EIR SYMPOSIUM

Peace, or Humanity’s Doom?
The Case for Negotiations

by Kevin Gribbroek

[Print version of this article]

Dec. 18—Executive Intelligence Review held an online symposium Dec. 17 featuring a diverse panel of pro-peace organizers on the urgent need for a negotiated end to NATO’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. All made clear, that were this war not ended quickly through a successful negotiated settlement, the result could be thermonuclear extinction of the human race.

But given the relentless, obsessive drumbeat from Western political, military and media circles that Russia must be defeated on the battlefield and forced to capitulate, how is a negotiated settlement even thinkable? The purpose of the symposium was to put in motion a process which will make this seemingly impossible outcome a reality.

Moderated by Dennis Speed, the symposium began, fittingly, with a performance by the Schiller Institute NYC Chorus of the round “Dona Nobis Pacem” (Grant Us Peace).

The first speaker, founder and leader of the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, set the tone for the event with the theme that people must wake up now to the danger threatening mankind. According to Zepp-LaRouche, because of lies and propaganda from the mainstream media, people have no idea what’s going on. She used a very prominent example of this ignorance. Very few people are aware of the recent statement of Russian President Putin at a Dec. 9 press conference in Kyrgyzstan’s capital Bishkek, that because the United States will not adopt a “no first use” nuclear weapons policy and contemplates using nuclear weapons in a non-nuclear conflict, Russia may decide to change its nuclear weapons policy and likewise allow a “preventive” nuclear strike. Given this, recent provocative NATO military maneuvers near Russia’s border could be seen by Russia as signals that NATO may launch a first strike, triggering a thermonuclear exchange and the total destruction of civilization.

So, what is to be done? Zepp-LaRouche argued that the best hope lies in the offer by Pope Francis for the Vatican to be used as a neutral venue for negotiations, with no preconditions, to end the war. She finished her remarks by calling on all religious denominations and all people of goodwill to demand these negotiations before it’s too late.

The next speaker, Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett, who was granted the 2017 International Journalism Award by the Journalists’ Club of Mexico and has spent years doing on-the-ground reporting of wars in the Middle East, gave an eyewitness account of the ongoing genocide against the people of Donbass, where she has been reporting for the last year. Since 2014, she reported, 12,500 civilians have been killed by sniping and shelling with NATO weapons in both the Lugansk People’s Republic and Donetsk People’s Republic, with over 4,500 killed since mid-February of this year. Given that civilian areas are targeted, this shelling constitutes terrorism and war crimes.

According to Bartlett, the Ukrainian military has also been saturating the Donbass with PFM-1 “petal” mines, insidious devices designed not to kill but to maim victims by blowing off their hands or feet. Children are particularly susceptible to these devices. She made the point that were Russia committing these crimes, it would be covered as a constant scandal by Western media. Bartlett ended her remarks by pointing to a flag of the Donetsk People’s Republic she proudly displays on the wall of her home, representing to her the resilience of a people shunned by most of the world and ridiculed as if their lives are meaningless. She expressed hope that the work she is doing will lead to Ukraine being held accountable for its war crimes and help allow people to speak openly about the fact that Ukraine is committing genocide.

Weaponization of Rage

Veteran Washington, D.C.-based journalist Garland Nixon spoke next on the topic of “The Iago Syndrome: The Weaponization of Self-Destructive Rage in Ukraine.” He began by posing the question “How did we get here?” and cited a recent poll indicating that an alarming number of Americans supported the war in Ukraine while knowing it could threaten nuclear war. Nixon masterfully described how psychological warfare is used either to create rage, or to manipulate existing rage for the purpose of causing working people to believe their interests align with those of the rich and powerful.

The creation of rage operates by convincing people that the leader of a country is evil. For example, there is no Syria, only the evil leader Assad; no Venezuela, only Maduro; never say Russia, only say Putin this or Putin that. According to Nixon, the oligarchs can then put this rage to geopolitical use by getting people to believe they’re part of a gigantic crusade to stop this evil leader. In the case of Ukraine, rage already existed against Russia amongst the extremist Nazi faction. This rage has been bolstered by NATO pledging to support a holy war to smite the “evil Russians,” at the expense of the Ukrainian people who are slaughtered and whose country is turned into a pile of trash. Despite the fact that it is “reckless to put all of humanity at risk for some neocon fantasy of eternal hegemony,” as long as people believe they are united against evil they are willing to take that risk.

Nixon concluded that the only way to defeat this brainwashing is to get inside the heads of people and help them see that there is no justification for their rage and that it has been artificially created to manipulate them into going against their own interests.

After an initial discussion session involving Zepp-LaRouche, Bartlett and Nixon, a short video from Col. Richard H. Black (ret.) was shown. Colonel Black is a Marine combat veteran, former head of the Army’s Criminal Law Division and former Virginia State Senator. The video is part of a relentless campaign he has been waging with the Schiller Institute to get Americans and Europeans alike to understand how close we are to nuclear war and that such a war would lead to total annihilation of humanity. His video graphically describes how every major population center in the United States and Europe, as well as Russia, would be incinerated in such a war with radioactive fallout raining down for weeks.

Like Zepp-LaRouche, Colonel Black cites Putin’s remarks about a potential shift away from a “no first use” nuclear weapons policy in Russia. The video ends with a grave warning: Given the massive losses by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, estimated by European officials in the range of 100,000; and with recent successes of the Russian military, particularly in the battle of Bakhmut; would the foreign policy establishment of the West resort to nuclear weapons to prevent the defeat of their Ukraine proxy? To prevent such a calamity, Colonel Black expresses his belief that “The U.S. must push for a truce and for peace talks, using whatever format and intermediaries the parties will accept. The risks to humanity are increasing by the day, and we must act now.”

Collapsing Finances and War

In a sort of dark compliment to Colonel Black’s remarks, University of Missouri professor and nuclear weapons expert Steven Starr went through his now famous Power Point presentation demonstrating that a nuclear war would almost certainly lead to total extermination of humanity. Starr presented a screen shot from a farcical public service announcement released by the New York City Emergency Management Department, which began airing Aug. 10, advising people on how to survive a nuclear attack. He then demolished the idea that anyone would survive a nuclear war, given the ramifications of a Nuclear Winter creating Ice Age conditions for a period of ten years and destroying most vegetation in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.

Starr also dispelled the myth popular in some academic and military circles such as the Council on Foreign Relations, that a nuclear first strike by NATO could wipe out 100% of Russia’s second-strike capability. One of the more chilling aspects of Professor Starr’s presentation was that once NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) has detected an attack (real or false), the president has 30 seconds to decide whether or not to launch a counter-attack!

Diane Sare, candidate for U.S. Senate from New York and founder of the New York City Schiller Institute Chorus, demonstrated why she is probably the only truly qualified candidate for the office of Senator in the United States, and at the same time, why she has been placed on the Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation “kill list” and labeled as an “information terrorist.” From Greek mythology to the wise words of President George Washington, Sare’s powerful presentation would surely have made her good friend and mentor, the late statesman and physical economist Lyndon LaRouche, very happy.

Her theme was that now is the time for mankind to “grow out of” those barbaric tendencies which make people susceptible to psychological manipulation (well described by Garland Nixon’s “weaponization of rage”) and for the United States to return to its “revolutionary anti-imperialist identity.” She expressed optimism that given the recent images from the Webb telescope, showing the awe-inspiring richness of the universe, human beings may be moved to “get along with each other … and do things that would ensure the survival of their species—as opposed to playing around with the annihilation of our species.”

Sare used two examples to show how, since the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, American foreign policy has shifted from its anti-imperialist tradition to a British-style imperialist policy: One was the completely unnecessary nuclear incineration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ordered by British lackey Harry Truman; and the second was the completely preventable 9-11 attack which set the stage for today’s pre-emptive war doctrine. Given the mindset of the self-proclaimed gods of Olympus behind these atrocities, Sare expressed her opinion that there is “reason to doubt that these people would actually stop short of launching a nuclear war”; that with the trans-Atlantic financial system collapsing, they may be willing to wipe out the entire human race rather than give up their power.

So, what is to be done? Sare recommended that people use the holiday period to read and study the Farewell Address of President George Washington. She read excerpts from the address where Washington warns against factionalization along party lines (what Lyndon LaRouche called the “two-potty system”); and against adopting a British imperialist foreign policy (today’s so-called geopolitics). Sare concluded:

I think these are wise words [referring to President Washington’s Farewell Address]. We would do well to consider them, and I think that Helga’s proposal for singing “Dona Nobis Pacem” everywhere is hopefully one way that people in the Western world, whose governments have become engaged in such depravity, can return to their better natures.

Is a Deal Possible?

Ray McGovern, CIA analyst (ret.) and a founder of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, spoke on the theme of hope: He sees a potential opening for negotiations to end the war, in which Pope Francis could potentially play a crucial role; but if action isn’t taken quickly, the opportunity could be lost. McGovern began with some historical background to the current war in Ukraine, going back to the 2014 Maidan coup and remarks made in 2015 by head of the Defense Intelligence Agency General Vincent Stewart, that “The Kremlin is convinced the United States is laying the groundwork for regime change in Russia….”

Given the fact that “Ukraine is a core Russian interest” as President Barack Obama stated in 2016, and that Russia has a clear military advantage over NATO in Ukraine, McGovern posed the question: “Are the Russians prepared to do a deal?” Based on 50 years’ experience as a Russia expert, he expressed his belief that signals coming from President Putin show this may be the case. He referred to a recent Reuters story that the Russian leadership has yet to decide how far they are prepared to advance militarily in Ukraine. That could be seen as a signal that the Russians are open to negotiation.

Addressing the Pope’s potential role in such negotiations, McGovern stated as a Catholic, although he does not agree with the Pope on everything, he believes the Pope’s instincts on matters of war and peace are good. And the fact that the Pope has apologized for what McGovern characterized as “idiot remarks about some Russians being the cruelest people fighting in Ukraine” has led him to believe that Helga Zepp-LaRouche is right that the Vatican may be the best venue for negotiations to take place.

McGovern used a quote from French philosopher Albert Camus (1913–1960), who in the aftermath of World War II lamented the fact that Pope Pius XII had not been a strong voice against the Nazi regime, to dramatize the effect Pope Francis would have, were he to advocate forcefully for such negotiations:

And what I know—which sometimes creates a deep longing in me—is that if Christians made up their minds to it, millions of voices—millions, I say—throughout the world would be added to the appeal of a handful of isolated individuals who without any sort of affiliation, today intercede almost everywhere and ceaselessly for children and for men.

McGovern concluded his remarks with several historical examples, by warning that in the words of Dr. King, there is such a thing as “too late”; that the time for action is now; and “without action, without doing things, nothing’s going to happen.”

After those remarks a short video of David T. Pyne, Deputy Director of Operations for the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security, was shown. (Pyne joined the symposium live for the second discussion period.) He thanked EIR for holding such an important forum and supported what he characterized as the Pope’s “inspired call for a ceasefire in this tragic and unnecessary war in Ukraine.” Pyne’s view is that 80% of information from Western media sources is Ukrainian propaganda, with the danger that it causes Congressional Members from both parties to support a policy which could lead to nuclear war.

Pyne argued that negotiations must take place immediately, and that this could be accomplished by America and NATO cutting off military support to Ukraine to force President Volodymyr Zelensky to the negotiating table with the Russians. He ended by expressing hope that a nuclear apocalypse can be avoided, saying that the Biden Administration must make foreign policy changes to prevent this horrible outcome. He added that the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives may be able to pressure Biden into such changes.

‘Where Is the Outcry?’

The final speaker was Harley Schlanger, international spokesman for the Schiller Institute. Schlanger demonstrated that there never was, and is not now, any intention by Western leaders seriously to address Russia’s security concerns. He used as an example former German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s confession that the entire Minsk II Accords were a sham, perpetrated only to buy time for NATO to build up Ukraine’s military. He also used the example of former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson who in March and April of 2022 sabotaged a potential peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine. Because of this treachery, all of the thousands of people who have died in NATO’s proxy war may have done so unnecessarily.

Schlanger quoted several pro-Western commentators making clear the true intention of the war. One, British Oxford historian Timothy Garton Ash, stated:

When viewed from a bang-per-buck perspective, U.S. and Western support for Ukraine is an incredibly cost-effective investment. A Russia continually mired in a war it cannot win is a huge strategic win for the U.S.

Schlanger said this exposes as a fraud the narrative that the Ukraine war is about freedom, sovereignty, and democracy. He concluded:

So, the question is—where is the outcry? I think we heard a very eloquent appeal from Ray [McGovern] in his presentation just before, that people get up and act. This has been the message from Helga Zepp-LaRouche over the whole year. What she’s called for is not just an end to the fighting, but the need for a new financial and security architecture which breaks the control of the unipolar order, which is insistent on continuing this war until Russia is defeated and humiliated.