The world is quickly approaching a boundary condition, wherein the current strategic framework can no longer continue to exist. Previous precedents have already been broken, red lines have been crossed, and the world has entered into uncharted territory. As founder of the Schiller Institute and convener of the International Peace Coalition Helga Zepp-LaRouche has recently said, the next three to six months are going to be the most dangerous moments in history, and the prospect of a global war of annihilation is an increasingly real possibility.
Ukraine’s incursion into the Kursk region of Russia has laid bare the underlying reality behind this past two and a half years of war. NATO weapons, equipment, and probably also troops are now involved in an offensive operation inside Russian territory—a first for Russia since 1941. At every step of this war over the past two and half years, NATO countries have supported the Kiev regime in evermore radical actions, blurring the line between “assistance” for Kiev and a direct NATO conflict with Russia. Despite the momentary excitement the Kursk adventure created over the past two weeks, it has been increasingly recognized that it is amounting to nothing, and is likely only accelerating the overall collapse of Ukraine’s army.
Then on Friday, August 23, Russia notified the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that Ukraine had fired another drone at the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant—the third in a little over a week. This brazenly insane tactic—what the Russians rightly called “nuclear terrorism”—signifies an utter desperation that seeks to create chaos and destruction in the face of impending failure. Will Ukraine’s enablers and supporters in the West condemn such behavior, and finally rein in Ukraine? Or will they condone another Chernobyl-like disaster as a necessary means in defense of “democracy?”
Another expression of this boundary condition is the situation in Southwest Asia. After months of insistence by the U.S. that Hamas is the only roadblock to a ceasefire deal with Israel, a leaked conversation between Bibi Netanyahu and previously released Israeli hostages has exposed what should have been clear for months. “Whoever told you that there was a [hostage-ceasefire] deal on the table and that we didn’t take it for this reason or that reason, for personal reasons, it’s just a lie,” the Prime Minister said. How much longer will the U.S. be allowed to cover for Israel’s mass-murder in Gaza? And how much longer will U.S. or global opinion accept it?
Or take the case of the suppression of dissent in the U.S. itself. The New York Times has revealed that the Department of Justice is engaged in a “broad criminal investigation” into Americans who express the wrong opinions vis-à-vis Russia, and who are therefore deemed a threat to the upcoming elections. Even though this investigation exists in a legally-ambiguous no-man’s-land, effectively cancelling the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, “more searches are expected soon” the Times writes. How long will the narrative of the currently-reigning “Democratic” Party be believed? When will the fools jump ship?
In such a momentous period in history, turbulence should be expected, and is likely to only increase. But the most important issue is whether enough of us can harness a truthful organizing principle for such a new architecture, which must urgently replace the dying old one.
