EIR LEAD EDITORIAL FOR FRIDAY, JUNE 11, 2021

London and Washington Policies ‘Are in Confrontation with Humanity's Common Interests, Including American People’

June 10, 2021 (EIRNS)—President Joe Biden began his week-long trip to Europe, which will culminate in Geneva on June 16 in a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, with a predictable and threatening diatribe against Russia. His remarks were no doubt music to the ears of the British Establishment, who are intently orchestrating a geopolitical showdown between the United States and Russia, and between the United States and China. As the London Guardian merrily headlined a June 8 op-ed: “Joe Biden’s Mission at the G7 Summit: To Recruit Allies for the Next Cold War.”

But will it all work according to London’s plan? Not likely. Reality has a nasty way of overturning the best-laid of utopian schemes.

A lead editorial in China’s semi-official Global Times on June 9 pointed out that the Establishment’s policy of geopolitical confrontation is “nothing but a bluff,” albeit a dangerous one, because it “cannot address the real problem of the U.S. and the West,” which is the economic breakdown crisis besetting the entire trans-Atlantic region. “If the U.S. is to compete with China strategically,” the editorial argued, “the fundamental way is to greatly revive its own economy.” But for the political elites in Washington, the editorial concluded, “Far from being in a confrontation with China, they are in a confrontation with the times and with the common interests of the human race, including the American people.”

That is an accurate characterization. The common interests of the human race and of the American people, interests urgently demanded by the times, lie in a global alliance among all nations around a crash program to defeat the COVID pandemic. That requires defeating the coronavirus itself—through worldwide mass vaccination, testing and requisite public measures. But it also demands defeating that which turned a mere virus into a full-force pandemic: the collapse of the physical economy, and in particular the health systems, living standards, and related economic infrastructure over the last 50 years.

A global mobilization in that direction—of organizing a world health system with modern capabilities in every nation in the world, as Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche has repeatedly called for—immediately brings into focus, and places on center stage, the urgent need for the full set international financial and economic policies that Lyndon LaRouche specified in his famous, June 8, 2014 Four Laws.

Remarks delivered by Lyndon LaRouche 20 years ago, during an Oct. 2, 2001 videoconference discussion with the Peruvian Society of Economist Engineers, serves to summarize today’s strategic stakes as well:

“So, you must bring in a system of cooperation on which you can launch a large-scale development project, in which countries which produce more high technology, will produce it and sell it, on credit, to countries which, like the interior of China, which need this supply of technology. Or, India. And that market—and the United States opportunity to participate in that market—is the best hope for the United States.

“So, if we don’t cooperate; if we can’t cooperate—at a time that Russia is willing to cooperate, that China is willing to cooperate, that India wishes to cooperate, that Europe wishes to cooperate—if we don’t cooperate, we are insane! And therefore, if we are insane, then, what we’re going to have is the price of insanity, which is a New Dark Age. That’s the way it is: When humanity does not have the sense, when empires have not had the sense, to stop being insane, they have, generally, destroyed themselves, like the Roman Empire, and others before.

“And, we’re at the point, where ... this planet can not go in the direction it’s now going. We can not continue this system, which is about to disintegrate, nor can we have a conflict of the type which is threatened by the Middle East conflict, or by the ways in which some people are trying to approach this terrorism question: We can not have that. Because this planet will not survive under those conditions.

“And therefore, I think that’s the way you have to look at it. There is no solution, except a global solution.”