Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 20. december, 2016 – En dyster rapport, der pludselig er publiceret af NBC News, gør gældende, at afgående præsident Barack Obama brugte den »røde telefon« i begyndelsen af oktober, for direkte at true med et militærangreb mod Rusland pga. angivelig e-mail »hacking« og forsøg på at indvirke på det amerikanske valg. Obamas efterfølgende erklæring den 15. dec., hvor han forbeholder sig ret til at »angribe på et tidspunkt og et sted efter vores valg«, er blevet efterfulgt at mordet på en diplomat, der var afgørende for Ruslands indsats for, sammen med Tyrkiet, at afslutte den syriske borgerkrig. En Obama på ferie har forholdt sig tavs som graven mht. mordet på den russiske ambassadør i Ankara. Dette er både det mest åbenlyse af Obamas mange forsøg i årenes løb på at true både Rusland og Kina; og det farligste. Der var et kupforsøg i Tyrkiet i juli, i hvilket mindst nære pårørende og tidligere kolleger til denne drabsmand var involveret. Både Rusland og Tyrkiet skønner, at også NATO var involveret.

Drabsmandens hensigt var at skabe en splittelse mellem Rusland og Tyrkiet omkring deres rammeaftale om Syrien. Det slog fejl.

De førende transatlantiske nationer og deres Golfstat-allierede – der alle konfronteres med økonomisk stagnation og trussel om endnu et finansielt sammenbrud – tager i grotesk grad fejl af Kina, Indien, Rusland og det nye, økonomiske paradigme med hastigt økonomisk og videnskabeligt fremskridt omkring dem.

En pompøs jordansk prins, der nu er FN’s højkommissær for menneskerettigheder (den aktuelle menneskerettighedskommission præsideres af Saudi-Arabien!) har krævet, at den filippinske præsident Rodrigo Duterte stilles for retten for mord, pga. af sin krig mod narkotika.

Det er Obama, hvis drab kræver denne handling. I årevis har Obama udvalgt mange tusinde mennesker, der skulle dræbes af droner, så mange som 200 mennesker i et enkelt angreb, som det skete i Somalia i august. Hans invasion af Libyen, hans bevæbning af Saudi-Arabien til krig mod Yemen, hans bevæbning af jihadister og sluttelig terrorister i Syrien, har kostet titusinder af mennesker livet – inklusive et statsoverhoved og en amerikansk ambassadør.

Obamas egen politik for narkotiske stoffer i USA er – i det mindste gennem manglende handling og gennem legalisering – blevet forfærdelig dødbringende, med en dødsrate pga. overdosis, der er tredoblet til over 50.000 dødsfald om året i løbet af nogle få år under hans præsidentskab.

Hans handlinger nu, hvor han truer Rusland og Kina direkte, varsler om massedrab.

»Obama«, som Lyndon LaRouche udtrykte det den 15. dec., da præsidenten truede med at »handle«, og igen i dag, »har været en dræber som præsident. Hillary Clinton gik med på det, det er et faktum. Det er også briterne. Og det er NATO. De vil slå så mange som muligt ihjel for at få deres vilje. Og for at stoppe dem, som præsident Putin siger, må man få dem til at betale.«

Og dette myrderi er alt sammen for at standse et nyt, økonomisk paradigme, der indledningsvis blev kendt som »BRIKS-politikken«, der søger at spænde over kontinenterne med nye korridorer for transport, elektricitet, kommunikation, nye byer; for at vende tilbage til videnskabens fremskudte grænser inden for rumforskning og fusionsteknologi, som vi har opgivet.

Den nye administration må dirigeres til ikke at true med at ødelægge, men derimod tilslutte sig dette nye paradigme. Dette vil kræve en international indsats, og en mobilisering af det amerikanske folk.

Foto; En Obama på ferie hr hidtil forholdt sig tavs som graven mht. mordet på den russiske ambassadør i Ankara.

19. dec., 2016 – Ruslands ambassadør til Tyrkiet, Andrej G. Karlov, blev i dag skudt og dræbt, mens han holdt tale ved et kunstmuseum i Ankara. Efter at være blevet såret af den enlige pistolmand, blev Karlov bragt til et hospital, hvor han døde. Tre andre personer blev såret under angrebet.

Den tyrkiske indenrigsminister Süleyman Soylu identificerede senere angrebsmanden som den 22-årige, tidligere politibetjent ved navn Mevlüt Mert Altintas. Ifølge nyhedsberetninger hørte man ham råbe »Glem ikke Aleppo! Glem ikke Syrien! Så længe, vore brødre ikke er trygge, vil I ikke nyde tryghed«. En hollandsk webside udlagde en videooptagelse af skudepisoden online, hvor man ser Altintas iført habit, og som iflg. udsagn kom ind på stedet ved at benytte sit politi-ID. Dernæst skød han Karlov i ryggen, mens ambassadøren talte. RT rapporterer, at tyrkiske specialstyrker dræbte Altintas efter skudepisoden.

I både Ankara og Moskva bedyrede regeringsfolk, at mordet på Karlov ikke ville få nogen indvirkning på de tyrkisk-russiske relationer, og at de ansvarlige ville blive fundet og stillet for retten. Den tyrkiske præsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan ringede til den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin for at briefe ham om angrebet, iflg. Erdogans præsidentielle talsmand Ibrahim Kalin. Den tyrkiske udenrigsminister Mevlüt Çavusoglu var allerede på vej til Moskva for at deltage i et trepartsmøde om Syrien, sammen med de russiske og iranske udenrigsministre, hhv. Lavrov og Zarif, da angrebet fandt sted. Han og den russiske udenrigsminister Sergej Lavrov forventes at holde en fælles pressekonference, rapporterer Hurriyet.

Det Tyrkiske Udenrigsministeriums erklæring i dag lyder, »Ambassadør Karlov er en enestående diplomat, der har vundet alle personer inden for statens agtelse for sine professionelle og personlige kompetencer under sin udøvelse af succesfuldt arbejde i en meget vanskelig tid i Tyrkiet. Hans minde vil altid være hos os. Vi vil ikke tillade dette angreb at overskygge det tyrkisk-russiske venskab.« Karlov havde været ambassadør i Ankara siden juli 2013 og havde tidligere i sin karriere i udstrakt grad arbejdet i Nordkorea.

Talskvinde for det Russiske Udenrigsministerium, Maria Zakharova, sagde i dag, at den russiske regering anser angrebet på Karlov for at være et terrorangreb.

»Terrorisme vil ikke få lov at finde sted, og vi vil gribe til resolutte handlinger imod det«, rapporterede TASS. »Mindet om den fremragende, russiske diplomat, manden, der har gjort meget for at imødegå terrorisme, Andrej Karlov, vil for altid være i vore hjerter.« Hun sagde, at spørgsmålet om angrebet omgående vil blive rejst i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd.

Angrebet blev ligeledes fordømt i hele verden. Ifølge en kreds af personer, som TASS citerer, var EU’s udenrigspolitiske chef Federica Mogherini blandt de første til at kondolere den russiske regering. Andre budskaber kom fra Stephane Dujarric, talsmand for FN’s generalsekretær Ban Ki-moon, Storbritanniens udenrigsminister Boris Johnson, det Syriske Udenrigsministerium, NATO’s generalsekretær Jens Stoltenberg, USA’s udenrigsminister John Kerry, samt andre.

»USA fordømmer mordet i Ankara i dag på den russiske ambassadør Andrej Karlov«, sagde Kerry i sin udtalelse. »Vi er rede til at tilbyde Rusland og Tyrkiet assistance i deres undersøgelse af dette foragtelige angreb, der også var et angreb på alle diplomaters ret til trygt og sikkert at fremme og repræsentere deres nationer i hele verden.«  

Foto: Den russiske udenrigsminister Sergej Lavrov, sammen med sin tyrkiske modpart, Mevlut Cavasoglu, lagde blomster nær ved det Russiske Udenrigsministeriums indgangshal, for at mindes ambassadør Andrej Karlov, rapporterer RIA Novosti tirsdag.  

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 19. december, 2016 – Den russiske ambassadør Andrej G. Karlov blev mandag skudt og dræbt, mens han holdt tale ved Center for Nutidskunst, i et angreb, som den tyrkiske præsident Recep Erdogan – også på vegne af præsident Vladimir Putin – fordømte som en åben »provokation« mod tyrkisk-russiske relationer. Gerningsmanden, en 22-årig pistolmand, kom til arrangementet under falsk politi-ID, råbte radikale slogans og blev selv skudt af tyrkiske sikkerhedsstyrker få minutter efter sin forbrydelse.

Mordet finder sted på tærsklen til konferencer om samarbejde om at løse den syriske krise, mellem Tyrkiet, Rusland, Iran og andre, i Moskva i morgen; og den 27. dec. i Askana, Kasakhstan, med deltagelse af den syriske regering og den moderate opposition. Tyrkiet og Rusland har for nylig samarbejdet om evakueringen, der begyndte den 15. dec., af indbyggere og oprørere fra det østlige Aleppo og andre steder i Syrien. Her til morgen vedtog FN’s Sikkerhedsråd enstemmigt at udsende FN-inspektører til at overvåge den igangværende proces, efter modifikationer i udkastet som respons på russiske indsigelser.

Efter de første rapporter om mordet mandag advarede statsmanden Lyndon LaRouche, »Sæt Obama på listen over mistænkte«. LaRouche henviste her til handlingens art, og til arten af præsident Barack Obamas natur. Selve mordet var »et overlagt mord – et setup«. Han sagde, »Det er ikke bare hævn, det er en specialoperation«. Han opfordrede til, at myndighederne »får fat i de mennesker, der på nogen som helst måde er involveret i dette«

For det andet påpegede LaRouche, at Obama har en historie for drab. Han leder for eksempel de berygtede tirsdagsmøder, hvor han autoriserer lister over mål for dronedrab. Han deployerer amerikanere, så de udsættes for skade og død, i blodige militæroperationer i Afghanistan, Irak, Syrien og andre steder, med det formål at fremtvinge regimeskifte. Obamas stedfar var agent for politiske mord i Indonesien. Som stedsøn »er Obama en iboende dræber«, som LaRouche udtrykte det.

Under en pressekonference den 16. dec., og i et interview til NPR, truede Obama specifikt med handlinger mod Rusland. Obama påstod, uden nogen beviser, at Rusland havde hacket den Demokratiske Nationalkomites computere, og sagde truende,

»Jeg mener ikke, der kan herske nogen tvivl om, at, når en fremmed regering forsøger at øve indflydelse på vore valgs integritet, så må vi gribe til handling, og det vil vi gøre, på et tidspunkt og et sted, som vi vælger. Noget af det vil blive udtrykkeligt og offentligt; noget af det vil måske ikke være det. Men hr. Putin er udmærket bekendt med dette, for jeg har talt direkte med ham om det.«

Mandagens forbryderiske mord og Obamas trusler og kampagne mod Rusland og andre nationer, skærper vores opmærksomhed som borgere i alle nationer for, at vi må fortsætte med at udøve et meget hårdt pres for at gennemtvinge et skift til et nyt paradigme for udvikling og fred og sætte Obama og hans akse ud af spillet. Den kendsgerning, at han forlader embedet om 30 dage, giver ikke anledning til ro i sindet; nærmest tværtimod.

Dette understreges af ny dokumentation, der i dag så dagens lys, om det 16 år lange Bush/Obama-regimes onde karakter. FBI-sagsakter, der for nylig er blevet tilgængelige – opnået som følge af krav under Loven om Informationsfrihed – viser, at FBI i 2012 aktivt undersøgte støttenetværket for morder-flykaprerne i 11. september-angrebet – som involverer saudiske støtter, når FBI i 2004 derimod benægtede, at noget sådant nogen sinde havde eksisteret og sagde, at der ikke var nogen spor at følge, i kølvandet på udgivelsen af kommissionsrapporten over 11. september. Mindst to nye personer blev identificeret som værende medsammensvorne med flykaprer-cellen i San Diego. Undersøgelsen i 2012 strakte sig til New York, London og København.

Foto: Den russiske præsident Putin og præsident Obama, juni, 2012. (Foto: kremlin.ru)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 6. december, 2016 – Den formelle overgang til USA’s næste præsidentskab – der er 45 dage til Indvielsesdagen for Donald Trump – får uophørlig opmærksomhed i USA og i andre medier, men, den historisk vigtige overgang i verden som helhed er det følgende: hvor hurtigt og vist vil USA og Europa opgive det geopolitiske, kasino-økonomiske system og gå med i det nye, globale win-win-paradigme? Udfordringen består i at mobilisere folk til at være med til at få dette til at ske. Dette omfatter, at de foretager en personlig ændring og bliver aktive, og ikke længere blot ser passivt og afventende til. Der gives øjeblikke i historien, hvor den subjektive faktor er altafgørende. Vi befinder os ved et sådant øjeblik.

Omstændighederne er dramatiske. Yderligere initiativer for fred og udvikling kommer i denne uge fra Rusland og Kina.

I dag var premierminister Dmitri Medvedev vært for mange møder i Moskva med den tyrkiske premierminister Binali Yildirim, inkl. møder med præsident Vladimir Putin. Sammen med afgørende, økonomiske engagementer, såsom byggeri af kernekraftværker og gasledningen Turkish Stream, bekræftede lederne det, som Yildirim kaldte behovet for en ny, international sikkerhedsarkitektur for at besejre terrorisme, og en ny dialog med vestlige magter på dette grundlag.

I Tokyo fremlagde en kinesisk embedsmand fra den magtfulde Nationale Udviklings- og Reformkommission (NDRC) i går et tilbud om at opkoble Bælt-og-Vej-programmet til Japans og Sydkoreas økonomiske »arbejdsplaner«. Hr. Cao Wenlian, generaldirektør for NDRC’s Internationale Samarbejdscenter, talte om at styrke komplementariteten i de tre nationers økonomiske aktiviteter, der tilsammen allerede udgør 36 procent af verdens BNP. Cao talte i anledning af det Første Forum for Samarbejde om Industrikapacitet mellem de tre lande. Dette fremstød med det kinesiske tilbud tilsidesætter Japans mangeårige underdanighed under transatlantisk, økonomisk og militær, tvivlsom og aggressiv manipulation.  

Selv Henry Kissinger – hvis personlige historie kan siges at indbefatte særdeles uønskede paradigmer – taler offentligt til fordel for samarbejde mellem USA og Kina. Kissinger mødtes den 2. dec. med præsident Xi Jinping i Beijing. I dag mødtes han med Donald Trump i New York City. I går aftes under et Manhattan-arrangement svarede Kissinger på et spørgsmål, der var stillet af LaRouchePAC’s Daniel Burke, som spurgte: »Hr. LaRouche deler stærkt Deres mening om, at USA og Kina må samarbejde. Og han understreger, at USA og Kina kan samarbejde omkring politikken med Ét bælte, én vej; at dette ville være en indlysende vej til at genopbygge USA’s kollapsende økonomi … « Kissinger svarede: »Jeg mener, at konceptet med Én vej, ét bælte [sic] er et vigtigt spørgsmål. Jeg mener, at Kina kan og bør finde en måde at tale om det. Det er et af de spørgsmål, hvor samarbejde sandsynligvis er muligt … «

I denne uge vil LaRouchePAC-aktivister fra flere østkyststater anføre angrebet på Capitol Hill i Washington, D.C., for at lægge pres på virkeligheden og politikken med det formål at få USA til at gå med i det nye paradigmes æra, med start i en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, der følges op af gennemførelse af de handlinger, der fremlægges i LaRouches Fire Love.

Ved et arrangement i går i Washington, D.C., talte både vicepræsident Joe Biden og Thomas Hoenig, vicepræsident for den amerikanske Statslige Indskudsgarantifond, FDIC, offentligt til fordel for Glass/Steagall-loven. Biden fordømte sin egen stemme til fordel for en ophævelse af Glass-Steagall i 1999 (Gramm-Leach-Bliley-loven) som »den værste stemme, jeg nogensinde har afgivet i hele min tid i USA’s Senat«. Men så vendte han rundt og sagde, det er derfor, vi nu »ikke kan tillade en ophævelse af Dodd-Frank«, fordi vi har brug for »en opmand i marken«.  

Hoenig udtalte imidlertid støtte til genindførelse af Glass-Steagall og forklarede, at ophævelsen af denne lov førte til de risikable omstændigheder, der skabte krisen i 2008.

»Man gav de kommercielle banker, der har et statsgaranteret sikkerhedsnet, lov til« at engagere sig i alle former for aktiviteter, og man »forsynede dem endda med udvidet statsstøtte til at handle … « Hoenig er en potentiel Trump-udnævnelse til viceformand for banktilsynet i Federal Reserve (USA’s centralbank).

Hvis man træder et skridt tilbage og betragter historien, ser man, at visse øjeblikke træder frem som tidspunkter, hvor en afgørende, personlig ændring finder sted. I denne uge tænker vi med alvor tilbage på den 7. december, 1941, Pearl Harbor Day, hvor amerikanske borgere, som nation, gennemgik en ændring over en nat.

Vi skal i dag forstå, at vi alle er kaldede til aktivt at intervenere for at være med til at afgøre det historiske udfald.

14. nov., 2016 – Den tyrkiske premierminister Binaldi Yilderim har erklæret, at miljøkampen er en forhindring for udviklingslande. »Spørgsmålet om miljøet er en fælde. Hvis man begynder at udvikle sig og har en fordel over for andre lande, når man foretager strategiske investeringer, eller trænger ind på deres territorium, aktiverer de omgående miljøforkæmpere«, sagde Yilderim ved et arrangement for »Byens arkitektmøde« i Istanbul.

Yilderim fortsatte med at sige, at ødelæggelsen af historie, kultur og natur ikke bør tolereres. »For at opretholde forsyningsniveauet har vi brug for et udvalg af energi. Vi bør bygge tre [kernekraftværker], ikke bare et eller to«, understregede han.

Den tyrkiske præsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan kom med en lignende udtalelse i sidste uge, og den 7. nov. meddelte minister for energi og naturlige resurser, Berat Albayrak, at den private sektor havde investeret $5 mia. i 2016 til byggeri af i alt 158 elektricitetsværker i Tyrkiet.

Foto: Fra en anti-kernekraftdemonstration i Tyrkiet.

Tirsdag, den 1. nov., 2016 – Samtidig med, at irakiske styrker går ind i Mosul i en langvarig kamp for at uddrive Islamisk Stat fra dets irakiske hovedbastion, er der udbrudt en voldsom debat mellem USA og Tyrkiet over timingen og strategien for at drive ISIS ud af Raqqa i Syrien. Den 28. okt. meddelte den amerikanske forsvarsminister Ash Carter, at USA stod over for at lancere et angreb på Raqqa »om nogle få uger«. Dette frembragte stærke klager fra Tyrkiet, som pressede Washington for at udsætte kampen om Raqqa, indtil Mosul er blevet generobret og de tyrkiske styrker har fuldført deres »Eufrat-skjold«-operationer for at sikre grænseområderne i Syrien.

Det underliggende spørgsmål i skænderiet er den kendsgerning, at USA har til hensigt at bero svært på det Kurdiske YPG’s (Folkets Beskyttelsesenheder) styrker, som udgør hovedparten af den Syriske Demokratiske Styrke. I en briefing fra Bagdad til Pentagon-reportere for nylig, forklarede generalløjtnant Stephen Townsend, øverstbefalende for den Kombinerede Fælles Specialenhed – Operation ’Inherent Storm’, at der er solide efterretninger, der indikerer, at ISIS planlægger store, nye, globale terrorangreb ud fra sit Raqqa-hovedkvarter, og at lanceringen af angrebet på Raqqa ikke bør udsættes.

Sidste onsdag, den 26. okt., talte præsidenterne Obama og Recep Tayyip Erdogan fra Tyrkiet sammen i telefon, og iflg. Det Hvide Hus’ redegørelse, sagde Obama udtrykkeligt, at USA støttede den Syriske Demokratiske Styrke (SDF), som er den eneste, pålidelige kampstyrke, der er i stand til at anføre angrebet på Raqqa. Erdogan insisterede på, at YPG – hovedstyrken i SDF – er den syriske gren af det terroristiske Kurdiske Arbejderparti (PKK) og ikke bør støttes af Washington.

Den amerikanske udenrigsminister John Kerry, der er i London for at modtage en pris fra Chatham House for sit og den iranske udenrigsminister Javad Zarifs arbejde med P5+1-aftalen, gjorde det klart, at han er forpligtet over for den samme form for tålmodigt diplomati, der også skaffede Iran-aftalen for Syrien. Han påpegede korrekt, at krigen i Syrien i realiteten er en række krige, der overlapper hinanden – og som alle udspilles på syrisk territorium, hvilket gør det langt vanskeligere at løse dem.

Foto: Obama og Erdogan er ikke helt enige i, hvordan, hvornår og ved hvilke midler, krigen i Syrien skal takles …

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

17. august 2016 – Sergei Glazyev, en rådgiver til den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin, gav et interview til det russiske nyhedssite Russkaya Vesna, som blev udlagt i går.

Efter at have beskrevet, at Ukraine kontrolleres af nazisterne, der i realiteten agerer som en besættelsesmagt for USA, samt andre meget barske udtalelser om Ukraine, kommenterede Glazyev Ruslands ekspanderende samarbejde med Tyrkiet og Kina. Han blev spurgt, om de forbedrede relationer mellem Rusland og Tyrkiet »er et strategisk initiativ fra de to landes myndigheders side, og endnu et opportunistisk fænomen? Og hvor store var chancerne for en russisk-tyrkisk økonomisk union på længere sigt?« Glazyev svarede:

»Med hensyn til målene er vore økonomiske interesser i samklang, således, at udviklingen af det russisk-tyrkiske handels- og økonomisamarbejde går rigtig godt. Vore partnere fra Kasakhstan i EAEC (Eurasisk Økonomisk Fællesskab) har fremsat et initiativ om at indgå en præferencehandelsaftale med Tyrkiet. Dette er imidlertid uforeneligt med Tyrkiets aspirationer om optagelse i EU. Hvis Tyrkiet er ude af EU og NATO, kan samarbejdet vokse mange gange, og politiske uoverensstemmelser kan med lethed løses.« [Medlemmer af den Europæiske Union har ikke lov til uafhængigt at tilslutte sig en anden handelsblok. Tyrkiet er selvfølgelig endnu ikke i EU og kan meget let tilslutte sig en hvilken som helst handelsblok eller indgå handelsaftaler med andre lande, hvilket det da også allerede har gjort.]

Forespurgt om sin evaluering af de aktuelle kinesisk-russiske relationer, og om det repræsenterer politik for en total »orientering mod øst«, sagde han: »Dette er et gensidigt ligeværdigt, strategisk partnerskab, i hvilket vore lande har det samme mål. Der har fundet en orientering mod øst sted i den globale økonomi, og vi må aspirere til fuld deltagelse i denne nye orientering i verdensøkonomien, det fremvoksende Kina og andre lande i Sydøstasien.«

Russkaya Vesnas engelske site: http://rusvesna.su/english

Artiklen kan læses her: http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/08/glazyev-ukraine-under-us-occupation.html

Foto: Sergei Glazyev (venstre) med Vladimir Putin.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

13. august, 2016 – Det er nu det italienske nyhedsmagasin L’Espresso, der skriver en mere realistisk analyse af topmødet d. 9. august, mellem den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin og den tyrkiske præsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Men, som Lyndon LaRouche kommenterede, mangler deres analyse den pointe, at der allerede, under præsident Putins lederskab, i hele Centralasien er vokset en ny kombination af lande frem for fred og udvikling, og som Tyrkiet nu har tilsluttet sig.

»Modviljen og harmen imod Vesten er den reelle basis for tilnærmelsen mellem Rusland og Tyrkiet«, siger artiklen i L’Espresso.

»Moskvas primære mål er at redefinere det eksisterende system af alliancer, der er fuld af uklarheder og befinder sig i en dyb krise, samt at opnå anerkendelse i Mellemøsten, og videre endnu«, alt imens Ankara ønsker at »slippe ud af den karantæneisolation, som det har befundet sig i efter regeringens reaktion på det fejlslagne kup i landet. Samt at finde så mange allierede som muligt i området, hvor det shiitiske Iran, samtidig med, at Syrien er ved t blive ødelagt, vinder momentum«.

L'Espresso fortsætter, »Moskva-Teheran-Ankara-trioen vil nu løse problemerne i Mellemøsten. Noget, som hverken Washington eller EU aldrig kunne have forudset for et år siden, da de underskrev en aftale om Irans atomprogram, som hævede alle sanktioner, der var relateret hertil, fra Teheran, så det kunne vende tilbage til systemet af internationale relationer.« Selvfølgelig har dette ikke behaget Saudi-Arabien, »Irans ærkefjende.«

Topmødet mellem Putin og Erdogan har sendt et stærkt signal til bade EU og USA. Europa er hermed blevet fortalt, at det »ikke længere er universets centrum.«

»Det europæiske lederskab befinder sig under nye vilkår, og bør nu flytte sig hurtigere og på mere effektiv vis finde frem til de rette beslutninger,« siger artiklen.

Budskabet til USA er, at Tyrkiet har »andre strategiske optioner på bordet.«

Som LaRouche tilkendegav, undlader L'Espresso at se det meget større strategiske billede. Hvad de kalder for Rusland-Iran-Tyrkiet kombinationen har ikke alene blikket rettet hen imod at løse den Syriske krise, men også at stabilisere hele strækningen gennem Kaukasus og ind i Centralasien mod øst og det Indiske Ocean mod syd. Tyrkiet kan bidrage til at løse krisen om Nagorno-Karabakh mellem Armenien og Aserbajdsjan, hvilket ville stabilisere Kaukasus og muliggøre en afgrening mellem Sortehavet og det Indiske Ocean af Nord-Syd Korridoren, der allerede er under udvikling i et samarbejde mellem Rusland, Aserbajdsjan og Iran. Dette kunne fuldføres ved at genåbne jernbanen gennem Armenien fra Aserbajdsjan og Tyrkiet, hvilken forbindelse har været blokeret på grund af den uløste Nagorno-Karabakh konflikt, og derved muliggøre nye transportkorridorer i forbindelse med Silkevejen, og en bevægelse henimod integration af hele den centraleurasiske region.

9. august 2016 (Leder) – Topmødet i dag, i Skt. Petersborg, Rusland, mellem den russiske præsident Putin og den tyrkiske præsident Erdogan, indikerede aftaler om handel og konstruktion af gensidig infrastruktur; om gasledningen »Turkish Stream« for russisk gas; og, af afgørende betydning, om bekæmpelse af terrorisme i Syrien. Her »har Rusland en særdeles fundamental rolle«, sagde den tyrkiske præsident; og om nødvendigt kunne et Rusland og et Tyrkiet, hvis de arbejdede sammen, alene løse krigsspørgsmålet, ifølge Erdogans erklærede synspunkt.

Tyrkiets politik er tydeligvis ændret; Tyrkiet kan spille en afgørende rolle i opbygningen af den nord-sydgående handel og økonomiske korridor fra Indien til Europa, som er i færd med at blive udviklet af Indien, Iran, Rusland, Kina og centralasiatiske lande.

Men der er meget mere end det, der er ændret. Putin har skabt historie. Den umiddelbare reaktion fra EIR’s stiftende redaktør, Lyndon LaRouche, var, at denne udvikling – i hælene på Putins topmøde med Adsjerbadjan og Iran i går – skaber en betydningsfuld forandring i hele den politiske geometri i området. Det svækker på afgørende vis både Obamas og krigskandidat Hillary Clintons positioner.

»En ny, eurasisk gruppering er nu ved at gå frem, og uanset, hvilken indsats, Obama og NATO måtte sætte ind for at standse det, vil det være for lidt, og for sent«, var LaRouches kommentar.

En blok af eurasiske nationer, der er langt større, vil være motiveret af Kinas »Nye Silkevej«, med dens politik for kredit og opbygning af infrastruktur. Dette økonomiske program kan forlænges til en Marshallplan for hele Mellemøsten og Nordafrika, der hidtil blot har været udsat for ødelæggelse gennem de krige, som Bush, Obama og Clinton har ført.

Tyskland vil komme under et enormt pres for at ændre den af kansler Merkel og finansminister Schäuble førte politik, som beviseligt er en fiasko. Vesteuropa har i realiteten ikke noget valg, nu, da Putin har ændret geometrien i Sydvestasien, sådan, som LaRouche, tilbage den 30. september sidste år, da det russiske militær først kom til stede i Syrien, forudsagde, at han ville.

Obama må stå til regnskab for det amerikanske folk. Han støtter en bogstavelig talt 100 % ’s al-Qaeda-terroriststyrke i det nordlige Syrien, som den »foretrukne platform« for at erstatte Assad-regeringen; han har myrdet Libyens præsident, og dernæst støttet en i hast omdøbt al-Qaeda-afdeling i Libyen, som deltog i mordet på amerikanere i angrebet på ambassaden i Benghazi; han støtter Saudi-Arabien i bombningen og ødelæggelsen af Yemen, efter saudiernes involvering i angrebene i USA den 11. september, 2001, som dræbte 3.000 amerikanere, var blevet afsløret.

Denne krigspolitik for regimeskifte er det, som endelig kan blive fejet til side af det, som Putins diplomati og handlinger er i færd med at afstedkomme. En Hillary Clinton-krigspræsident in spe kan ikke tolereres i yderligere fire år med Obamas miskrediterede krigspolitik, ganske uanset, hvor mange Cheney- og neokonservativ-galninge, der støtter hende.

Kendsgerningen er, at intet er fastlagt på forhånd i det amerikanske præsidentvalg; de to hovedkandidater er en katastrofe i deres egne partiers vælgeres øjne. Wall Street/London-finanssystemet og de transatlantiske landes nationale økonomier er ved at krakke, og det rette svar på dette er ikke at fremprovokere en krig med Rusland og/eller Kina.

Vi har brug for et »nyt præsidentskab«, der forpligter sig til et nyt paradigme. Dette nye præsidentskab må genoprette produktivitet og produktiv beskæftigelse i den amerikanske økonomi, og det må samarbejde med Kina og Rusland om videnskabeligt fremskridt, om rummet, og om freden.

Baggrundsanalyse, fra Lyndon LaRouche:

Lyndon LaRouche: Putin skaber atter historie.

I dag sagde Lyndon LaRouche, »Historiens gang er blevet ændret!« af de aftaler, der er indgået, og de aftaler, der vil komme som en følge af Putin-Erdogan-topmødet. Tyrkiet kan spile en afgørende rolle i denne nord-sydgående korridor, og mødet mellem Putin og Erdogan vil fremme dette mere dybtgående samarbejde.

Det, jeg så som en mulighed, er nu blevet virkeliggjort. En ny, eurasisk gruppering går nu frem, og uanset, hvilken indsats Obama og NATO måtte sætte ind for at standse det, så vil det være for lidt, og for sent«, sagde han.

LaRouche sagde, at der nu er åbnet udsigt til, at man kan knuse hele det tjetjenske terrorapparat, der i juni måned udførte selvmordsangrebet i Istanbul Lufthavn, og som har erklæret jihad-krig mod Rusland og præsident Putin. Det åbner op for, at hele det eurasiske kontinent kan blive en blok for økonomisk udvikling og sikkerhed. Dette er et alvorlig slag mod præsident Barack Obama og hans britiske støtter. Og det betyder, at Tyskland nu må ændre sin politik, på dramatisk vis.  

Foto: Den russiske præsident Putin byder den tyrkiske præsident Erdogan velkommen i Katarinapaladset i Skt. Petersborg, til topmødet den 9. aug.

I kølvandet på den britiske beslutning om at forlade EU står ikke blot Det Britiske Imperium og EU’s drømme om et imperium for fald, men hele det defekte paradigme, den vestlige verden har været præget af. Deutsche Banks krise er en sammenbrudskrise for hele finanssystemet, og Deutsche Bank må reddes for at undgå kaos – men samtidigt må banken bringes tilbage til Alfred Herrhausens politik for realøkonomisk vækst. Frigivelsen af de 28 sider må betyde afsløringen af Saudi-Arabiens og Storbritanniens støtte til international terrorisme og en fælles front med Rusland for at udrydde den. Chilcot-kommissionens rapport om Storbritanniens deltagelse i Irakkrigen afslører ikke blot Tony Blair som en løgner, men er en opfordring til et skifte fra det vestlige paradigme for permanent krig tilbage til respekt for FN og national suverænitet. Det mislykkede kupforsøg i Tyrkiet, som kom efter tyrkiske tilnærmelser til Rusland, vil fremskynde Erdogans planer om total magt, men kan være med til at stoppe hjælpen til IS gennem Tyrkiet. Udtalelsen fra Den Internationale Voldgiftsdomstol i Haag øger faren for krig i Det Sydkinesiske Hav. Danmark og Europa må gå med i Kinas og Ruslands nye paradigme for fredelig sameksistens og fælles udvikling.

Dette er en redigeret version af en briefing af Tom Gillesberg, formand for Schiller Instituttet, den 18. juli 2016. Den kan høres på http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=13685

Download (PDF, Unknown)

21. juli 2016 – Efter møder mellem det Nationale Tyrkiske Sikkerhedsråd og kabinettet, erklærede præsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan den 20. juli en tre måneders landsdækkende undtagelsestilstand. Dette er ikke militærets overtagelse af magten i landet og har ingen indvirkning på parlamentets funktion. Det giver mere magt til provinsguvernørerne, der for det meste er statsudnævnte civile tjenestemænd. Formålet er at fortsætte med at arrestere og afskedige dem, der angiveligt skulle være involveret i kuppet, samt også medlemmer af bevægelsen omkring Fethullah Gulen, der beskyldes for at stå bag kupforsøget. Regeringen har påkaldt artikel 120 i den tyrkiske forfatning, der gør det muligt at erklære en undtagelsestilstand i op til seks måneder i tilfælde, hvor der foreligger trusler mod den forfatningsmæssige orden. Der vil blive fremstillet lovforlag i parlamentet om spørgsmålet, som det kræves.

»Formålet med undtagelsestilstanden er at tage nødvendige skridt på den mest effektive og hurtige måde, for at eliminere truslen mod demokratiet i vort land, mod regering ved lov og mod vore borgeres rettigheder og frihed«, sagde Erdogan.

»Loven for undtagelsestilstand er en proces, hvor man giver mere magt til guvernørerne. De tyrkiske bevæbnede styrker vil tjene guvernørerne i provinserne og arbejde sammen med dem. Der er ingen begrænsninger af fundamentale rettigheder og friheder under undtagelsestilstanden. Vi er garanter for dette«, sagde han.

Regeringen vil også suspendere den Europæiske Menneskerettighedskonvention (ECHR) under undtagelsestilstanden.

»Frankrig erklærede også undtagelsestilstand. Og de har suspenderet ECHR under konventionens artikel 15«, sagde vicepremierminister Numan Kurtulmus, som er talsmand for regeringen, til Ankaras mediebureauchefer den 21. juli. Frankrig har netop fornyet sin undtagelsestilstand for yderligere seks måneder.

ECHR’s artikel 15 betinger: »I en tid med krig eller anden offentlig nød, der truer det nationale liv, kan enhver, der, som statsrepræsentanter, har underskrevet traktaten, træffe forholdsregler, der nedsætter nationens forpligtelser under denne konvention i den udstrækning, som er strengt nødvendig i situationen, under betingelse af, at sådanne forholdsregler ikke strider imod nationens andre forpligtelser under international lov.«  

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Video: 2. del:

Lyd:

20. juli 2016 – I løbet af de seneste par dage har der været en bølge af bekymring over sikkerheden for lageret af B61-3/4-atombomber, som USA har i depot på Incirlik-flyvebasen i Tyrkiet. Den kendsgerning, at den tyrkiske kommandør for flyvebasen var blandt de højtplacerede militære officerer, der blev varetægtsfængslet tidligere på ugen, har øget bekymringen for tilstanden af disse våben, der estimeres til et antal på så mange som 90. USA har haft atombomber dér siden 1950’erne, da USA’s Ingeniørkorps oprindeligt byggede faciliteten. I tiden efter den Kolde Krig var der krav om deres fjernelse, især fra general James Jones i 2005, da han var chef for NATO. Andre siger, nej, de skal blive dér pga. Ruslands gen-opkomst. Nu drejer spørgsmålet sig om Tyrkiets stabilitet. Et problem omkring argumentet for, at bomberne skal blive, er, at der ikke findes noget fly i Tyrkiet, der er i stand til at kaste bomberne, hvilket betyder, at man ville blive nødsaget til at bringe specialfly, der kan monteres med og kaste bomberne, samt uddannet personel, ind til at kaste dem, ifald man beslutter at bruge dem. Dette rejser yderligere spørgsmål til, hvorfor de stadig er der.

Jeffrey Lewis, direktør for Det Østasiatiske Program for Ikke-spredning, for James Martin-centret for Studier af Ikke-spredning ved Middlebury Institut for Internationale Studier i Monterey, skriver i en artikel i Foreign Policy, at kupmagere i lande, hvor der tidligere har været militærkup, ikke har haft atomvåben højt placeret på deres liste over prioriteter.

»Skulle en fjendtlig junta tage magten over et land, hvor der er stationeret amerikanske atomvåben, kunne tingene gå hen og blive mere farligt«, skriver Lewis. Forsigtighedsreglerne på amerikanske baser, hvor atomvåben er oplagret, er fornuftige, fortsætter Lewis, men »de er baseret på en række antagelser om, at landet er stabilt og venligtsindet. Synet af Incirlik-basens kommandør, der kommanderes i gåsegang fra basen, er foruroligende præcist, fordi dette underminerer sådanne antagelser.«

I betragtning af risikoen for yderligere kaos i Tyrkiet, tilrådede pensionerede DIA-officer, oberst Patrick Lang, på sin blog her til morgen, at bomberne blev fjernet fra Tyrkiet så hurtigt som muligt. »Tænk på den potentielle afpresning, der ligger i at være i besiddelse af et eller flere af disse våben, i hænderne på vore fjender«, advarede han.     

Foto: Den øverstbefalende over Incirlik Flyvebasen, Bakir Ercan Van, var blandt de seks tusinde ansatte i militæret og retsvæsenet, der blev arresteret i hele Tyrkiet, mistænkt for at være involveret i det mislykkede kupforsøg, iflg. tyrkiske nyhedsmedier i søndags.

20. juli 2016 – I en kommentar til det nylige tyrkiske kup sagde den amerikanske statsmand Lyndon LaRouche, at ideen om, at den tyrkiske præsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan skulle have iscenesat et falsk kup for at retfærdiggøre en udrensning af oppositionen imod ham, er vanvittig. I stedet sagde LaRouche, at man skulle se på den tjetjenske vinkel, hvor de afgørende britiske forbindelser skal findes. En gennemgang af de nylige begivenheder peger præcist i denne retning. LaRouche nævnte sit eget, direkte samarbejde med den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin om bekæmpelse af de tjetjenske terrorister.

Den 27. juni sendte præsident Erdogan et brev til præsident Putin, hvor han undskyldte for Tyrkiets nedskydning af et russisk kampfly den 24. november 2015, hvor det blev påstået, at kampflyet krænkede tyrkisk luftrum. Dengang meddeltes det også, at Putin og Erdogan kunne mødes i den nærmeste fremtid, i august eller september. Inden for 24 timer, den 28. juni, blev Istanbuls Ataturk-lufthavn mål for et tredobbelt selvmordsbombeangreb, der dræbte flere end 40 mennesker og sårede flere end 200; bombemændene var tjetjenere, der hørte til Islamisk Stat (ISIS/ISIL), og de havde opereret i Syrien fra baser internt i Tyrkiet. Dette var første gang, at en tjetjensk ISIL-terrorcelle havde udført et selvmordsbombeangreb i Tyrkiet. I betragtning af timingen havde bombeangrebet tydeligvis forbindelset til den tyrkiske regerings plan om at normalisere relationerne til Rusland. Og siden dette bombeangreb er denne proces fortsat: Tyrkiet, der arresterer lejesoldaten fra de Tyrkiske Grå Ulve, der skød og dræbte en af piloterne fra det russiske kampfly, der var sprunget med faldskærm til sikkerheden på syrisk jord. Og nu, efter kupforsøget, har den tyrkiske regering arresteret de tyrkiske kamppiloter, der nedskød det russiske kampfly, og fremført deres involvering i kuppet.

I en diskussion over telefon mellem Erdogan og Putin blev det ligeledes besluttet, at de to ledere skulle mødes i august. Det skal understreges, at det tyrkiske militære efterretningsvæsens rolle, samt også de organisationers rolle, der har tilknytning til tyrkiske efterretningskredse, længe har haft forbindelser til russiske og tjetjenske terrorister – siden 1990’erne, hvor de tjetjenske krige imod Rusland blev forsynet og støttet fra tyrkiske og saudiske baser. Der er nu 1.500 tjetjenske flygtninge i Tyrkiet, hvoraf de fleste findes i en flygtningelejr uden for Istanbul og har udgjort en rekrutteringspulje til ISIL-kæmpere i Syrien.

Det er ligeledes en udbredt opfattelse, at den tyrkiske militære efterretningstjeneste har støttet tjetjenske jihadi-grupper, der opererer i Syrien. Der findes en enorm mængde af åbent kildemateriale herom, som vi ikke behøver gennemgå her; ikke desto mindre rapporteres det, at tjetjenere, der har været loyale over for Aslan Maskhadov, er den gruppe, som tyrkiske efterretningskredse foretrækker. Maskhadov var anfører for tjetjenerne i den første tjetjensk-russiske krig og blev dernæst præsident for den halvautonome Tjetjenske Republik efter en fredsaftale med den russiske regering. Dette brød hurtigt sammen og førte til endnu en krig, i hvilken Maskhadov også deltog. Han døde i 2005.

Som EIR har rapporteret det, så besøgte Maskhadov London i 1998, mens han var præsident for den kortlivede republik. Hans vært var den daværende finansminister fra det Konservative Parti, Lord McAlpine; han dinerede sammen med tidligere premierminister Baronesse Thatcher, og han talte for det Kongelige Institut for Internationale Anliggender/Chatham House. Han dinerede også med rektoren for Oriel College, Oxford, og han besøgte det Imperiale Krigsmuseum, med feldmarskal Lord Bramall som vært. Hans besøg blev arrangeret af Timothy Bell, også kendt som Lord Bell, der var rådgiver til Thatcher. Det siges, at Bell hyrede soldater, der ikke havde tjeneste, til at fungere som æresgarde, som om Maskhadov repræsenterede en suveræn stat.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

15. juli 2016 kl. 18:00 EDT – Militærkup i gang i Tyrkiet; Erdogan angiveligt på ferie med sin familie, taler til CNN Turk fra »sikkert opholdssted«.

Fra og med kl. 16:30 EDT begyndte nyhedsmedier at rapportere, at et militærkup var i gang i Tyrkiet. USA’s Udenrigsministerium har tilkendegivet, at der finder »et oprørsforsøg« sted i Tyrkiet, og udenrigsminister Kerry sagde, at han håber, Tyrkiet fortsat vil være en kilde til stabilitet og kontinuitet, og at han følger opdateringerne, men ikke havde yderligere information.

Fra Ankara sagde premierminister Binaldi Yildirim, at regeringen ikke vil tillade, at kuppet lykkes, og at opstanden kom fra elementer i militæret. Omkring kl. 17:15 EDT annoncerede statsradioen TRT, der var blevet besat af officerer fra militæret, at militæret havde overtaget myndigheden over hele Tyrkiet.

I en erklæring, der rapporteres af The Atlantic i Washington, sagde de tyrkiske militære officerer, »For at genoprette forfatningsmæssig orden, demokrati, rettigheder og friheder, regering ved lov, sikkerhed og tryghed i den tyrkiske nation og den tyrkiske stat, har tyrkiske bevæbnede styrker overtaget det regeringsmæssige ansvar for Republikken Tyrkiet.«

Omkring kl. 18:00 EDT talte den tyrkiske præsident Erdogan over telefon til CNN Turk fra et ikke-identificeret »sikkert opholdssted«, rapporterer Sputnik. »Man ved, at der har været et kupforsøg«, sagde Erdogan. »Jeg venter på hele vort folk på gaderne og torvene. Sammen vil vi respondere tilsvarende. Man ved, at dette kupforsøg blev anført af den ’Parallelle Struktur’. Anstifterne af kuppet vil blive alvorligt straffet og vil betale en høj pris for det.«

Udtrykket »Parallel Struktur« beskriver tilhængerne af Fethullah Gulen, en person fra det muslimske præsteskab, der bor i USA, og som engang var tilhænger af Erdogan og AKP. Men bortset fra Erdogans erklæring er der ikke andre rapporter om Gulens involvering.    

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>

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]

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

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

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

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

“Mr. LaRouche, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has blamed

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

So, Jeff.

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

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

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

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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Med formand Tom Gillesberg