Helga Zepp-LaRouche Webcast

Break Out of the Permanent War Paradigm with the LaRouche Solution

This is an edited transcript. Subheads and embedded links have been added. The video is available here.

Harley Schlanger: Welcome to our weekly dialogue with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder and chairwoman of the Schiller Institute. Today is Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2024; I’m Harley Schlanger and I will be your host. You can send your questions and comments to us via email at questions@schillerinstitute.org.

Helga, we’re now in a period of profound danger, but there is also an enormous opportunity to overcome these dangers and begin a new era of peaceful cooperation for economic development. The Schiller Institute, your organization, is a leading force in shaping a new paradigm, through the ongoing organizing efforts of the International Peace Coalition, as well as the circulation and discussion of your Ten Principles of a New International Security and Development Architecture, which provide both a philosophical and a practical basis for a transition to a new paradigm.

Now, the first question I have is from someone who follows us very closely in the United States, who writes: “Helga, in the last days we’ve seen new provocations coming from the NATO side, such as the proposal of French President Macron to consider deploying NATO troops in Ukraine, and the discussion in Germany of providing Ukraine with long-range missiles, and even the deployment of nuclear weapons in Germany and in Europe in general. Do you think there’s going to be a pushback against these and similar provocative proposals, or are they just going to go unnoticed?”

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: There had better be a pushback, because if you listen to what these leading political circles are saying, for the most part these days, there’s only one conclusion: that they have gone collectively completely mad, and that we have to get them off this course. If this is continued, it will lead to a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia in the very near future.

Now, as you mentioned, the recent outburst of a very problematic mental condition was visible in President Macron, who organized a meeting with more than 20 countries on Ukraine, and then in a midnight press conference, he all of a sudden announced that French and other NATO troops should be sent to reinforce Ukrainian troops inside Ukraine. He said that he would lead a coalition of countries that are planning to enable medium- and long-range missiles and bombs and so forth to be sent to Ukraine. This was announced in the midst of gigantic pressure on Germany, on German Chancellor Scholz in particular, to send the Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine. These missiles can fly more than 500 km and therefore could theoretically reach Moscow hitting strategic targets such as the Kremlin and other ministries. That outburst fortunately caused Chancellor Scholz to put the brakes on, for the time being. He said that under no circumstances would he allow Germany to be pulled into the war as a war party.

And he also disagreed with sending German troops into Ukraine, and in that way, there was an open split between Macron and Scholz. I can only say that the people who are pushing these escalations are completely irresponsible. It is as if their minds had been completely turned off, and some evil genius has taken over their brains and is dictating things that are leading the world, if they were to be followed, directly into Armageddon and a nuclear end of civilization.

So, I can only say that it’s really high time that people in Europe and elsewhere wake up and put a brake on that, and basically take to the streets—not like all these demonstrations that were organized by these so-called “investigative journalists” against the right, which turns out to be an orchestration, actually where the suspicion is that the government is organizing that for their own political reasons. The same people should go out into the streets and march instead against the danger of immediate nuclear war! Because this is what the result will be of these policies.

And in Germany, as of now, even if you would get rid of this incredibly incompetent so-called “streetlight” coalition, if that would be replaced by the opposition, let’s say, the CDU/CSU plus FDP or the Greens, it would be no better. Because you have politicians on the side of the opposition party who, like Roderich Kiesewetter [CDU member of the German Bundestag], who is saying we have to bring the war deep into the territory of Russia—I mean, these people are playing with the strongest nuclear power on the planet! So, have these people completely gone bananas? That’s the only explanation one can have. Therefore, where are the adults in the room, who stand up and tell them that this has to stop? This is more than sleepwalking into World War III; this is going with a hurrah, fully jumping into the catastrophe.

So, I can only say, join our International Peace Coalition: We meet every Friday by Zoom, and we are discussing what actions can be taken. The purpose of the International Peace Coalition is to unify the international peace movement. There are many people fighting for peace, but so far, they’re not well-organized to work together. And we have to get a stronger peace movement internationally. It is very clear that there is an enormous discrepancy between what the governments are pushing—for whatever reason, any sane person cannot understand it—and what is happening. Even if they are committed to following their personal greed and prestige and privilege, you cannot risk the existence of the whole of civilization by doing what they’re doing.

However, there is an incredible discrepancy between what these politicians are pushing, and what the population is experiencing. Because from the many discussions I have had in the last days, people are generally freaked out, they’re scared, they think these politicians may be going crazy, and therefore, the only answer is don’t just say that; mobilize with us, with the Schiller Institute and the International Peace Coalition, which can stop this.

Schlanger: From the questions I’ve been receiving, it is clear that people are really focused now on the war danger as never before. Maybe it was hoopla around the second anniversary of the special military operation, or something. But let me give you some of these questions: We have one from Nigeria, where the person writes: “Under the Biden administration, the U.S. seems committed to funding a permanent war against Russia in Ukraine, in full support for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s goal of driving the Palestinian population out of Gaza and the West Bank. As in previous cases, in Iraq, Afghanistan and so on, the U.S. has, in the eyes of much of the world, been complicit in war crimes. Is it possible that this time, the U.S. will be held accountable?”

Zepp-LaRouche: I can only say that there are certain legal moves. There was one case in California which, however, was rejected by the court, citing the division of powers, that the judiciary cannot rule on the executive.

I think the results of the International Court of Justice in The Hague—Monday marked the 30 days from their Jan. 26 ruling on provisional measures demanded from Israel, from the complaint of the South African government. However, to my knowledge nothing has yet been made public by the court. And the longer complaint from the UN General Assembly, from 2022 is also not public, and it may take more weeks and months, maybe even years—in any case, it’s not conclusive, as far as I know.

Then, there is a new case in Holland, where somebody sued that the Dutch government cannot send weapons to Israel because that would possibly condone genocide. So, where this case is going, I don’t know, but there was a certain amount of ruling. And similarly, there are other efforts.

I think what is needed urgently is a serious discussion at the highest levels.

These escalations are taking place because the establishments in the North realize that their system is clearly being rejected by the Global Majority: It’s a blowback. Rather than investigating themselves, and saying, why are these policies failing?—Sanctions, for example, unilateral sanctions without UN Security Council approval, which the United States and European Union very generously distributed against many countries, it has caused a blowback! Because it was recognized that these sanctions, like the Caesar sanctions against Syria, or the sanctions against Afghanistan, or the many other countries that have been sanctioned, the aim always was causing regime change, to topple mostly elected governments.

And the countries of the Global South look at that and say, “Well, if that’s what we get, that’s not what we want.” The interventionist wars, the so-called “right to protect” wars, are the same thing: These wars resulted in enormous casualties, millions and millions of people died or were displaced. Now, the Global South looked at that, and said, “Well, if that is what we get when we work with these countries, we’d rather go with countries where we can get a benefit, like China and the BRICS in general.” So, rather than recognizing that it is their own doing which caused all of that, they keep insisting that they’re the “good ones,” and the others are the bad ones.

I think we have to really find a way to reconcile the supposed conflict between the Global North and the Global South. If you really look at it, we’re sitting in one boat. And the danger of thermonuclear war makes that clearer than anything else. And we have to stop geopolitics and we have to go to cooperation among Europe, the United States, the BRICS countries, the BRICS-Plus and the Global South.

Given the fact that the establishments are opposed to that, I think it requires a much broader discussion: Maybe we have to bring this whole issue into the UN General Assembly; maybe they have to create different fora to discuss the need for a new international security and development architecture, maybe first on the level of universities, or on the level of think tanks or other convenient fora. But I think the population is really asked to get much more involved in expressing their will and their rightful demands.

Schlanger: As you mentioned, the International Court of Justice just completed a week of hearings on a motion to expedite action on provisional measures which doesn’t appear to have happened yet. We have a question from South Africa: “The lack of response from Western governments to dire forecasts of mass starvation and death from disease is astounding. Do they not hear the cries of children, or see the despair in their mothers’ eyes?”

Zepp-LaRouche: Well, apparently not! Anybody who wants to know what is happening in Gaza has plenty of opportunity to find out. I was just reading this morning a report from a man who is describing how, because of the complete lack of food, the entirety of little energy people have is spent to somehow—somehow—desperately find a meal for themselves, their family; how they have less and less to eat, even if it’s maybe only grain, but then the grain is no longer available. They have absolutely nothing. They go to their families, and they find the same situation. People who were normal weight and healthy only a few months ago, are now dwindling and about to starve. And it’s heart-breaking!

I cannot understand how people can know these things and then turn it upside down. For example, look at the just concluded Berlinale film festival in Berlin. And while I only read about it, and did not participate or have a closer look, what was reported is that some of the artists started to bring up the issue of what’s happening in Palestine. And then there was a huge outcry where they basically say that this was a demonstration of hatred against Israel! That’s not what happened! Absolutely not! How can you not express a deep-felt human outcry against what is happening to the Palestinians sitting in Rafah: 1.5 million people, in an unbelievable situation! If you cannot express a human sentiment anymore, feeling with these people, we are losing all humanity.

And that is what is really at issue here. And I only want to compliment the South African government: You, the government, have taken the course of the morality of humanity, and it is a symbol of where we are that it was not one of the beautiful Global North and the rules-based order [countries] that had the moral dignity to take up the issue; it was the South African government. And I think that that is a sign of the times: that the leadership, the moral leadership at this point is coming from the Global South, and that’s the reality. If the Global North wants to remedy that, they have to really hurry up and shape up, because history is the court judge.

Schlanger: Here’s a question from a regular viewer, who writes: “Doesn’t the European Union/U.K. war drive show that the elites and military-industrial complex are actually afraid of their people, as they’re having to use fear and a war-economy to dominate the political narrative?”

Zepp-LaRouche: Oh yes, absolutely! I think you just hit the nail on the head, because the whole game is the control of the narrative. If you listen to certain radio programs or TV programs, they have now moved to even so-called “entertainment,” some stupid program on religion, or children’s questions; it is all used to make sure the narrative is the official NATO narrative. And if you have any different view—for example, if you say, “the Ukraine war should be settled through dialogue, because the Ukrainian country is being destroyed; the people are dying; many people have died already, and there should be a stop,” you are called a “Putin sympathizer”! Anybody who is not a complete moron can see right now that war cannot be a means of settlement of political issues. In the age of nuclear weapons, war should be ruled out and we are right now in two situations, Ukraine and Southwest Asia, where regional conflicts are at the dangerous moment where they could develop into larger regional conflicts or even a global conflict, at the end of which nobody would survive! We need a complete shift!

The Chinese, one year ago on Feb. 24, 2023, made a very comprehensive 12-point proposal for a peace settlement in Ukraine. That was flatly rejected by the West. However, we urgently need to go back to that. China has proven to be the one country in this conflict that has been very balanced, very even-handed. China has good relations with Ukraine and would have to play a major role in the reconstruction of Ukraine. That reconstruction would work best if the New Silk Road were extended, if the entire Eurasian Land-Bridge, as part of the World Land-Bridge, were to be fully built out. Then Ukraine could have a future and have a prosperous idea for how that nation would become reconstructed after this terrible war.

The effort to shut people up, to not allow discussion of solutions—it’s almost like the book 1984: We are reminded of George Orwell; if you don’t please the Truth Ministry, you get targeted immediately for all kinds of operations. But the people doing that should reflect on the hard truth that they are not going to profit from it, because we will all be dead as a result of these policies.

Schlanger: You mentioned the control of the narrative and the pushing of the NATO view. There was an absurd scene today at the European Parliament, where the widow of Alexei Navalny came in and basically called for Europe to go to war against Russia. And she was greeted by lusty cheering from the deranged members of the European Parliament.

We have two questions from Southwest Asia regarding Gaza. One is from Faisal, who writes: “Why is Biden underestimating the power of the Arab countries regarding Gaza? And I’d like to know if you think that’s the case?” The second question, from Algeria, is: “Do you think Biden’s taking for granted Arab passivity? Couldn’t that become a big problem for the West?”

Zepp-LaRouche: I think it is. And I think the only remedy is what we have discussed already in previous programs. If you have not seen yet our 14-minute video on the “Oasis Plan for Southwest Asia” you should definitely look at it. What we are doing is, we are circulating this video globally, in the hope that it would become a topic in the pro-peace demonstrations: Because it’s not just enough to basically be for an end of the war, but the only way how you can have a realistic perspective, is if you have a plan for economic reconstruction after the war ends, and then basically hope that the neighbors of Israel and Palestine would all put their weight in. And if they decided—they would have a lot of weight after all. Of the major oil countries, several of them are now part of the BRICS: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Iran are now part of the BRICS. And they could bring in their weight together with the other Gulf States, and make sure that there is enough pressure to implement the Oasis Plan.

I think if people in the streets would demand the Oasis Plan, so that you create an environment where the United States—which is in an election campaign, and they have to think about what they do: The last report was that in the primary [election] in Michigan, there were many, many people who were undecided, and it was pre-discussed that “undecided” would be a protest against Biden’s policy. So there are means, but I think it does require more action on the part of everybody, because this is the test of humanity—everybody—the Arab nations, the other nations of Southwest Asia like Türkiye; and there are many people who are acting, but they all have to get on a much higher level.

And the United States, in the final analysis, is the one country on which everything depends. Because if the United States would basically say, you either go for a peaceful settlement or we will not send weapons and financial aid—it would occur. So, the ball is really in the court of the United States.

I can only ask people, look at our Oasis Plan, because that is the way out. If we would get all participants to agree that we need to have a positive, hopeful perspective, where everybody can live and everybody participates, I think that’s, in my view, the only way out of this crisis.

Schlanger: Here’s a question from a blogger who has a blog that focuses on the security state. And he writes that “The New York Times article on CIA coordination with Ukraine’s neo-Nazis going back to 2014 should surprise no one, especially people in The LaRouche Organization. But why do you think it was published now? Does this show that some are looking for a way out of the Ukraine war?”

Zepp-LaRouche: I think whenever the New York Times published something from the CIA, one should not assume that it is a leak. One should assume that it has a purpose and that it was designed to push a certain policy. I definitely think this is more like an announcement of the policy, and therefore, the question is really how to get a shift in the situation, which can only come through a coordination of international forces acting together.

Schlanger: Here’s a question from a viewer in Pakistan. He writes, “It’s clear that the U.S. was involved in the attempt to keep Imran Khan out of the government and that this is a very dangerous operation which is getting very little attention in the West. Do you have any thoughts on it?”

Zepp-LaRouche: There are reports, I think, from one ambassador who reported that he was pressured by the United States against Imran Khan. And Imran Khan’s party had the largest vote in the recent election, but apparently there was some meddling, and the votes were not counted properly, but that’s another case.

You cannot rule indefinitely against the will of a people. And in every case where that has been attempted, it led to a terrible outcome, and I can only encourage people—it’s very difficult; I’m only to a certain extent familiar with the internal policies of Pakistan, and the U.S. influence there has historically been quite significant. On the other side, Pakistan geographically is sitting in the middle of the New Silk Road and if there is any hope for the entire region, it is the kind of economic “win-win cooperation” which is potentially possible with the New Silk Road.

So, I can only say, people in Pakistan must try to convince more people to be on the side of cooperation instead of confrontation. But again, if we do not get the United States and Europe to stop the geopolitical games, I don’t think that the West, which is collapsing right now, that they will collapse as peacefully as the Soviet Union did. And therefore, we have to get this idea that confrontation has to be replaced with cooperation, and then you can settle any conflict on the planet.

But that shift—that shift, I think, right now, if you say to most people in Germany, for example, or in the United States, to certain layers: “Let’s cooperate with Russia and China,” they look at you as if you are coming from a different universe or some far away planet. But what is so abnormal about the idea that the major powers on this planet should not treat each other as adversaries, but should work together for the common good of humanity? That, in my view, is the necessary evolutionary step: If we are not capable of taking that step, I think we will blow ourselves up.

Schlanger: Helga, we have a note about the self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell in protest of genocide in Palestine, on Feb. 25, as a man of conscience, but a sad loss, and asking if you have any comments on what he did.

Zepp-LaRouche: Well, I did watch this video yesterday and I must say, I really felt sick to my stomach, because it was so unbelievably strong. And when he says that that is what the Palestinian people experience every day, I think people should listen to him! I know there was an immediate campaign to vilify him and smear him and so forth. I know nothing about Aaron Bushnell, but what I saw on this short video was so heart-breaking and so strong, that I can only wish that everyone has the nerve to watch it, and not push it aside: Think about it! He was 25 years old and an active-duty airman. He was not deranged, as some people tried to make out, because he was in the midst of being an active-duty American patriot.

So: Think about it. Think about it. And in a certain sense, I think the message has to be taken to heart.

Schlanger: I have a final question for you from a young person who wants to become an activist, but says that, “Growing up in this world, it’s very hard to know what’s really happening.” And she asks if “you have any advice as to where to turn, to become more qualified to take leadership in moving the population out of this decaying system?”

Zepp-LaRouche: Well, that’s a very good question. I think, if I would be a young person at this point, looking at what offers are there—war in Ukraine, war in Southwest Asia, a general Doomsday perspective—I would really be very grateful if somebody would answer that question.

And my answer is: you have to qualify yourself. You have to, in a world where disinformation, where fake news is being used, obviously by everybody—but it is definitely being used in the West to control the narrative, to not ever invite the Russians to conferences anymore; you don’t hear what people think in China; you don’t hear what people say in Africa and Latin America. So, you have to qualify yourself, to have the demand on yourself to be able to judge whether something is true or not.

Now, one good way, we in the Schiller Institute, we publish a lot of things, and you can look at that for a while and then compare it to what is in the mainstream media and form your own judgment. You can also go to other newspapers: Go to the Arab world, India, to African countries; try to talk to people from other countries. Try to be your own, independent judge, also by learning things: learn about philosophy, learn about Plato, Leibniz, Confucius, many others.

What Schiller did, for example, I always thought was very useful: He was extremely gifted, naturally. He had an excellent schooling, despite the fact that he thought the school was horrible; but what he did in the rest of his life, he always would say, “OK, I have to conquer a certain area of knowledge, like philosophy.” Then, once he was very competent in that, he said, “The next topic is history.” And so, he moved from one area to the other, always having the aim to know the topic in its essentials, to be able to judge things. And that way he accumulated, over the course of his unfortunately much-too-short life, enormous amounts of what you call in German Geistesmassen: thought-objects, ideas.

And it is the beauty that if you accumulate more and more of such concepts and ideas, that they resonate, and you start to see connections, and you arrive at a holistic view, and you start to get an overview that you would never get if you just pick this item here, and that item there; but if you go about building your own knowledge with a systematic approach, you can make enormous progress in a very short period of time.

Schlanger: Well Helga, thanks again for joining us this week. I would suggest as well, that our listeners should ask the people they know at the Schiller Institute, or write to the Schiller Institute, to get information on the weekly International Peace Coalition meetings every Friday, and you can work with that and become a part of it, wherever you are in the world.

Helga, any final words?

Zepp-LaRouche: It is a very challenging moment, you know. As a matter of fact, being an old war horse, I still ask, “Is this possible that these leaders, so-called, are pushing us to the brink of World War III?”

But they are.

I think the only response to that is to get mobilized. Get active with us. Don’t sit on the fence, because only if we have a large number of people, large enough to move things, can we stop that. And you are absolutely crucial to be part of that.

Schlanger: OK, with that, we’ll see you again next week.

Zepp-LaRouche: I hope so.