt videre. Müller sagde, at man under alle omstændigheder er alt for besat af at gøre fremskridt med Tyrkiet, når det haster med at skaffe omgående nødhjælp på stedet til flygtninge i Syrien, og i Jordan, Libanon og Irak.

Det kan ikke tolereres, at Libanon kollapser under vægten af sine 1,4 million flygtninge, sagde Müller; omgående hjælp i meget stor skala ville være muligt, hvis EU bevilger 10 mia. euro til det. Müller tilføjede, at det ikke kan passe, at pengene er der til at gennemføre bank-bailout, altså bankredning, men ikke til at redde flygtninges liv, og EU må omdirigere midler fra sit budget til nødhjælp: »Med 15 mia. euro fra denne omdirigering kunne vi skabe hjem, skoler, sundhedsklinikker og jobs i de forskellige kriseområder. Det skulle være muligt at gøre dette, når man tager i betragtning, at vi brugte mange gange dette beløb til en bail-out af det græske banksystem i sammenhæng med finanskrisen.«

Hvis man ser på den nordirakiske by Dohuk, der har et indbyggertal på 1,4 mio., ligesom München, men som har taget yderligere 800.000 flygtninge ind, så får man en idé om, hvor store problemerne er der, sagde Müller. Han advarede desuden om en stor, humanitær katastrofe på Balkan, hvor ti tusindvis af flygtninge, mange af dem børn, er strandet der i regnen og mudderet, mellem pigtrådshegnene.

Foto: Hele denne vinter har flygtninge på Balkan, herunder mange børn, måttet leve under særdeles sundhedsfarlige vilkår, udsat for elementerne, og det er ikke slut endnu. Her, fra Kroatien.

Vi står på randen af det totale sammenbrud, og det er absolut utilgiveligt, at regeringerne giver mulighed for, at dette system, der er baseret på bedrageriske intriger og fusk, kan opretholdes så meget som en dag længere. Storspekulanternes kasinoøkonomi må øjeblikkeligt lukkes ned gennem en streng Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling! Der findes en løsning, men den kræver, at man på dramatisk vis går bort fra den nuværende, neoliberale model og genindfører realøkonomi og økonomisk genopbygning.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Engelsk udskrift: Matthew Ogden kommenterer Helga Zepp-LaRouches besøg og tale i Indien om behovet for en Marshallplan/Silkevej i Sydvestasien; Jeffrey Steinberg giver os Lyndon LaRouches meget skarpe kommentar om EU’s korrupte aftale med Tyrkiets Erdogan om mod betaling at tage syriske flygtninge tilbage, og Jason Ross fra LPAC Videnskabsteam taler om Gottfried Leibniz og nødvendigheden af kreativ nytænkning, som Kina i dag legemliggør.

WE NEED THE NEW SILK ROAD NOW FOR ALL OF MANKIND! –
International Webcast for March 11, 2016

MATTHEW OGDEN: Good afternoon. It’s March 11, 2016. My name
is Matthew Ogden, and you’re joining us for our weekly Friday
night broadcast from LaRouche PAC.com. I am joined in the studio
today by Jason Ross from the LaRouche PAC Science Team and Mr.
Jeff Steinberg from {Executive Intelligence Review}, and the
three of us had the opportunity to have an extensive discussion
with both Mr. LaRouche and also Helga Zepp-LaRouche earlier
today.
Now, as you know, Helga Zepp-LaRouche has just recently
returned from an extraordinary trip that she took to India. This
is the first time that either one of the LaRouches has been to
India since I think at least 2003; so this was a very important
trip, and during that visit to India, Helga was a featured
speaker on one of the keynote panels at a discussion in New Delhi
called the Raisina Dialogue Forum. This was a major conference
which included international representation, former prime
ministers, former heads of state, finance ministers, elected
parliamentarians, and so forth.
Now during that speech, Helga LaRouche focused her remarks
on the necessity for a new win-win, Marshall Plan development
project for the Middle East and North Africa. She remarked that,
in the wake of Xi Jinping’s visit to Iran, to Saudi Arabia, and
to Egypt where he brought the development vision of the Chinese
New Silk Road, that now was the time to adopt what she’s been
calling for, for years: which is, a New Marshall Plan to develop
that region of the world and to create a new era of peace and
prosperity for a region of the world that has suffered so much
under perpetual war, and a total breakdown of society.
Now this is very relevant, because obviously, as a
representative of the Schiller Institute from Germany, Helga
LaRouche was speaking directly from the standpoint of the
perspective of a European, who is witnessing the unprecedented
refugee crisis of millions and millions of refugees fleeing the
Middle East and North Africa, and flooding into Europe.
Our institutional question for this week actually focusses
directly on that topic, and what I’m going to do is read the
institutional question, and then give Jeff Steinberg and
opportunity to go through, both specifically and more in general,
what both Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche’s remarks were concerning this
question, and some broader questions as well.
So the question is as follows:

“Mr. LaRouche, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has blamed

European nations for
unilaterally shutting the Balkan route for migrants. She said
that this has put Greece in a very difficult situation, and such
decisions should be taken by the whole of the EU. Austria,
Slovenia, Croatia, and non-EU member states — Serbia and
Macedonia — have all acted to stem the migrant flow. The
European Union and Turkey — from which migrants reach Greece —
have set out a plan to ease the crisis from their perspective.
Under the proposals that have been hammered out at a summit that
occurred in Brussels on Monday, but still to be finalized, all
migrants arriving in Greece from Turkey, would be sent back. For
each Syrian returned, a Syrian in Turkey would be resettled in
the EU. European Council President Donald Tusk has said that the
plan would spell the end of ‘irregular migration to Europe.’ What
is your view on the EU’s new migrant policy?”

So, Jeff.

JEFFREY STEINBERG: To put it very mildly, Mr. LaRouche was
extremely blunt. You’ve got to start from the standpoint that
this is a rotten deal; it’s not going to work. And furthermore,
that nobody has any business making any kind of backroom deal
with President Erdogan of Turkey. Here’s somebody who has been a
principal sponsor of the jihadist terrorism, including the
Islamic State and the Nusra Front; who has robbed his country
blind; he’s one of the most notorious thieves on the planet. He’s
killed his own people. He shut down the entire opposition
newspaper, and, quite frankly, he’s carried out a 6 billion euro
extortion operation against the European Union.
So the problem, in fact the disease that we’re dealing with,
is the tendency that’s rampant in the entire trans-Atlantic
world, to make these kinds of rotten deals with people who have
no business being allowed to remain in power. You have an entire
trans-Atlantic system that was really, in effect, characterized
this week by two developments. Number One: this rotten deal with
Erdogan, which should never be allowed to happen. And number two,
by the announcement by the European Central Bank head, Mario
Draghi, that the ECB was going to replicate the insane policies
that were carried out in the United States under the Quantitative
Easing, bail-out, and Dodd-Frank bill, all of which are
universally known to have been complete and total failures. So,
Draghi announced zero interest rates, and announced that the QE
policy of the ECB would be extended up to $80 billion euro a
month, and furthermore, that the ECB would begin purchasing
absolutely worthless private sector bonds to keep what one
columnist called the “zombie banks” in business.
Now, there’s been an absolute revolt in Germany, in
particular, against this Draghi policy, because the net effect is
that, with zero interest rates, people are going to be pulling
their money out of the actual savings banks and regional
commercial banks, through which all of the lending into the real
economy takes place. And as the result of that, you’re going to
see rampant bankruptcies on top of the already advanced complete
breakdown of the European real economy. All of the European
too-big-to-fail banks are already hopelessly bankrupt.
So you’ve got these two examples of absolute policy
insanity, of attempting to operate and make compromises and
“reforms,” within a system that is already dead. As Mr. LaRouche
said, you don’t make deals with dead people; there’s nothing in
it for you. There’s no future in it. Yet that’s exactly what
we’re seeing as the dominant phenomenon throughout the
trans-Atlantic region.
Now the fact of the matter is that there are viable
solutions. In the case of the United States, you could just
simply say, the Wall Street debt is unpayable, and we’re going to
just simply cancel it, and we’re going to go back to the
traditional American, Hamiltonian credit system, and we’re going
to just simply let Wall Street sink, period. It’s already
bankrupt. The people involved in it are absolutely correct —
they should have been frog-marched off to jail a long time ago.
So, by and large, when you talk to people in the political
system at a relatively high level, you’re dealing with a system
that is absolutely paralyzed with fear, and overwhelmed by
corruption. Because you press the issue, and you’ll get
widespread admission that the system is doomed, we’re headed for
another blow-out far worse than 2008; it could happen any moment
now. It could happen Monday morning when you wake up. And
furthermore, you could cancel this rotten debt, wipe out those
cancerous aspects of the whole system, and you could go ahead to
rebuild, but based on a completely different set of premises.
Same thing with the arrangement with Turkey. There’s no
grounds whatsoever for paying 6 billion euros in extortion,
knowing that a character like Erdogan is going to come back again
and again and demand more, and will continue to threaten to
unleash massive waves of migration, while at the same time Turkey
is trying to sabotage the efforts of Lavrov and Kerry to bring an
end to this five-year monstrosity of a war that’s been going on
inside Syria.
So, if you operate within a dead system, you are doomed to
go down with it. Now there are things that are working in the
world today. Putin is functioning. Putin is carrying out very
effective flanking operations in Syria. China is functioning, and
is in fact functioning at a much higher level from the standpoint
of real economic growth. And China is willing to invest in real
physical economic growth all across Eurasia, down into Africa,
into Latin America. And furthermore, China is leading a global
science driver policy. The plans to actually land an orbiter on
the dark side of the Moon have been discussed frequently in
recent weeks on this broadcast. China is now the leading R&D
nation on the planet, and they embody the principle of human
creativity. They’re not trying to draw deductive, pragmatic,
practical conclusions from policies that have failed. You can
never derive success by trying to scrutinize and analyze
systematic failure. You need human creativity, and you see that
in China.
Increasingly, there are nations that are grouping around
these opportunities that are posed for real development, centered
around China. Russia has taken certain measures to assure that
Russia survives, and that Russia has the military and material
resources to be able to conduct the kind of flanking operations
that may very well save Syria and the Middle East, and major
parts of Africa, from the genocidal destruction that will occur
if the existing trans-Atlantic forces, led by the British Empire
and stooges that they’ve got at their disposal like President
Obama, with his Dodd-Frank madness; like Mario Draghi; like the
corrupt Erdogan.
So, anytime that there’s an offer to make a rotten deal with
a rotten SOB like Erdogan, the obvious answer should be, run in
the other direction. Don’t do it. And so, in response to the
question that’s been posed, this is a rotten deal that is doomed
to failure, but it’s typical of a much larger problem, which is
the tendency to be stuck thinking inside the deductive box when
the only avenue for survival for mankind is to think creatively,
and align with those people who’ve demonstrated that they’ve got
a viable commitment to the future.
You find that in China. You find that in many of the actions
taken by Putin in Russia, and it’s pretty scarce everywhere else.
And it’s certainly virtually nonexistent in the entire
trans-Atlantic region.

        OGDEN: Thank you very much, Jeff. I also neglected to
mention in my remarks in the beginning that, coinciding with
Helga’s trip to India and these very important developments with
Xi Jinping’s visit to the Middle East. The Arabic version of the
EIR Special Report, “The New Silk Road Becomes the New
Land-Bridge,” which was available in English and also has been
translated into Chinese; has now been translated into Arabic. And
I think Helga LaRouche’s foreword or preface to that will put it
very appropriately; that “either this is an extraordinary
coincidence or an act of divine intervention” that this would be
available at a time like this, when this is precisely what you
need. This sort of vision for a new Marshall Plan, the World
Land-Bridge, to bring development to this part of the world which
is in such dire need of it.
Now, as Jeff summarized quite succinctly, what Mr.
LaRouche’s focus in our discussion was, is that we are on the
edge of a total implosion of the trans-Atlantic system. That you
have a community of nations which is, in its present form, dead,
because of its own behavior; it has brought this upon itself. On
the other hand, you have nations such as China and others, who
are engaged in a process of real physical economic progress. And
this was a willful choice that was made by China to invest in
exactly the types of things that would create a future potential
of growth, scientific development and otherwise. So, Mr.
LaRouche’s question was, why would you associate yourself with a
dead system, when the alternative is immediately at hand?
So, Mr. LaRouche had a much more developed idea, however, of
what it is that brings success to a nation and to the human race
in general. And he was very specific to say that real creativity
is never a replication of the past; real creativity depends on
new ideas that are new in a very real sense. That creativity is
always {ad novo}, he said; and it’s not achieved through the
reform of a bad system. But it is only achieved through the
introduction of an entirely new principle which is truly new. He
said, Einstein is a good example of this; the personality of
Brunelleschi is an ideal example of this. But the goal is never
to deduce what the solution to a crisis must be from some sort of
precedent; but rather, to ask the question, “What is it that we
actually wish to accomplish for the future of mankind?” And, with
that question in mind, therefore, what must be done? What must be
done to achieve that future? And we tend to fail to ask that
question, and we get too consumed by the details of the present;
when we should be thinking from a total global standpoint about
what we wish to achieve in the future.
Now, I think at a time like now, where it’s very clear that
the nations of Europe and the United States are imploding,
socially, economically, politically; what brought us to this
point? But also, more significantly, what must be done to save
civilization now? And we discussed, I think very appropriately,
that when a nation loses its {raison d’etre}, when a nation loses
its mission, it tends to implode and fall in upon itself. And we
can learn a lot from the mission that China has, and the
optimistic vision of the future which is shared by all of its
citizens. So, with that said, I would like to invite Jason to
come to the podium. As you know, Jason Ross has been conducting a
many-part series of presentations, classes on the LaRouche PAC
website on the unique genius of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz; this
is a series which will continue. But I would like to invite him
to the podium now.

JASON ROSS: Well, this year, 2016, is the 300th anniversary
of Leibniz’s death in 1716. Leibniz lived from 1646 to 1716. And
a number of the disputes that he was in, the discoveries that he
made, are very freshly relevant for us today. Both historically
from the standpoint of understanding where we came from, and
because there are disputes that continue to the present. Disputes
over the nature of the purpose of the nation, disputes over the
nature of the Universe, disputes over the nature of mankind.
To discuss one of those, I’d like to frame it by contrasting
the views of Gottfried Leibniz and Isaac Newton. Many people are
probably familiar, certainly if you’ve been watching this
website, with the concept of the dispute over the calculus. That
Leibniz plagiarized the calculus from Newton, as Newton and his
friends said; no. Did Newton steal the calculus from Leibniz, who
invented it first? Let’s leave that aside; that’s really not at
issue for what I want to talk about today. Let’s consider the
dispute that was represented between the British outlook of
Newton and the outlook of Leibniz in terms of the purpose for
humanity, as seen in their views of creation and of the Universe
as a whole. In the very last years of Leibniz’s life, he was
engaged in a dispute via letters with a follower of Isaac Newton,
Samuel Clarke. And in this discussion, one of the primary topics
that came up was the basis of considering God to be great. On
this, the two differed in a very fundamental way. Newton, via
Clarke, said that God’s greatness came from his power; Leibniz,
while not disputing that, said that God’s wisdom is also one of
His perfections, and that in leaving this out, you have a total
misunderstanding about God.
Now, I’m not going to make a theological point about this
today. I want to look at this in terms of the existence of the
nation-state. While Newton said that because God can do anything,
that shows how wonderful He is; and while this same outlook — a
religious outlook — was applied to man and society by John Locke
and Thomas Hobbes, who said that a powerful ruler of society
really exists for himself, and that people form a society through
a compact to not infringe upon each other, not with the idea to
have a mission together, but simply to get along as a way of
putting under control the impulses of people to steal from each
other and this sort of thing. So, on the one side, you have the
notion that the state exists, the ruler exists and is justified
in existing to maintain power; that that is the basis of
legitimacy of a ruler — holding power. It’s a somewhat circular
reason.
On the other side, you have Leibniz, who — in keeping with
his view of God being worth reverencing, respecting, loving
because of His wisdom; and having chosen in making the Universe,
to make it the best of all possible universes that could be
created. Leibniz applies that idea as well to society; saying
that the justification, the legitimacy for a ruler for a nation,
lies in how it is creating a happy society. And how it is imbuing
its people with wisdom, and developing science and economy to
create a more productive and a happier future. Happiness is an
important thing.
So, if you consider that today, and you look at — Matt had
brought up where is the {raison d’etre}; what is the
justification for the United States, for example, right now? What
is our {raison d’etre} right now under Obama? We don’t have one.
Obama’s destruction of the space program, which as a policy
better encapsulates an attack on the future than anything you can
imagine, has left us without a future in the stars; contrasted
with other nations, being led by China, with a serious,
comprehensive, really breath-taking mission of advancements that
they have been making towards reaching out into the heavens, and
the potential of developing new scientific breakthroughs in that
way.
So, as Jeff and Matt said, LaRouche, in the discussion that
we had with him today, was stressing that, in creating the
future, it is made {de novo}; it isn’t something we deduce from
the past, although we can certainly learn from the past. The
essential characteristic is making something where nothing of
that sort existed before. He had singled out Brunelleschi and
Einstein in this regard. Einstein, who made breakthroughs
scientifically that did not follow from, or result from, the
thoughts of his day; but rather, contradicted and overthrew them.
This is an example of the kind of thinking that’s necessary. In
the United States in our most recent history, the time under the
Apollo program, as launched in its strength by Kennedy to go to
the Moon and back; this was in recent times, probably the most
singly powerful example of a potential to reach that. That
program didn’t result in Einstein’s per se; it didn’t have that
kind of effect. Amazing technological developments were made. The
potentials that the space program has as a whole to make new
scientific breakthroughs, however, is absolutely tremendous.
So, consider China. China, which has brought hundreds of
millions of people out of poverty in just the past few decades.
China, which currently lends out more internationally in
investments in nations than the whole World Bank does. China,
which has played a major role along with Russia in setting up the
BRICS; the Shanghai Cooperation Organization for Peace and
Stability; the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, to address
the $5 trillion or more needs for infrastructure within that
region of the world; offering loans that are without the
conditionalities that are the hallmark of the World Bank. This
ability to put into very specific practice a concept of “win-win”
cooperation, as it was put by President Xi; these specific ways
of cooperating with neighbors, with other nations for development
projects. As for example, the railroad operating in Ethiopia at
present, allowing the transport of food to the interior of the
nation in a timely fashion; preventing the intensity of
starvation that would otherwise be likely given the agricultural
disasters they’ve faced recently.
Take a look at space and science. China’s East Tokamak, a
super-conducting tokamak, recently had a 50 million-degree plasma
held for 100 seconds; a breakthrough for them on their way
towards developing fusion. Their space program — that was the
first soft landing on the Moon in decades — the Chang’e 3 with
the Yutu rover. Planning to come out next year, Chang’e 5, a
sample return mission to the Moon; again, the first time in
decades, and they’ll be only the third nation to have done this.
And then in a few years, a space first — not only for them, but
for the world — the Chang’e 4 mission, to land on the far side
of the Moon. The first time ever; this is something new that
mankind has never done before. It opens up new windows
scientifically in terms of the potential the far side of the Moon
offers for different types of telescopes — such as radio
telescopes.  They’ll be able to show us things that no other —
it’s the most convenient place to be able to do these things. It
simply is impossible from here on Earth, or in orbit; you need a
body to place these things on.
So, I think when we think about what’s the purpose of a
nation, it can’t be a short-term survival; it certainly can’t be
dominance per se, or maintaining a place in the world. For
example, the United States; there’s an unfortunate form of
thought that the United States should be first in everything.
Well, how did the United States become such a powerful nation?
The policies that made that possible, the outlook that made that
possible, the sense coming from the American Revolution that
there’s a mission for the nation that is beyond having
sovereignty itself, per se; but lies in a mission for development
and for the pursuit of happiness — as it’s put — that’s the
concept that has to guide us today. Now, if we were to adopt this
in the United States, which we must, as we force the adoption of
this policy in our own nation, we have the potential for the US
to play a very important role among other nations internationally
in reaching these objectives. And there’s really no reason for
conflict among nations; it’s simply not necessary at this point.
There might be some specific examples, but on the whole, by
throwing out the British-led creation of conflicts, and putting
the US on a path towards cooperation, participation, and
leadership on these sorts of ventures, we can regain in terms of
history, the right to exist, or reason for existing; a mission
for the nation.
So, if we’re going to turn around our domestic conditions,
as we see frighteningly in the dramatic rise in deaths by drug
overdoses or suicides in other forms that are increasing
dramatically; if we’re going do this, we have to have a mission.
We have to have a vision for the kind of future that we’re going
to make that doesn’t exist a present. The opportunities for this
exist; there are plenty of the particular policies that are
needed. These things are known. What is necessary is a demand and
a change in direction in the United States without Obama, to
adopt this orientation as our own. And if we do that, we can look
to the future with the knowledge that there is a reason for the
existence of the nation; and there’s a purpose to be fulfilled,
and that we’re taking up that purpose in our future which lies
beyond the Earth and out in the stars.

OGDEN: Thank you very much, Jason. And I think we can use
that as a promotional to encourage you to tune in to all of his
classes, which are available and will continue to be available on
larouchepac.com. And I’d like to thank Jeff for joining us here
as well, today. So, that’s what we have to present to you here
today; short and sweet. And we thank you for tuning in; and we
encourage you to please stay tuned to larouchepac.com. Good
night.

Der er intet grundlag overhovedet for at betale 6 mia. euro i afpresserpenge, når man ved, at en karakter som Erdogan vil komme tilbage … og vil fortsætte med at true med at udløse massive flygtningestrømme samtidig med, at Tyrkiet forsøger at sabotere Lavrovs og Kerrys indsats for at bringe en afslutning på denne fem år lange monstrøsitet af en krig, der har raset i Syrien.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

9. marts 2016 – De Forenede Nationer og menneskerettighedsgrupper advarede i går om, at EU-aftalen om at tilbagesende alle ikke-regulære migranter til Tyrkiet til gengæld for politiske og finansielle belønninger til landet, kunne være ulovlig, rapporterer journalister fra Reuters, Stephanie Nebehay og Gabriela Backzynska, den 8. marts.

FN’s flygtningehøjkommissær Filippo Grandi sagde til EU-parlamentet i Strasbourg i går: »Jeg er dybt bekymret om ethvert arrangement, der involverer en almengældende tilbagevisning af nogen person fra et land til et andet uden, at man klart forklarer, hvad standarden er for beskyttelse af flygtninge under international lov.«

Grandi kom med denne udtalelse kun få timer efter, at de 28 EU-ledere havde udarbejdet en aftale med den tyrkiske premierminister Ahmet Davutoglu i Bruxelles, og som vil betale Tyrkiet flere penge (3,3 mia. dollar mere) for at holde flygtninge i Tyrkiet; som giver hurtigere rejsetilladelse uden visum til tyrkere i hele EU, og sætter skub i forhandlingerne om medlemskab af EU, der længe har været gået i stå, til den tyrkiske, ISIS-støttende præsident, Erdogan.

EU’s feje ophøjelse af Tyrkiets status blev omgående fordømt over hele verden:

Amnesty International kaldte den foreslåede massetilbagevisning af migranter til Tyrkiet for »et dødsstød mod retten til at søge asyl«.

Den velgørende nødhjælpsorganisation Læger uden Grænser sagde, »I ’realpolitikkens’ navn syntes medlemsstater parat til at træde på deres principper for at slå en skammelig handel af med Tyrkiet.«

Sputnik International erklærede i dag, at, »med politiets voldelige beslaglæggelse i denne weekend af Tyrkiets største, uafhængige aviser, Zaman og Today’s Zaman, har landet endelig overskredet stregen for at blive et fuldt udviklet diktatur … EU-ledere lefler for Tyrkiet, efter at sidstnævnte har spillet en førende rolle i destabiliseringen af Syrien og udløsningen af flygtningekrisen … Tyrkiet favner nu et fascistisk diktatur, og Washington og dets europæiske håndlangere er ramt af den samme omfavnelse.«

Foto: FN’s flygtningehøjkommissær Filippo Grandi holder sin tale under EU-parlamentets plenarforsamling i Strasbourg, Frankrig, den 8. marts 2016. (Foto: EPA)

Tom Gillesberg til Folketingets Udenrigsudvalg den 1. marts: Vi står netop nu med en enestående mulighed for at sikre, at den langvarige mareridtsagtige proces med krig og ødelæggelse, der har præget Mellemøsten i årtier, og som har spredt sig til Europa og resten af verden i form af terror fra Islamisk Stat og en flygtningebølge, der er ved at løbe Europa over ende, kan bringes til ophør og erstattes af et nyt paradigme for fred gennem fælles økonomisk udvikling.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

8. marts, 2016 – Blot få dage efter den tyrkiske regerings overtagelse af nyhedsorganisationen Zaman i Tyrkiet, var den tyrkiske premierminister Ahmet Davutoglu i Bruxelles, hvor han krævede NATO’s samarbejde om både flygtningekrisen og Syrien. Ifølge NATO’s erklæring om Davutoglus besøg sagde NATO’s generalsekretær Jens Stoltenberg, at NATO i går påbegyndte sine aktiviteter i Ægæerhavet for at hjælpe med at stoppe flygtninge, der forsøger at nå til Grækenland.

Stoltenberg sagde også, at alliancen, som led i bestræbelserne på at hjælpe med flygtninge- og migrantkrisen, har besluttet at intensivere indsamling af efterretninger, overvågning og kontrol langs den tyrkisk-syriske grænse. ”Dette vil supplere de forholdsregler til forsikring for Tyrkiet, som vi besluttede sidste år, inklusiv flere AWACS-overvågningsfly og en forøget flådetilstedeværelse.” Sådanne NATO-operationer går klart videre end til flygtningespørgsmålet og yder direkte støtte til Tyrkiets fortsatte kriminelle beskydning af Syrien og støtte til terrorister i Syrien.

Alt imens han betegnede våbenstilstanden i Syrien som “det bedst mulige grundlag for fornyede forsøg på at nå en fredelig forhandlingsløsning på krisen i Syrien”, så klagede Stoltenberg samtidig over russernes militære tilstedeværelse i Syrien og det østlige Middelhav.

“Ruslands militære aktivitet i regionen har båret ved til den humanitære krise og drevet endnu flere mennesker til Tyrkiets grænser. Det har også forårsaget krænkelser af NATO-luftrummet”, hævdede han. ”Så mere end nogensinde før er det vigtigt med besindighed, nedtrapning og dialog.” I NATO’s officielle erklæringer nævnes der intet om, hvorvidt NATO i sine overvejelser medtager den meget store sandsynlighed for, at AKP-regeringen i Ankara udgør en væsentlig faktor i den destabilisering, som Stoltenberg hævder at være så bekymret over.

Foto: NATO’s Stoltenberg og Tyrkiets Davutoglu under den fælles pressekonference 7. marts, 2016, i Bruxelles.

4. marts 2016 – I en artikel i bladet Russlandkontrovers skrev Matthias Platzeck, formand for Tysk-Russisk Forum, at økonomiske og politiske relationer med Rusland ikke må få lov til at forværres yderligere. Sanktionerne imod Rusland har gjort landets opførsel over for Vesten hårdere og har her forårsaget en bølge af »nationalisme«, og de har også haft en destabiliserende effekt på den russiske økonomi. Men en destabilisering af Rusland er ikke noget ønskværdigt, eftersom det er den andenstørste atommagt på Jorden, advarede Platzeck og opfordrede Vesten til at se, hvor de større udfordringer, rent globalt set, ligger:

»Den flygtningekrise, der i øjeblikket får Europa til at holde vejret, er kun begyndelsen af store forandringer. I Afrika synes staters kollaps at være en realistisk mulighed, hvilket vil forårsage yderligere bølger af massemigration, ud over de 60 millioner flygtninge, der allerede i dag er i bevægelse.«

Da afdøde tyske kansler Willy Brandt engang advarede om, at øst-vest konflikten var for intet at regne i sammenligning med nord-syd konflikten, sagde han noget, der er af endnu større relevans i dag, fortsatte Platzeck. »Vi konfronteres med globale udfordringer. Vi må håndtere disse sammen med Rusland. Uden Rusland, eller i konflikt med Rusland, kan ingen af disse globale problemer løses.

Krisen i Syrien fremstiller dette på drastisk vis for vore øjne. Vesten må acceptere, at Rusland tydeligvis har et ord at skulle have sagt i denne region, og må inddrage russisk politik i samme øjenhøjde i den internationale krisekommunikation. Syrien kan blive til en lakmusprøve for, hvordan verdens problemer kan håndteres og løses, sammen med Rusland.«

2. marts 2016 – »I det øjeblik, vi, om Gud vil, har en standsning af fjendtlige handlinger, adgang for humanitær hjælp og gennemførelse af disse tre punkter – ny styrelse, forfatning og valg – vil jeg vædde på, af mange [syrere] ikke alene ikke vil rejse, men vil vende hjem, især, hvis vi har en massiv ’Marshallplan’ for genopbygning af Syrien«, sagde FN’s særlige udsending Staffan de Mistura til Reuters’ Tom Miles den 1. marts.

FN vil påbegynde den næste runde af fredsforhandlinger for Syrien den 9. marts, sagde de Mistura til Reuters i går. »Vi har udskudt det til eftermiddagen den 9. af logistiske og tekniske årsager, og også, for at våbenstilstanden skal være bedre etableret«, sagde de Mistura. »Jeg vil ikke udskyde det længere.«

»Vi ønsker ikke, at diskussionerne i Genève skal blive til en diskussion om krænkelser eller ikke omhandlende våbenhvilen; vi ønsker, at de faktisk skal adressere kernen i det hele«, sagde han i et interview. De forenede Nationer håbede, at en standsning af fjendtlighederne ville gøre det muligt for humanitær hjælp at blive sendt ind i belejrede områder, og muliggøre nye fredsforhandlinger.

USA og Rusland, der udfærdigede aftalen om ophør af fjendtligheder, aftalte at dele information og håndhæve våbenhvilen, fordi FN ikke var involveret i denne proces, sagde de Mistura. Det fordrede, at begge sider skulle dele fælles kort over slagmarken og overvåge situationen med droner og satellitter, fordi det ikke var muligt at udstationere tusinder af observatører på jorden. FN havde kun generelle kort over situationen inden våbenhvilen, sagde de Mistura.

Efter at den første runde af fredsforhandlinger stoppede den 3. februar, sagde de Mistura, at han ønskede, at diskussionerne skulle fokusere på forfatningsmæssig reform, styrelse og afholdelse af valg om 18 måneder, og at løsladelse af fanger også ville »stå meget højt på dagsordenen«. Hertil kommer, at krigen har skabt flere end fem millioner flygtninge, der også skal have en mulighed for at stemme ved et fremtidigt valg, sagde de Mistura.

Reuters rapporterer fra Damaskus, at mange, der overvejede at forlade Syrien, gentænkte denne beslutning pga. standsningen af fjendtlighederne, »så skrøbelig og vanskelig, den end er«.

Foto: FN’s særlige udsending for Syrien Staffan de Mistura, foto fra 26. februar 2016.