Den 18. – 20. august fandt den 8. årlige konference for Forbundet for Sammenslutninger af Kinesiske Eksperter i Europa (FCPAE) i Danmark sted, med titlen »Nye muligheder for kinesisk-europæisk samarbejde – inkl. initiativet for ’Ét bælte, Én vej’«.

Der var omkring 450 deltagere, med repræsentanter for kinesiske eksperter, der arbejder i Europa, danske, europæiske og kinesiske regeringsfolk, selskabsrepræsentanter, studenter og akademikere.

Schiller Instituttets delegation, der var blevet inviteret til at deltage, havde livlige diskussioner hele dagen med mange af deltagerne i området, hvor man får forfriskninger, i konferencesalens forhal, og fik kontaktinformation fra 85 personer fra Kina, Danmark, Sverige, Tyskland, Belgien, Frankrig og UK. De var meget interesseret, da de hørte, at vi mobiliserer for at få Europa og USA til at arbejde tæt sammen med Kina om bygningen af projektet for ’Ét Bælte, Én Vej’, og for at udvide dette til en økonomisk udviklingsstrategi for Verdenslandbroen i stedet for at forsvare det døende, transatlantiske system og konfrontation og krig med Kina og Rusland. Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale ved T20-konferencen i Beijing og reklamemateriale for Verdenslandbro-rapporten blev delt ud på kinesisk, dansk og engelsk. Dette vil blive fulgt op af en rekruttering af alle til at blive ambassadører for det nye paradigme i Europa.

En kontakt begyndte at forklare, hvorfor det vestlige finanssystem vil krakke, og hvordan dette kan føre til krig gennem provokationer i Ukraine og det Sydkinesiske Hav, og han købte omgående Verdenslandbro-rapporten. Andre gav udtryk for deres forundring over, hvor omfattende Schiller Instituttets vision var, og de kunne på den anden side forstå faren for kollaps og krig. En anden kontakt er endda koordinator for kinesiske børnekor i Danmark.

Selve konferencen blev også arrangeret af Sammenslutningen af Kinesiske Eksperter i Danmark (ACED), med co-sponsorering fra det Danske Udenrigsministeriums departement Invester i Danmark, Konfucius-erhvervsinstituttet i København ved Københavns Erhvervsskole, Hillerød kommune, hvor arrangementet afholdtes, og Københavns investeringsdepartement.

På den kinesiske side sagde den kinesiske ambassadør til Danmark, H.E. hr. Biwei Liu, at, konfronteret med den sløve verdensøkonomi præsenterer det afgørende initiativ med ’Ét bælte, Én vej’ (OBOR), med win-win-samarbejde, en ny mulighed for at revitalisere Eurasien. Det er meget betydningsfuldt for Kina og Europa at bygge OBOR i fællesskab. Han talte om væksten i de dansk-kinesiske økonomiske relationer, og at OBOR vil betyde endnu flere muligheder for samarbejde.

T.v. Den kinesiske ambassadør i Danmark H.E. hr. Biwei Liu, og præsidenten for den Kinesiske Kultur- og Kunstfond, Gu Changjiang, t.h.

Vicepræsidenten for Statens Administration for Udenlandske Ekpert-anliggender i Kina holdt også en tale. Desuden gav præsidenten for Kinas Kultur- og Kunstfond, Gu Changjiang, en meget interessant præsentation af »Ét Bælte, Én vej-museets Uddannelsesprogram«, som arbejder på at forbinde alle verdens museer gennem en internet cloud, og han viste en spændende video om projektet, der viste kinesiske skolebørn, som modtog undervisning af en museumsguide et sted i verden.

Udstrakte danske relationer med Kina tjener som en livline for det nye paradigme, selv, mens landet fortsat støtter sanktioner imod Rusland. Dette kom til udtryk gennem deltagelsen af højtplacerede danskere, inklusive videohilsen fra den danske udenrigsminister, der var i Argentina, og den danske kronprins Frederik fra Brasilien, så vel som også fra chefen for Handelsrådet ved Udenrigsministeriet, der havde været generalkonsul i Shanghai, samt lokalvalgte repræsentanter.

Danmark er det eneste land, der har haft en ubrudt diplomatisk tilstedeværelse i Kina siden 1908 og som var et af de første lande, der anerkendte Folkerepublikken Kina i 1950, og i 2008 blev et strategisk partnerskab etableret. Repræsentanten fra Handelsrådet sagde, at der nu er 500 danske selskaber i Kina, og 100 kinesiske selskaber i Danmark. Førende danske selskaber, der er involveret i Kina, præsenterede deres erfaring.

Der var også en interessant præsentation om det Kinesisk-danske Universitetscenter i Beijing, et fælles forsknings- og uddannelsesprojekt mellem otte danske universiteter, det Danske Ministerium for Højere Uddannelse og Videnskab, det Kinesiske Universitet ved det Kinesiske Videnskabsakademi, samt det Kinesiske Forskningsinstitut ved det Kinesiske Videnskabsakademi.

Alt i alt vil konferencen være med til at forøge de kinesisk-europæiske relationer og Schiller Instituttets kampagne for et nyt paradigme.     

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

19. august 2016 – Med et løfte til den besøgende leder fra Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi, om, at Kina ønsker at sikre, at landenes relationer udvikler sig i den »rigtige retning«, sagde Kinas præsident Xi Jinping i dag, »folket i Myanmar står ved et nyt begyndelsespunkt for en strålende fremtid for landet«, rapporteres det i Singapores Channel News Asia. »Vi bør knytte os til den rigtige retning og satse på nye fremskridt i bilaterale relationer og på at bringe mærkbare, gavnlige effekter til de to folkeslag«, tilføjede Xi iflg. nyhedsrapporteringen.

Som respons til Xis udtalelser understregede Lyndon LaRouche, at dette er godt for hele området.

Forud for sit møde med Xi i dag sagde Suu Kyi til reportere i Beijing, at hun »forventer, at Kina vil støtte historiske fredsforhandlinger med bevæbnede grupper nær landenes urolige fællesgrænse«, rapporterede The Straits Times. »Vi er overbevist om, at Kina, som en god nabo, vil gøre alt, hvad der er muligt, for at fremme vores fredsproces. Kina er, som en nabo, der har en meget vigtig, fælles grænse, langs med hvilken der er mange bevæbnede, etniske grupper, vigtig mht. sin goodwill«, tilføjede hun iflg. The Straits Times. Der er planlagt en fredskonference i Myanmar senere på måneden.

Alt imens medierapporteringerne var nødtørftige mht. den brede diskussion mellem Xi og Aung San Suu Kyi, så tales der meget om Myitsone-vandkraftværket tæt på grænsen mellem Kina og Myanmar, hvor de to, nordlige floder i Irrawady-flodbækkenet løber sammen. Kina havde investeret US$ 3,6 mia. i dæmningsprojektet, før arbejdet blev suspenderet i 2011 af den tidligere præsident for Myanmar, Thein Sein, pga. udbredte protester, der var arrangeret af etniske grupper og miljøfolk. Kina har arbejdet på at genoptage arbejdet på dæmningen, der iflg. den oprindelige plan ville have sendt 90 % af sin elektricitet til Kina, rapporterer Channel News Asia. Man fornyer nu engagementet i projektet, så vel som også andre infrastrukturprogrammer, til de to landes fælles fordel.  

Den 28. juli 2016, v/næstformand Michelle Rasmussen.

»Jeg inviterer dig til at lære Schiller Instituttet at kende og til at kontakte os.

Verden er i en dyb krise, en civilisationskrise. Det er en brydningstid. Det kan blive meget værre, med et fuldt finanssammenbrud, måske sat i gang af de italienske banker, som er i krise, eller sågar af Deutsche Bank, som står øverst på listen over de store, systemiske krisebanker, og som teknisk set faktisk er bankerot.

Det kan også være krig med Rusland og Kina, ført af dem, som gerne vil forhindre, at disse nationer fører an i skabelsen af en alternativ økonomisk politik.

Vi oplever efterdønningerne efter Brexit-afstemningen i Storbritannien, og det har rystet hele EU. Men det giver os nogle muligheder. En ting, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche og Lyndon LaRouche har krævet, er en redningsplan for Deutsche Bank, men på betingelse af, at Deutsche Bank vender tilbage til den ånd, der var, da Alfred Herrhausen var chef i 1989, hvor han havde en produktionsbaseret politik for banken, og hvor han kom ud med et krav for gældssanering for de fattigste lande og for udvikling af Østeuropa. Dengang var Berlinmuren endnu ikke faldet.

Vi kan takke ja til samarbejde i stedet for krig med Rusland og Kina, om at bygge en Ny Silkevej hele vejen fra Asien til Europa. Vi kan udvide det til at blive en Verdenslandbro, en bro over land, gennem Sydvestasien og hele vejen ned til Afrika. Vi kan følge den tråd, der for nylig er kommet frem, med Saudi-Arabiens rolle bag angrebene den 11. september 2001, og følge denne tråd helt til det nuværende Britiske Imperiums fraktions rolle bag terrorisme; og så kan vi takke ja til samarbejde med Rusland om at bekæmpe terrorisme.«

Præcisering: Chefen for Deutsch Bank,  Alfred Herhausen, blev dræbt af terrorister den 30. november 1989. Berlinmuren faldt den 9. november 1989. Hvis han, som var en ledende rådgiver til den tyske kansler Helmut Kohl, havde levet, ville verden have set anderledes ud.

Denne video blev lavet i forbindelse med omdeling af Schiller Instituttets materiale i jyske og fynske byer.

Kontakter i Jylland:

Kolding: Preben Samsøe, 4146 4714

Aarhus: Hans Schultz, 4841 4096; 6016 4096

Randers: Poul Gundersen, 2082 0350

Her er nogle vigtige links:

NYHEDSORIENTERING JULI 2016: Sidste chance for at stoppe europæisk bankkrak og krig

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Menneskehedens skønne fremtid – hvis vi undgår dinosaurernes skæbne.

Hovedtale på Schiller Instituttets internationale konference i Berlin, 25. – 26. juni, 2016

Baggrundsmateriale:

Lyndon LaRouches 3-punktsprogram for genopbygning af realøkonomien:

1. Hvorfor en Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling ville løse finanskrisen og ødelægge Wall Street

2. Hvordan man skaber ikke-inflationære kreditter gennem et nationalt kreditsystem

3. Infrastrukturprojekter og fusionsøkonomi

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

30. juli 2016 – China Daily, den største udgivelse på engelsk i Kina, havde i dag en artikel med overskriften, »Guruer inden for politisk strategi søger løsning for verden«, og som rapporterer om den internationale konference den 29. – 30. juli, hvor også Schiller Instituttets præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche og EIR’s William Jones deltager. Selv om artiklen ikke omtaler talerne af disse to, så viser artiklens fremtrædende foto Jones og Cai Fang med følgende undertekst:

»Cai fang, vicepræsident for det Kinesiske Akademi for Samfundsvidenskaber, og William Jones, chef for Executive Intelligence Reviews Washington-bureau, i samtale ved T20-topmødet i Beijing den 29. juli 2016.«

Artiklen fortæller, at Cai Fang holdt hovedtalen ved begivenheden, der var arrangeret af tre betydningsfulde, kinesiske tænketanke: Instituttet for Verdensøkonomi og Verdenspolitik ved CASS, Shanghai-institutterne for Internationale Studier og Chongyang Instituttet for Finansielle Studier ved Kinas Renmin Universitet.«    

[Photo/China Daily]

Redaktionen: Uddrag af artiklen i China Daily: 

Kinesiske rådgivere indtager førende rolle i fremstød for nye relationer

Omkring 500 tænketanks-eksperter, politikere og repræsentanter for internationale organisationer fra 25 lande i hele verden er i Beijing for Tænk 20 (T20)-topmødet, der finder sted fra den 29. til den 30. juli, for at bidrage med deres visdom til G20 Hangzhou-topmødet for opbygning af nye, globale relationer.

Som en af de vigtige G20-grupper orienteret mod kontakt med omverden er T20 en betydningsfuld platform for globale tænketankes forskere til tilvejebringelse af ideer og forslag, der kan skabe en politik, for G20, sagde den kineske viceudenrigsminister og regeringens særlige medansvarlige ved G20, Li Baodong.

Læs artiklen her. 

Med formand Tom Gillesberg
Lyd:

Af EIR’s Mike Billington. 

Følgende artikel forekommer i EIR, 24. juni 2016.

21. juni 2016 – I Stillehavet flyver og sejler Obamas truende patruljer tæt på kinesiske territorier, hvor de tilmed undertiden med fuldt overlæg krænker suverænt kinesisk territorium. Han forsøger at opbygge et net af alliancer i Stillehavsområdet.

I Central- og Østeuropa gennemfører NATO provokerende øvelser på Ruslands grænser, hvor de forsøger at opnå krig, som den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier korrekt har antydet.

Og hvor var Kinas præsident Xi Jinping fra 17. til 21. juni? I en strategisk mesterstreg, der er en general William Tecumsah Sherman værdig, var Xi Jinping lige præcis i Central- og Østeuropa, NATO’s planlagte krigsfront. Ikke på en krigsmission, men en vital strategisk mission, der er mere omfattende end spørgsmålet om krig – en mission for en ’win-win’-politik for fredelig udvikling, koordineret med Putins Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum.

Kinas præsident har besøgt Serbien i Østeuropa, Polen i Centraleuropa og Usbekistan i Centralasien. I april besøgte Xi den Tjekkiske Republik, alt imens ledere fra Central- og Østeuropa (CEE) har besøgt Kina i år. Dette diplomatiske og økonomiske samarbejde er en del af den 16+1 proces, der er etableret mellem Kina og de 16 CEE-nationer i 2012. De fleste af disse nationer var engang en del af Sovjetunionen eller Warszawa-pagten, mens mange i dag er med i EU, eller søger om optagelse. Gruppen af 16+1 fungerer således som en afgørende bro mellem Øst og Vest, og den fungerer i særdeleshed som omdrejningspunkt – nav – for udviklinger langs den Nye Silkevejs forbindelseslinje mellem Kina og Europa.

Serbien har bevaret stærke relationer til både Rusland og Kina selv, mens landet samtidigt har ansøgt om medlemskab i den Europæiske Union siden 2007. Polen har på den anden side under den aktuelle højrefløjsregering fuldt ud tilsluttet sig Obamas mobilisering for en militær konfrontation med Rusland. Polen kræver permanente NATO-baser samtidig med, at landet installerer amerikanske missilsystemer på sin jord, missiler, der er en direkte trussel mod russisk sikkerhed. Samtidig har Polen meget tætte bånd til Kina. Xi Jinpings besøg og udvidelse af deres strategiske relationer og økonomiske bånd, er en klar demonstration af den win-win-politik, som følges af både Kina og Rusland, og som tilskynder til samarbejde om gensidig økonomisk udvikling med alle nationer – hvilket samtidig fratager Obamas marionetter deres vilje til kamp.

Det tjener som model, at Xi følger sin central- og østeuropæiske turne med et besøg i Usbekistan, hvor Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisation (SCO) afholder sit 16. årlige topmøde i Tasjkent, og hvor han skal mødes med den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin, som dernæst rejser videre til Beijing til et statsbesøg i Kina.

Serbien: Mødested mellem Øst og Vest

I en signeret artikel i Serbiens førende avis Politika den 16. juni, dagen før sin ankomst, skrev Xi Jinping: »I århundreder har Serbien været et sted, hvor civilisationer i Øst og Vest mødes, interagerer og sammen virkeliggør væsentlige fremskridt i den menneskelige civilisation.« Han bemærkede det tætte samarbejde mellem kineserne og Jugoslavien om bekæmpelsen af »fascistisk aggression på de østlige og vestlige fronter under Anden Verdenskrig« og tilføjede, at den serbiske præsident Tomislav Nikolic i november 2015 deltog i 70-års højtideligheden i Beijing, i anledning af sejren i den »Antifascistiske Verdenskrig«, der »sendte et stærkt budskab om vore to landes forpligtelse over for opretholdelse af efterkrigstidens internationale orden, beskyttelse af verdensfreden og opbygning af en bedre fremtid for menneskeheden.«

Serbien er en betydningsfuld del af den Nye Silkevej, eller, som Beijing kalder det, Ét bælte, Én vej (OBOR), hvilket refererer til det Nye Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte over land og det 21. Århundredes Maritime Silkevej over vand. Kina er allerede i færd med at bygge store projekter i og omkring Serbien, inklusive jernbanen fra Beograd til Budapest, Pupinbroen over Donau i Beograd samt en jernbane fra Beograd til Montenegro.

Dette var første gang i 32 år, at en kinesisk præsident besøgte Serbien, men de to nationer underskrev en aftale om strategisk partnerskab i 2009, som nu er blevet opgraderet til et »Omfattende Strategisk Partnerskab«. Kina har investeret mere end $1 mia. i infrastruktur og energiprojekter siden da. Intet projekt har været af større betydning end købet i april af det 100 år gamle Smedervo-stålværk af Kinas Hesteel Gruppe for en pris af 46 millioner euro, hvilket således reddede selskabet og dets 5000 arbejdere fra en sandsynlig lukning. Den 19. juni besøgte Xi stålselskabet med præsident Nikolic og premierminister Aleksander Vucic. »Lad kinesisk-serbisk samarbejde sætte et godt eksempel for samarbejde med andre nationer i Central- og Østeuropa«, sagde Xi.

»Serbien indtager en vigtig, strategisk position«, sagde præsident Nikolic og tilføjede, at »Serbien er parat til at blive Kinas vigtigste partner, og ikke kun i området. Jeg er overbevist om, at Serbiens fremtid vil se meget anderledes ud end i dag.«

Besøgets mest dramatiske øjeblik kom, da præsidenterne Xi og Nikolic lagde en krans af hvide krysantemer på stedet for den tidligere kinesiske ambassade i Beograd, der blev bombet og ødelagt den 7. maj 1999 af et amerikansk B-2 Stealth bombefly, og tre kinesere blev dræbt.

Præsidenterne Xi Jinping og Tomislav Nikolic fra Serbien lægger kranse ved stedet for den tidligere kinesiske ambassade i Beograd, der blev ødelagt af et amerikansk luftangreb i 1999. Senere lagde de to præsidenter en hjørnesten på samme sted, hvor der skal bygges et Kinesisk Kulturcenter, og hvor de afslørede et monument for Konfucius.

At Xi lagde en krans, indikerede ikke noget ønske om hævn – tværtimod. Xi og Nikolic lagde en hjørnesten på stedet, hvor der skal bygges et kinesisk kulturcenter, og de afslørede et monument for Konfucius (Konfutse), såvel som også navneskilte til den nyligt navngivne Konfucius-gade og Den Serbisk-kinesiske Venskabsplads. Der findes allerede to Konfucius-institutter i Serbien, og der undervises i det kinesiske sprog i flere end 100 under- og mellemskoler. For Xi gælder Konfucius’ begreb om Harmoni under Himlen for alle folkeslag og alle nationer.

Med hensyn til Serbiens bestræbelser på at tilslutte sig EU sagde Xi, at han støtter ansøgningen.

Kina og Serbien underskrev også 21 aftaler under besøget, inden for handel, infrastruktur og andre områder. Præsident Nikolic tildelte præsident Xi Serbiens højeste orden, Storordenen af Republikken Serbien. Den russiske præsident Putin fik tildelt samme orden, da han besøgte Beograd i oktober 2014.

Præsident Nikolics svigerdatter, dr. Milena Nikolic, er med i det officielle billede af præsidenterne Nikolic og Xi. I oktober 2014 havde hun fremlagt Serbiens forslag til en kanal mellem Donaufloden og Ægæerhavet – forslaget om Donau-Morava-Vardar/Axios-Ægæerhavet-vandvejen – på en konference, der blev afholdt af Helga Zepp-LaRouches Schiller Institut i Tyskland. Kina har siden finansieret en foreløbig gennemførlighedsundersøgelse af projektet, men den er endnu ikke blevet offentliggjort. 

Serbien er beliggende på et afgørende vigtigt punkt, der forbinder Kinas Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte og det 21. Århundredes Maritime Silkevej. Bæltet og Vejen mødes ved den græske havn i Piræus nær Athen. I april købte Kinas Havshippingsselskab (COSCO) en aktiemajoritet i havnen i Piræus som det 21. Århundredes Maritime Silkevejs primære terminus, for kinesiske varer, der sejles til Europa. Varer, som skal til Central- og Østeuropa, vil blive transporteret med jernbane – for det meste bygget af Kina – igennem Makedonien, Serbien, Ungarn og videre derfra.

Polen: Silkevej og Ravvej

Præsident Xi rejste videre til Polen søndag, den 19. juni. I en artikel i den førende polske avis, Rzeczpospolita, den 17. juni, refererede Xi til Kopernikus, madame Curie og Chopin som polakker, der har ydet store bidrag til menneskehedens fremskidt, og som er meget kendte og respekterede i Kina. Han nævnte også den polske jesuiterpræst Michal Boym, der arbejdede stort set alene for at forsvare den sidste Mingkejser i 1640’erne imod Qing-invasionen fra Manchuriet, og som også udgav værker om Asiens flora og fauna.

Xi roste Polens historiske samarbejde med Kina som en af de første nationer, der anerkendte Folkerepublikken Kina, og det første, centraleuropæiske land, der gik med i den Asiatiske Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB, etableret af Kina). Kina og Polen er gensidigt hinandens førende handelspartnere i deres respektive områder, med en tovejshandel til en værdi af mere end $17 mia. i 2015. Der findes fem Konfucius-institutter i Polen, og Xi sagde, at et voksende antal kinesiske universiteter underviser i det polske sprog.

Han påpegede, at Polen ligger på både den antikke Silkevej og den ligeså gamle Ravvej – således kaldet, da rav var »Nordens guld« – den nord-sydgående handelsrute fra Østersøområdet gennem Polen til Venedig, og derfra videre med skib. Han bemærkede, at flere kinesiske jernbanelinjer til Europa enten slutter i, eller passerer igennem, Polen.

Xi indikerede, at Polen forfølger en genindustrialisering, alt imens Kina søger internationalt samarbejde til distribution af »produktionskapacitet«, en henvisning til hans politik med at anvende Kinas såkaldte overskudskapacitet (i forbindelse med det økonomiske kollaps i Vesten) til at bygge industrielle produktionsfabrikker i udlandet.

Xi og præsident Andrzej Duda underskrev måske 40 aftaler og MOU’er (Forståelsesmemoranda) den 20. juni, for det meste inden for området byggeri, råmaterialer, energi, finans og videnskab. Duda sagde, at han håbede, at Polen ville blive Kinas »indgangsport til Europa« og pegede på både havnen i Gdansk og terminalerne på land for jernbaneforbindelserne.

Xi og Duda tog sammen af sted for at byde et tog, der ankom til Warszawa fra Kina, velkommen. De spiste begge polske æbler – et af de landbrugsprodukter, der nu kan eksporteres til Kina med jernbane. Den polske godstransportgruppe PKP Cargo opererer 20 tog om ugen via den Nye Silkevej mellem Polen og Kina, hvor hver tur tager 11-14 dage, hvilket er dobbelt så hurtigt som med skib, og langt billigere end med fly.

Under Xi Jinpings besøg beundrer han og den polske præsident Andrzej Duda polske æbler, der nu kan eksporteres til Kina via de Nye Silkevejstog, der forbinder Kina og Europa.

Xi og Duda aftalte at opgradere deres relation til et »omfattende strategisk partnerskab« fra det eksisterende strategiske partnerskab, ligesom Xi og Nikolic også gjorde for Kina og Serbien.

Xi kom ikke med nogen offentlige udtalelser om Obamas militære mobilisering imod Rusland, ej heller om Polens centrale rolle i den militære inddæmning af Rusland, og heller ikke om den ekstreme fare for en konflikt, der kunne føre til en global atomkrig. I sin artikel i Rzeczpospolita forud for sit besøg sluttede Xi med følgende: »Kina og Europa har behov for at følge tidstendensen for fred, udvikling og win-win-samarbejde. Vi bør intensivere strategisk samarbejde, øge kommunikation om og koordination af internationale anliggender og bidrage til opbyggelsen af en ny type internationale relationer, der udviser win-win samarbejde og et fællesskab for en fælles fremtid for hele menneskeheden.«

Usbekistan og SCO

I skrivende stund, den 21. juni, er Xi rejst videre til Usbekistan i Centralasien til et statsbesøg, på invitation fra præsident Islam Karimov, før han deltager i SCO-topmødet i Tasjkent den 23.-24. Ud over at mødes med regeringsledere vil Xi tale for Usbekistans Senat og Lovgivende Kammer, de to huse i Oliy Majlis.

SCO-topmødet vil officielt acceptere både Indien og Pakistan som nye SCO-medlemmer, der nu omfatter Rusland, Kina og fire af de fem centralasiatiske nationer – Usbekistan, Tadsjikistan, Kirgisistan og Kasakhstan. Tilføjelsen af de to sydasiatiske nationer vil betyde, at 60 % af Eurasien vil samarbejde gennem SCO omkring både strategiske og økonomiske spørgsmål. Der er bekymringer, der går på, at spændingerne og de lejlighedsvise fjendtligheder mellem Indien og Pakistan kunne underminere niveauet af gensidig politisk tillid inden for SCO, men begge nationer er ivrige efter at tilslutte sig. Det bredere samarbejde inden for SCO kunne i realiteten bidrage til løsning af nogle af stridsspørgsmålene mellem Indien og Pakistan.

Iran, der i øjeblikket er observatør i SCO, forventes at blive optaget som medlem i nærmeste fremtid.

Samarbejde mellem SCO og den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union (EAEU), som omfatter Rusland, Belarus, Kasakhstan, Armenien og Kirgisistan, giver et yderligere grundlag for præsident Putins opfordring på det nyligt afholdte Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum om et »Stor-Eurasien«, der potentielt omfatter alle de eurasiske nationer, inklusive, understregede Putin, nationerne i den Europæiske Union.

Dette er visionen for fremtiden, baseret på gensidig udvikling, både fysisk og kulturelt, og som må opnås, hvis den fremstormende, geopolitiske krig skal forhindres.    

Titelfoto: Præsidenterne Xi og Nikolic besøger Serbiens Smerdervo-stålværk, som er blevet købt af et kinesisk selskab, og dermed reddet fra sandsynlig lukning og arbejdsløshed for værkets 5000 arbejdere. 

21. juni 2016 (Leder) – En intens række af diplomatiske engagementer er planlagt for de næste to uger, som kunne være bestemmende for, om verden tager en tryg kurs hen imod et Nyt Paradigme for udvikling – som det klarest er blevet fremlagt i præsident Vladimir Putins forslag til »en plan for Stor-Eurasien« på Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum den 16.-18. juni, og ligeledes i den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings program for ’Ét bælte, én vej’ – eller, om verden går i krig, med udslettelse til følge, sådan, som det promoveres af London og dets skakbrik Obama.

På torsdag afholder Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationen (SCO) sit årlige topmøde i Tasjkent, Usbekistan. Indien og Pakistan skal indføres som nye medlemmer, og Iran vil få en højere status over observatør nu, da FN’s sanktioner er blevet ophævet i kølvandet på P5+1-aftalen. Fra Tasjkent vil den russiske præsident Putin rejse til Kina for et officielt statsbesøg hos præsident Xi. Den russiske vicepremierminister Dmitry Rogozin er allerede i Kina, hvor han forbereder mødet med Kinas vicepremierminister Wang Yang. Man er allerede i gang med at udarbejde aftaler om samarbejde om rumteknologi, om det mulige salg af en $11 mia. stor andel i Ruslands statslige olieselskab, Rosneft, samt en mulig kinesisk investering i højhastigheds-jernbanelinjen Moskva-Kazan, som sluttelig kommer til at løbe hele vejen til Beijing.

Torsdag den 23. juni vil den længe ventede Brexit-afstemning finde sted i Storbritannien. Den 28. juni træffer de europæiske statsoverhoveder beslutning om, hvorvidt de skal forlænge sanktionerne mod Rusland over Ukraine i yderligere seks måneder. Den franske udenrigsminister gjorde det i mandags klart, at han forventer, at sanktionerne forlænges, men han indikerede, at Frankrig vil gennemtvinge en debat for en tidsramme for sanktionernes reducering og fjernelse. På et eller andet tidspunkt, måske før afstemningen den 28. juni, forventes Normandiet-4-gruppen (Putin, Merkel, Hollande og Poroshenko) at mødes for at forsøge at kickstarte Minsk II-processen, der er gået i stå, og som er et nøglespørgsmål mht. sanktionerne mod Rusland.

NATO’s krigsprovokationer imod Rusland forårsager tydeligvis dybe rifter i de europæiske regeringsinstitutioner. Den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeiers skarpe angreb på NATO i søndagens Bild am Sonntag er tydeligvis en indikation på sådanne splittelser. Den italienske premierminister Renzis og EU-kommissionens præsident Junckers tilstedeværelse i Skt. Petersborg er en anden.

En mere dybtgående undersøgelse af NATO-forsvarsministrenes møde i Bruxelles i sidste uge, som en forberedelse til NATO-statsoverhovedernes topmøde i Warszawa den 7.-8. juni, demonstrerer det vanvid, der har grebet Alliancen. De deltagende ministre aftalte at tilføje cyberspace som et yderligere militært domæne – i tillæg til luft, land, vand og rummet. Hvad dette rent konkret betyder, er, at et angiveligt cyber-angreb imod et NATO-medlemsland kunne udløse en anråbelse af den fælles forsvarsklausul (artikel V) i NATO’s charter, som kunne føre til et militært NATO-angreb på det land, der får skylden for cyber-angrebet. Dette er topmålet af galskab og kan blive en ny, hårfin udløsermekanisme for krig med Rusland og Kina – to lande, der gentagent er blevet beskyldt for at føre cyber-krig imod USA og Europa (sidste uges hackerangreb ind i det Demokratiske Partis database, som det oprindeligt var blevet »bevist« var blevet udført af den russiske stat, fandtes senere at være blevet udført af en hacker uden forbindelse til Rusland).

Som en kommentar til denne række af diplomatiske begivenheder fastslog Lyndon LaRouche den basale pointe: Vi ved endnu ikke, hvad der vil komme ud af disse begivenheder. Vi ved imidlertid, at Putin har sin egen, klare strategi og dagsorden, og han vil handle på det. Alt imens vi ikke specifikt ved, hvad Putin vil gøre, så ved vi, at det vil blive en faktor, der vil forme den globale situation.

Foto: Et amerikansk Air Force B-52 Stratofortress anfører en formation af fly, inklusive polske, tyske og svenske styrker, over Det baltiske Hav, 9. juni 2016. NATO-allierede udfører en række realistiske øvelsesmissioner på Ruslands grænser. (U.S. Air Force photo)

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Video: 2. del:

Lyd:

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Det var mindeplade, som de første astronauter bragte til månen for næsten 50 år siden: “Vi kommer med fred, for hele menneskeheden.” Ikke blot astronauterne, men hele den amerikanske nation og millioner af andre mennesker rundt om på jorden fik ændret deres tankegang om menneskehedens fremtid af disse rejser, som de foretog, tilrettelagde og bevidnede.
”For første gang besluttede mennesker sig bevidst for at lære at leve og agere i omgivelser, der er komplet anderledes end dem, fra hvilke vi har udviklet os,” som en astronaut sagde det.

Men næsten fra den ene dag til den anden trak de smukke skibe, der cirklede om månen, sig tilbage; fjernere rumrejser blev glemt. Landet kastede sig ud i krige – modelleret efter britiske og franske kolonikrige –, som er fortsat siden da, og som USA ultimativt har tabt. Under præsidenter G.W. Bush og Obama, har de spredt katastrofer af krig og terrorisme tværs over Mellemøsten, Nordafrika og Europa.

Skønt der blev udpeget ubemandede rummissioner for opdagelser og opdagelsesrejsende, var amerikanerne overbevist om at være ”praktiske” og at glemme at gennemleve opdagelser, som de ofte havde gjort før.

Andre nationer, Kina og Indien i særdeleshed, planlægger nu at tage de store opdagelsesskridt i rummet, planlægger Mars-missioner, programsætter de første landinger på den storslåede platform for opdagelser af galaksen – Månens bagside.

På samme tid har de asiatiske magter sammen med Rusland planlagt og påbegyndt udfordrende projekter for ny infrastruktur, store øst-vest og nord-syd eurasiske landbroer med højhastighedstog, nye byer, energi, selv magnettogsforbindelser.

Når de griber ind for at bringe krige til afslutning, så de kan påbegynde genopbygning og ny udvikling, så mener de det.

Præsident Obama, der prøver at sammenstykke militæralliancer, handelskrige, NATO-krigstrusler og konfrontationer for at stande de russiske og kinesiske ledere fra disse udviklinger – organiserer faktisk en ”liga af tabere.” Truslen om global krig fra hans forsøg på at intimidere Rusland og Kina er alvorlige; men han er en taber, der truer virkelige ledere som Putin og Xi.
Glem hvad der er “praktisk muligt”: Selv i bekæmpelse af terrorisme, er opdagelser hvad der behøves for at vinde sejre, opdagelser, som i at eksponere de saudisk/britiske hænder, der kontrollerede massemordene d. 11. september, og pludseligt dermed se kilden til de seneste 15 års katastrofale krige.

Så meget desto mere i at genoplive det storartede amerikanske rumprogram. I samarbejde med de nylige dynamiske rum-magter vil det blive en ny kilde til at leve gennem opdagelser – der faktisk er menneskelige, som nationen lærte det for 50 år siden.

23. maj, 2016 – Mens han var i Kasakhstan d. 21. maj for at gennemføre samtaler med regeringsembedsmænd, gav den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yi journalister fra Kina og Kasakhstan et overblik over, hvad der er opnået fra Silkevejens økonomiske Bælte- og Den maritime Silkevejs-initiativer, siden præsident Xi Jinping først foreslog Det økonomiske Bælte i 2013.

Xinhua gav en detaljeret rapport om hans bemærkninger:
Udenrigsminister Wang identificerede mange vigtige ”foreløbige høstudbytter” fra "Ét bælte, én vej-"-initiativet, som han karakteriserede som "værende i overensstemmelse med folks fælles håb om udvikling og samarbejde i forskellige lande i Asien og Europa…. en yderst vigtig offentlig service tilvejebragt af Kina til det asiatiske og europæiske kontinent." De næste skridt vil fortsat følge princippet om "gensidig diskussion, gensidig konstruktion, gensidige privilegier," sagde han.

Det første "høstudbytte", som Wang pegede på var, at "en rammestruktur for internationalt samarbejde" er ved at blive sat sammen, hvori mere end 70 lande og organisationer har udtrykt villighed til at slutte sig til projektet, og samarbejdsaftaler mellem regeringer er blevet underskrevet med 34 lande og internationale organisationer. Finansielle støttemekanismer, såsom AIIB og Silkevejsfonden, begynder at arbejde." Projekter til forbedring af transportopkobling er undervejs, inklusive en jernbane mellem Ungarn og Serbien, et højhastigheds-jernbaneprojekt i Indonesien, jernbaner til at forbinde Kina med Laos og Kina med Thailand.

I Wangs optik er den "internationale industrielle kapacitets samarbejds-modus", der er sat i gang ved aftalerne underskrevet af mere end 20 lande, vigtigere end de specifikke aftaler på grund af den "vigtige demonstrationseffekt", som det vil resultere i.

Økonomiske korridorer begynder at manifestere sig. Den "kinesisk-pakistanske økonomiske korridor startede tidligt og udviklede sig hurtigt; Kina, Mongoliet og Rusland "arbejder hastigt på at udarbejde planer og skitser" for en korridor; og den økonomiske korridor mellem Kina-Bangladesh-Indien-Myanmar udvikler sig støt.

Tog mellem Kina og Europa spiller en større og vigtigere rolle i at forbedre den økonomiske udvikling og handel langs med forbindelserne, sagde Wang. "Indtil nu har mere end 1500 tog succesfuldt rejst mellem Kina og Europa. Alene sidste år blev 815 tog sendt af sted mellem Kina og Europa," med togafgang fra 10 byer i Kina til syv lande.

Wang rapporterede, at, som et resultat af alt dette, har der været en "heftig vækst i regional handel og investering" – dobbelt så meget som den gennemsnitlige globale vækst, siden "Ét bælte, én vej"-projektet blev påbegyndt, alt imens "der er opnået tættere menneskelig kommunikation" fra de mange kulturelle festivaler og projekter, der ledsager projektet.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Video 2. del: (5 min.)

Lyd:

Præsident Putin benyttede Rusland-ASEAN-topmødet og et møde med den japanske premierminister Abe i Sotji til langtrækkende aftaler

I Asien er et faseskift af enorme dimensioner i gang. Dette viste sig blandt andet under topmødet mellem Rusland og ASEAN, der fandt sted i det russiske Sotji den 19.og 20. maj. Mødet fandt sted under mottoet "På vej mod et strategisk partnerskab i almenvellets interesse". (ASEAN-landene er Brunei, Indonesien, Cambodja, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Filippinerne, Singapore, Thailand og Vietnam, med i alt over 600 millioner mennesker.) Præsident Putin erklærede, at dette topmøde var den største internationale begivenhed i Rusland i hele 2016.
De fleste statsoverhoveder fra de ti ASEAN-lande deltog personligt i topmødet, og Putin havde bilaterale møder med dem alle i løbet af en uge. Derved er samtalernes hjertelige og fortrolige atmosfære lige så vigtig som de konkrete resultater, heriblandt investeringsaftaler, tættere handelsforbindelser og i flere tilfælde også forsvarssamarbejde.
Også præsidenten for den asiatiske infrastrukturs-investeringsbank (AIIB), kineseren Jin Liqun, tog del i topmødet. Han forhandlede i Sotji om finansieringen af 16 projekter i Det russiske Fjernøsten til et beløb af 8 milliarder dollars.
Den amerikanske statsmand Lyndon LaRouche kommenterede denne nye udvikling med begejstring: "Dette er en sag af meget stor betydning!"

Udvikling af Det russiske Fjernøsten

I tilslutning hertil bekendtgjorde den russiske minister for udvikling af Fjernøsten, Alexander Galusjka, at Rusland har forelagt 16 projekter i Fjernøsten for AIIB. Nyhedsbureauet TASS citerede ham: "Vi forelagde projekterne for udvikling af de internationale samfærdselskorridorer Primorje-1 og Primorje-2, som projekter af interesse for AIIB. Vi har desuden informeret vore partnere i banken om vigtige udviklingsområder og om Vladivostok som frihavn og indbudt AIIB til hurtigt at deltage i udbygningen af Nordøstpassagen." Korridorerne Primorje-1 (Harbin-Vladivostok-Natjodka) og Primorje-2 (Hunchun-Kraskino-Zarubino) ligger i det russisk-kinesiske-nordkoreanske grænseområde ved Det japanske Hav).

AIIB-præsident Jin erklærede efter mødet: "AIIB agter at fremme investeringerne i infrastruktur og i massetransportlinjer på den kæmpestore eurasiske landmasse, fordi vi tror, at regionens økonomiske potentiale forbedres, når vi forbedrer transportmulighederne. Vejen dertil er at mobilisere hjælp fra alle medlemsstaterne og fra de internationale institutioner såsom Verdensbanken, EDB (Den eurasiske Udviklingsbank), EBRD (Den europæiske Bank for Genopbygning og Udvikling) og andre institutioner", citerede Sputnik ham for.

Samarbejde med Japan

Også Japan udviser interesse for udviklingen af det russiske Fjernøsten. Japan er tæt forbundet økonomisk og militært med De forenede Stater og har ladet sig indfange af USA's præsident Obama i hans indkredsningspolitik over for Rusland og Kina. Men Japan har også sine egne interesser i Asien, især økonomiske, og søger derfor at samarbejde med sine naboer.
I et bidrag til bladet Executive Intelligence Review (27/5) beretter Michael Billington: "Japans premierminister Shinzo Abe havde den 6. maj et yderst udbytterigt møde med Putin i Sotji, til trods for at Obama havde forlangt, at han blev væk fra det. Og også selv om der ikke blev talt offentligt om det, erfarede EIR, at Abe og Putin havde enedes om en bestræbelse for at bilægge de territorialstridigheder mellem Rusland og Japan, der havde forhindret en fredsaftale mellem Japan og Rusland for at afslutte krigstilstanden. Over for offentligheden talte de to statsoverhoveder om en hel række mulige japanske investeringer, især i det russiske Fjernøsten, inden for energiproduktion, i olie- og gassektoren, medicinske indretninger, transportnet, havne og andre ting. Og her må man huske, at en så omfattende fælles udvikling også vil få afgørende følger for Den koreanske Halvø.

Putin indbød Abe til at deltage i det østlige økonomiske forum i Vladivostok den 2.-3. september. Man går ud fra, at Abe siger ja til denne indbydelse, og at et nyt topmøde finder sted med Putin ved den lejlighed. På forummet mødes internationale topfolk inden for økonomi og politik for at drøfte de økonomiske og investeringsmulighederne i det russiske Fjernøsten og den asiatiske stillehavsregion.
LaRouche kommenterede: "Vil Japan virkelig gøre det? Hvis ja, så er det en meget positiv udvikling for hele Asien."

Tættere samarbejde mellem Rusland og Indonesien

Også Indonesien, der med sine 240 millioner mennesker er det folkerigeste land blandt ASEAN-medlemmerne, er interesseret i et tæt samarbejde med Rusland. Som Jakarta Post berettede, foreslog Indonesiens præsident Joko Widodo under sine samtaler med Putin i Sotji, et tættere gensidigt samarbejde inden for økonomi og forsvar. Jakarta Post citerede den 19. maj Putin fra topmødet med Widodo, som han kaldte for konstruktivt: "Det hvilede på samme indstilling som hos præsident Sukarno, der var en ægte ven af vort land." (Sukarno eller Soekarno var i 1945-67 den første indonesiske præsident efter uafhængigheden fra Holland.)
Generaldirektøren for olie og gas, Wiratmaja Puja, fra det indonesiske ministerium for energi og mineralforekomster, sagde under topmødet, at han håbede, at russiske foretagender ville tage del i opførslen og driften af to olieraffinaderier i Indonesien: "Hvad raffinaderierne angår, har Rusland god kvalitet og teknologi. I de kommende år opfører vi to raffinaderier. 13-14 milliarder dollars er nødvendige for det ene raffinaderi på Østkalimantan. Infrastrukturen er allerede på plads, vi behøver kun investeringer til opførsel og drift af et raffinaderi. Det andet raffinaderi
på Java kræver investeringer på 8-9 milliarder dollars. Det er en lejlighed for vore russiske partnere til at investere i Indonesien", citerede Sputnik Puja.
I følge Jakarta Post talte Putin og Widodo om oprettelsen af en frihandelszone og om russisk hjælp til store infrastrukturprojekter i Indonesien, såsom bygningen af en jernbane på Kalimantan og et 1,8 GW-kratværksprojekt til omkring 1,8 milliarder dollars. Rusland skulle også være interesseret i at levere skibe, indbefattet flydende havne, sagde Putin.
Ruslands viceminister for økonomisk udvikling, Alexej Lichatjev, erklærede i følge TASS den 19. maj i Sotji: "Arbejdet med at skabe en frihandelszone mellem Den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union (EAWU) og Indonesien kan begynde, så snart Jakarta fremsætter anmodningen derom."
En sådan anmodning ville være et vigtigt signal, fordi USA's regering under præsident Obama her for tiden forsøger at isolere Kina og Rusland økonomisk med deres frihandelsaftaler TPP og TTIP.

Ændring af den strategiske situation

Når man sammenfatter alt dette, fremkommer der en forhåbning om et tæt og fortroligt samarbejde mellem Rusland, Indien, Kina og Japan inden for det politiske, økonomiske og forsvarsmæssige område. Og det vil igen ændre forholdene i Asien og i hele verden afgørende.
Lyndon LaRouche understregede forskellen mellem denne udvikling og Obamas såkaldte "drejning mod Asien". USA arbejder på at indkredse Kina og Rusland gennem et militært samarbejde med Korea, Japan og Filippinerne, men befinder sig selv i en tilstand af økonomisk forfald. USA producerer stadig våben, men bortset fra det er dets økonomi brudt sammen", og selv våbnene er langt mindre effektive, end de giver indtryk af. Obama er overhovedet ikke troværdig. Og derfor kan hans regering heller ikke tilbyde nogle overbevisende alternativer til det økonomiske samarbejde mellem de asiatiske lande.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg:

30. april, 2016 — Selv om kinesiske videnskabsfolk igennem nogen tid har presset på for en mission hvor astronauter lander på månen, kom den første meddelelse om en sådan plan i forbindelse med fejringen den 24. april af ’Den Nationale Rumdag’, fra en højt placeret embedsmand i rumprogrammet. Generalløjtnant Zhang Yulin meddelte ved en konference for fejringen af Kinas første rumdag, at Kina planlægger at lande astronauter på månen i 2036. Zhang er viceleder af ’Kinas Bemandede Rumprogram’, som lagde hans bemærkninger på deres hjemmeside den 28. april. Han er også stedfortrædende chef for Den Centrale Militære Kommissions Afdeling til Udvikling af Udrustning.

Kina må ”forbedre sine evner og benytte de næste 15 til 20 år til at virkeliggøre sin intention om bemandede ekspeditioner for at udforske Månen” sagde Zhang, ”og tage et afgørende skridt for det kinesiske folk, med at forberede grundlaget for at udnytte rummet”. Han noterede også, at projektet ville, i al almindelighed, befordre den videnskabelige og teknologiske udvikling af landet. Zhangs kommentar følger præsident Xi Jinpings udtalelse på rumdagen om, at hans ”vision for Kina” er forbundet med Kinas visioner i rummet.

Pang Zhihao, fra Kinas Akademi for Rumprogramteknologi, beskrev de udfordringer der er for Kinas rumprogram, for at udføre en sådan månelanding. Først skal en meget kraftig affyringsraket, i størrelsesorden som en Saturn V måneraket, designes, udvikles, tilpasses mennesker og afprøves. ”For at sende vore astronauter til månen, skal vi bruge en enorm raket, som er i stand til at løfte en nyttelast på mindst 100 tons op i kredsløb omkring jorden i en lav bane”, forklarede han. ”Det er derfor, at vore videnskabsfolk er begyndt på at udvikle Long March 9”. Den nye løfteraket forventes at have en kapacitet på 130 tons og være i stand til at lette omkring 2030. Det bliver nødvendigt at udvikle en ny besætningskapsel, større og mere velegnet end rumfartøjet Shenzhou. At skabe nye rumdragter, velegnet til at gå på månen er på vej, og teknikker til nedstigning på måneoverfladen, en blød landing, og evnen til opsendelse fra måneoverfladen og til at møde og sammenkoble med et rumskib til hjemrejsen er alt sammen nødvendige forudsætninger.

Embedsmænd har understreget, at Kinas igangværende projekter danner grundlaget for en bemandet rummission. Møde og sammenkoblingsmissioner i jordrumskibet med Shenzhou-kapsler har dannet grundlaget for de mere krævende måne rumskibes møder, der er forudsætning for den bemandede mission. Næste års Chang’e-5 missioner, der vil sende måneprøver tilbage til Jorden, vil demonstrere den højhastighedsreturnering til Jorden, som den bemandede månemission vil kræve. Ligeledes var landingen af Chang’e-3 og dens ledsager månebilen Yutu på månen en god øvelse for landingsteknikker borte fra Jorden.

Over de næste 15-20 år, sagde Zhang, vil alle disse færdigheder blive udviklet.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg:

<iframe width=”100%” height=”450″ scrolling=”no” frameborder=”no” src=”https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/263241683&amp;auto_play=false&amp;hide_related=false&amp;show_comments=true&amp;show_user=true&amp;show_reposts=false&amp;visual=true”></iframe>

EIR-videointerview med astronaut Andreas Mogensen efter konferencen på Christiansborg, om rumindustriens muligheder, 2. maj 2016

EIR: Hvordan ser du samarbejdet med Kina, og deres ambitiøse program?

Mogensen: Vi samarbejder også med Kina hos ESA; de bliver en vigtig samarbejdspartner i fremtiden. De er så bare ikke i dag en del af samarbejdet bag Rumstationen. Men vi håber da på, i hvert fald fra europæisk side, at få etableret et samarbejde, og jeg også, at der er en god chance for, at vi en dag ser en europæisk astronaut ombord på den næste, kinesiske rumstation. Hør mere.  

Se også:
Optagelser fra konferencen på Christiansborg den 2. maj 2016, om rumindustriens muligheder, inkl. astronaut Andreas Mogensen

(Desværre kom videobilledet ikke frem p.g.a. en teknisk fejl, men der er lyd.)

Ambassadør Peter Taksøe-Jensen præsenterede sin udredning af dansk udenrigspolitik på Københavns Universitet den 2. maj 2016. Schiller Instituttet stillede et spørgsmål, om at i stedet for at betragte Rusland som værende på den anden side, at vi burde samarbejde med Rusland og Kina, om at forlænge Silkeven til Mellemøsten og Afrika, som en måde at forhindre terror, flygtninge, og en ustabil område. Ambassadør Taksøe-Jensen svarede således:

Jeg synes ikke — det er svært at ikke være glade for, at der er ført en fast politik overfor Rusland, når Rusland har besluttet sig for at ændre den europæiske sikkerhedsordning. Så at slå ind på et samarbejdspolitik nu, det vil ikke føre frem til, tror jeg, at vi vil få et mere sikkert eller stabil Europa end den politik vi har ført både i NATO og EU, og hvor Danmark har bakket fuldt op om det.

Men idéen om at prøve at udbrede vores samarbejde med Kina, og prøve at bygge økonomiske udvikling, og opbygge Silkevejen, det synes jeg bestemt giver mening, fordi hvis vi kikker på hvad der har bragt flest mennesker ud af fattigdommen, så har det været økonomisk vækst, og det synes jeg da er noget vi kan bidrage med, som en del af vores formål. Det har også den positive afledte effekt at det også er [på denne måde] at vi bekæmper fattigdom.

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