In the atmosphere of a “Captain Ahab-like” increasingly unhinged recklessness being expressed by several trans-Atlantic governments, and their reluctant but captured “allies,” all now driving the world, wittingly or not, to thermonuclear war, it is essential not to divert from the policy proposal: “Convoke an International Conference to Establish A New Security and Development Architecture for All Nations” authored by Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp LaRouche. That way lies a restoration of sanity.
The problem we are facing is the addiction to the dying, imperial monetarist world order that the City of London and Wall Street still insist must be saved. That axiomatic, unachievable obsession is the actual underlying impulse for war, for which the surface conflict called “the Ukraine crisis” is but today’s most momentarily prominent symptom. Notice how no one is now talking about the unfolding deliberate deaths of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions in Afghanistan—far more people than are in danger of death in Ukraine. There is no uniformity, no standing together with the “forces of democracy” to save those people’s lives.
Insight into the “Bertrand Russell” mind-set in play in the drunken judgemental processes of the “Hooray For Doomsday” crowd is provided by considering the evaluation offered Monday by General Sir Richard Barrons, ex-head of the British Joint Forces Command. He stated (despite what had been said by White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki–see slug) that Ukraine’s “no-fly zone” request might be granted by NATO, leading to a war with Russia by the end of the week: “A no-fly zone is feasible. So, it’s Monday night. By Wednesday, Russian heavy artillery will be around these Ukrainian cities. And they may be firing indiscriminately, and destroying large chunks of the city, and killing civilians, and when they do this, they will be 300 miles from the border with NATO and the European Union, a day’s drive, or half an hour in a military jet. So I think one of the issues, for about Thursday or Friday of this week, is, how does public opinion in the UK and other countries react, to seeing people who look and live like us being slaughtered. And at that stage, I think there will be a different conversation, led by public opinion, about the application of NATO military power—perhaps through the sky, and definitely against heavy weapons.”
In another example of manic, potentially-fatal hubris, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire was caused to quickly withdraw recklessly arrogant statements he made in an interview concerning the use of sanctions against Russia. “I do not want to leave any ambiguity about the European determination on this issue. We are going to wage an all-out financial and economic war against Russia.
Q: “Against Russia or against Vladimir Putin?
BLM: “Against Russia, against Vladimir Putin, against his government. But the Russian people will also pay the consequences. Let’s be clear. We want to target the heart of the Russian system, we target Vladimir Putin, we target the oligarchs, but we also target the entire Russian economy.”
Le Maire was answered with a stern response from former Russian President and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, now deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, and withdrew the statement. But as American analyst Scott Ritter recently stated, “President Putin has often complained that the West does not listen to him when he speaks of issues Russia deems to be of critical importance to its national security…The question is, is [the West] capable of comprehending the seriousness of the situation? So far, the answer seems to be no.” This present path, no matter the wishful thinking otherwise, must surely lead, sooner or later, to total war. Another road must be taken.
“The fault behind the onrushing doom of the world’s present financial system, lies not with individual policy decisions, but in an ultimately fatal pattern of policy shaping innovations…. That point should be repeated. The fault lies not in any particular decision, as such; the fault lies in the social and ideological characteristics of today’s ‘Atlantic establishment,’ just as the collapse of the Soviet system flowed from the ideological and related characteristics of its establishment. The fault lies in the habituated, ideologically charged pattern of changes of decision, and ordering of changes which shape the ‘planetary orbit’ of the net affects so produced. We say, therefore, that the fatal trajectory of events is, like a planet’s orbit, essentially systemic, not the result of several isolable policy decisions on direction made along the way….
“The rabbit who is killed by the automobile, had the physical ability to avoid that risk: it was the characteristic of the rabbit’s nature, to choose the new decision which then doomed it to serve the pleasure of the waiting crows.”
Lyndon LaRouche wrote that in his November,1988 preface to the book Genocide: Russia and the New World Order, written by economist Sergei Glaziev. Glaziev, for decades a prominent minister in government in Russia, wrote on Feb. 25 that “sanctions are the agony of the outgoing imperial world economic system based on the use of force. In order to minimize the dangers associated with it, it is necessary to accelerate the formation of a new – integral – world economic order which restores international law, national sovereignty, equality of countries, diversity of national economic models, principles of mutual benefit and voluntariness in international economic cooperation.”
For such a design to occur, the worst of enemies will have to decide that the choice is neither “my way, or no way,” nor even the more civilized “nonviolence or nonexistence.” The choice is between the destruction of all mankind, or the development of all mankind. Economic development is the only pathway to peace, and the LaRouche Four Laws, discussed at the conclusion of the Zepp-LaRouche proposal, are the standpoint from which the International Conference to Establish A New Security and Development Architecture for All Nations can succeed.
