ANASTASIA BATTLE: Welcome everyone. This is the International Peace Coalition; this is our 72nd consecutive meeting. Thank you all for joining us, especially if you are new. My name is Anastasia Battle; I’ll be your moderator, along with Dennis Small and Dennis Speed as co-moderators.
Just to start off, the reason why we created this forum—and I really like to emphasize this, because it’s important—is because we wanted to bring people of all ideologies and many different nations and cultures together to accomplish true peace. And that the only way we’re going to stop this danger of nuclear war is if we bring humanity together to make this happen. So again, I want to thank all of you for joining us today at this very difficult time. I’m sure many of you have heard about the assassination of Hamas leader Sinwar. He was killed by Israel just the other day, which brings us even closer to this danger. Also, President Zelenskyy threatening that Ukraine will go nuclear if they do not get their NATO membership. This is incredibly intense, and all the more reason why what we’re doing here today is very important.
If you’re on the live stream or the Zoom, please share this link out and get as many people on as possible right now. With that, we’re going to continue with our agenda. We have a number of opening speakers for you, and then we’ll have a general discussion with the many people who are on the Zoom line. So, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, please go ahead and open us up. She is the founder of the Schiller Institute and the initiator of the International Peace Coalition. Thank you.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Let me first say hello to all of you. A couple of months ago I had dared the opinion that we would enter the most dangerous six months in the history of mankind. Unfortunately, I’m not in a position to correct that view; as a matter of fact, there are many signs that major developments will occur before the U.S. election on November 5th.
As Anastasia just said, with the assassination of the leader of Hamas, Sinwar, we are clearly in a situation where the escalation is looming. Kamala Harris said now is the time to end it, but obviously that is not what Netanyahu intends. And CNN already a couple of days ago reported that the Israeli army is ready for an attack on Iran at any moment. It could be that such an attack takes place; it could be a conventional attack “only” on oil refineries and such targets. It could also be an attempt to knock out the nuclear facilities, which obviously, given the fact that they are deeply hidden in the mountains, would require probably nuclear weapons. Therefore, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov has warned very sharply in a sharp warning to Israel, that if they would do that, it would lead to an absolutely horrible catastrophe in the region and possibly beyond.
The situation on the ground remains one that is beyond description. Ethnic cleansing is continuing. Israel has announced that they will declare about 400,000 people living in the north of Gaza as combatants and that they can only leave or face starvation. If this is not a case of clear ethnic cleansing, I don’t know what you call it. But the even larger danger naturally is a pending strike into Iran. Already in 2016, Russia had delivered the S-300 air defense system to Iran, and the Times of India was reporting at the end of August, that Russia also has delivered some Iskander missiles to Iran. These are nuclear-capable missiles. And also, the Murmansk-BN EW system, which is a system which can suppress satellite navigation and communication at a range of about 3-500 miles. The Iskander system can also include R-500 or 9M729 ground-launched missiles which have a range of 1550 miles and are also nuclear-capable. But the crucial point about all of this is that they need Russian specialists to operate them—both the Iskander and the Murmansk systems. Also, more recently, Russia has supplied Iran with S-400 defense systems. So, there are, in all likelihood, Russian specialists in Iran, helping Iran with these systems. While on the other side, the United States has delivered recently the THAAD [Terminal High Altitude Air Defense] air defense system to Israel. It is reported that there are about 100 U.S. troops there, and these THAAD air defense systems will clearly be a target for Iran if this scenario unfolds. Russia has to supply Iran with the targetting info needed to hit these U.S.-operated THAAD missiles. So, that means we are not only looking at a possible Israeli strike against Iran, but we are looking at a direct confrontation between the U.S. and Russian militaries over this situation. And you can easily imagine that this has the potential to completely go out of control; especially because the recent Russian-Iranian security arrangement which has been agreed upon is supposed to be signed at the upcoming Kazan BRICS meeting. Obviously if that goes into effect, then you have a full-fledged Russian-Iranian response. Remember that President Putin only a few months ago was in North Korea to make a strategic agreement between Russia and North Korea; and then you have the close cooperation between Russia and China. So, we are really looking into the eye of an escalation to World War III.
Unfortunately, the situation in Ukraine is not much better, because there the situation on the battleground in Ukraine is becoming more desperate by the hour, and it’s very clear that there is no chance in the world that Ukraine could win against Russia; which many people have been saying for a long time. Zelenskyy is on a tour of Europe right now, including Berlin and other places, demanding or proposing his so-called “victory plan,” which is not a victory plan at all. Because all he demanded was that Ukraine should immediately be allowed into NATO, and that Ukraine will insist on having nuclear weapons if that is denied. That is obviously a direct plan to World War III, because both of these conditions—nuclear arms in Ukraine, and Ukraine being part of NATO—are the absolute red line. That’s the real reason why this whole conflict erupted in the first place. Basically for Russia it is not acceptable to have offensive systems so close to their border. And for Zelenskyy to repeat that just means that he has no concern for reality at all. This is why one of the leaders of the Duma, Leonid Slutsky, characterized that plan as an attempt to pull the West into World War III.
Unfortunately in Germany, where Scholz still says no, he will not deliver the Taurus, otherwise Germany will be, second to the United States, the largest supplier of weapons to Ukraine. But Scholz said the Taurus system would still not be delivered. He will stick to that. But then, Friedrich Merz, the opposition leader and probable Chancellor candidate of the opposition, on Oct. 16 in a Bundestag debate was talking—he said, “Oh, we should give Putin a 24-hour ultimatum that he stops attacking the Ukrainian population, or we should destroy the supply lines by which the weapons come, for killing the Ukrainian population. And we should supply Ukraine with the Taurus missiles.” Now, you probably remember that only a few months ago, there was this big scandal about a tape being somehow released in which three Bundeswehr officers were debating how the Taurus system can only be operated by experts of the Bundeswehr. So, what Merz is actually proposing, is to use German Taurus missiles for an attack on Russia; a nuclear power. Somebody who makes such a proposal is obviously completely separated from any reality. I think if one would consult a psychologist, they would easily agree that the definition of insanity is that people are completely separated from reality.
The real reason this is coming to a head is not just in the timetable of the U.S. election, the general condition on the battlefield, but obviously also because the financial system of the trans-Atlantic world is in terrible shape. They want to prevent by all means the emergence of a new system; but that is exactly what is happening. The former vice president of the New Development Bank Paulo Nogueira Batista, just again in an interview said that the IMF is unreformable. I think the unwillingness of forces in the West to write off an unpayable debt would confirm such an estimate. Therefore, Nogueira is insisting that a new international financial architecture is needed; a new reserve currency. In the preparatory meetings before the BRICS summit, it became clear that within the BRICS group, not everybody is on the same page. It seems that India is not going in the direction of such a new reserve currency. This is why Nogueira proposed that a sub-group of the BRICS should work on such a proposal. He said—which I think is absolutely true—that the countries of the Global South would be absolutely disappointed if out of the Kazan meeting, nothing concrete would come out, but just nice words.
There is one other development, which I think is more hopeful, and that is that Sun Xiaobo, the Director-General of Arms Control of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, has written in an article in Global Times that a new security architecture is needed. I think this is the closest I have heard to the proposal we have been pushing here for a new security and development architecture which must take into account the interests of all nations of the world. So, what Sun Xiaobo says is we absolutely have to aim to have a world free of nuclear weapons. I think that is so absolutely urgent, because if we are the intelligent species on the planet, and we cannot eliminate a weapons system which threatens our extinction, then we fail that characterization for sure to be the creative species. He says that the existing security structures are not adequate to prevent nuclear war; which is clear if you look at the malfunction of the UN Security Council because of the veto power of the five permanent countries, no conclusion has been reached for a very long time. Therefore, he calls for a paradigm shift, an inclusive and cooperative security framework which gives attention to the legitimate concerns of all nations. He calls for all nations to start to discuss a sustainable security concept which should be started with concrete steps, and which must go beyond Cold War thinking.
I think that is the absolutely necessary answer to a two-fold nuclear war danger coming out of two regional crises which can go out of control at any moment. Therefore, I want to reiterate my repeated call to all the participants of this meeting that we have to find a way of catapulting this debate on the need for a new security and development architecture in the tradition of the Peace of Westphalia, on the international agenda. Because I think that is the only way we will get out of this two-fold crisis.
So, let’s discuss this, I hope.
Remarks to Mossi Raz:
I think this peace proposal you were talking about, Mr. Raz, which was discussed also with the Pope, I think it has its place; but my experience and worry is that it will not work. Because if you don’t change the underlying dynamic, which would mean an agreement to stop this Eretz Israel on the one side and to really go into a direction like what we have proposed with the economic development plan for the entire region, so that you put an incentive for everybody to put past wars and conflicts behind, and move towards building a future together, I’m not certain that it will function. This is why I think we need to look at the totality. What will be the result of the Lebanon crisis? Already more than a million people have become refugees; many of them go to Syria, but some of them also go to Europe. If you look at the European response to the refugee crisis, it just is absolutely putting into question the right for asylum, the Geneva Convention on refugees. What Italy is now proposing with the hotspot in Albania is a nightmare. It’s a concentration camp, and the EU wants to make that the model for all countries; that they would put up such hotspots, and in that bypass the Schengen Agreement, which says that the country where a refugee comes on land for the first time, must also proceed with the asylum procedures. This is not functioning because there are many EU members who don’t want to have any refugees at all, so they try to bypass this with these hotspots. But that is completely inhuman. If you look at the Frontex pushback operation in the Mediterranean, we are losing all morality. We are supposed to be a continent with a humanist tradition, and I see that all of that is being forgotten. That is the other concern. I think that the condoning of what has happened for so long is already … I think the image of Europe has completely gone into a dive in the eyes of the Global South. The countries are looking at Europe as a failed continent with an inhuman policy all the way around. I really think, apart from what I said about the immediate danger of a direct U.S.-Russia engagement over Iran, which could happen, and this idea of escalating in the Ukraine situation is equally bringing us to the abyss.
If you look at all of these things together, it is unfortunately my conviction that no partial solution can function. These partial solutions are very important if they are embedded in an overall new security architecture like it was accomplished with the Peace of Westphalia, where also the war parties agreed on basic principles, like to take into account the interests of the other in the interest of peace to forgive all crimes which were committed by one or the other side. So, there were these general principles, and then they were sitting for four years to negotiate all the details, territorial claims and other details. I think if one looks at what this proposal is in that context, it can have a very important positive role. But if you don’t change the general attitude of the large powers involved—which is the United States, Russia, the European Union, China, and the BRICS—I don’t see that this can function. So, I would encourage, can we not discuss also how to make this proposal for a new security and development architecture really the focus of our organizing? I find it very encouraging that the Chinese Foreign Ministry issued something which is just expressed in different words, but concerning the content, goes absolutely in the same direction.
