Note: A technical error cut out 12 minutes of the transcript from the May 14 webcast in the briefing for May 15. We present the complete transcript here:
Three Stooges Plus One Rally Behind the Puppet Zelenskyy
Wednesday, May 14, 2025
HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hello and welcome to our weekly dialogue with Schiller Institute founder and chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Today is Wednesday, May 14, 2025. I’m Harley Schlanger and I’ll be your host. You can send your questions and comments by email to Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche at questions@schillerinstitute.org, or post them on the chat page.
Now, Helga, we’re in the midst of a series of very high-profile diplomatic initiatives, with President Trump in Southwest Asia, a meeting between representatives of Ukraine and Russia scheduled for tomorrow in Istanbul, ongoing deliberations between the U.S. and Iran, and between India and Pakistan, trade talks between the U.S. and China, and on and on and on. The move from kinetic warfare to diplomacy would be a welcome step forward, but there are still many obstacles to overcome. Before we go to the specific cases, I’d like your thoughts on the overall dynamic underway, which you described as an historic wave toward a New Paradigm, following the Victory Day celebrations on May 9 in Moscow, and President Putin’s May 11 press conference.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think that the overall dynamic is that of a new world economic order. But before I come to that, I think President Trump in the last several days has clearly tilted the situation by trying to end the war in Ukraine—as you said, tomorrow is the meeting in Istanbul where from the Russian side it is unclear who will be there. Maybe Ushakov, an advisor of Putin; maybe Lavrov; maybe some surprise, in the form of Putin which I don’t think will happen, but it’s not to be excluded. In any case, it was reiterated from the Russian side that what is on the table is the Putin offer to return to the negotiations as they were in March-April 2022; which obviously would be the reasonable way to go. Zelenskyy is saying he will be there, he will be there before the Russians, whatever. If it would come to such a meeting and direct discussions would take place, it would be a great fortune.
Unfortunately, one can also see that the so-called “Coalition of the Willing,"—the British, the French, the Germans, the Poles—they are still playing around with putting European troops in Ukraine as a so-called “peace force,” which has been rejected by Russia. And also ongoing talk coming from the new German government of Merz of not disclosing from now on anymore what kinds of weapons will be delivered to Ukraine. Why do you need to deliver weapons, even by implication the Taurus, when there is a clear perspective for peace? Merz has basically said that the time when it will be said very clearly what kinds of weapons will be sent to Ukraine is over; from now on this will be done in secrecy. Kiesewetter, the de facto defense spokesman for Merz, implied that if Russia is not making compromises, the Taurus will be delivered. This is a clear break of the absolutely last red line, which would make Germany a war party.
Now Bundestag member Miersch from the SPD said the SPD will stick to their policy of no Taurus missiles to Ukraine because it would make Germany a war party. But I think this noise coming from the new government is very dangerous, and I think that given the fact that the delivery of the Taurus would make Germany a war party, given the fact that only German soldiers can operate that cruise missile; I think this is a degree of irresponsibility to even contemplate that. I have had discussions with some colleagues and friends and contacts in the last several days, and we were all agreeing that what is the most remarkable is the complete detachment of the present establishments from considering what will be the consequences of their actions. It is as if they are being pulled by some internal or external mechanism which has nothing to do with reality, but is some kind of a drive to keep doing what they have been doing to maintain a position of hegemony, of dominance.
I think it’s very, very important that the population gets more active and wakes up, because I think the biggest problem in Germany is still the passivity. When you think of what is at stake, that if Germany ends up in a conflict with Russia, the likelihood that nothing at all would be left of Germany is almost 100%. Then you have the actions of these politicians, which I find to be such a discrepancy that it’s scary. I am happy to announce that next week on this same format, the very famous and extraordinary rocket and nuclear missile expert Ted Postol will be on the program. He will prepare, especially for the German population, a clear message of what the deployment of the Taurus to Ukraine would mean for Germany. So, that is the immediate comment on that.
Naturally, it is good that there seems to be some agreement between the U.S. and China on trade issues. The Trump trip to the Emirates and the Arab states seems to be mainly dominated by business deals, arms sales from the U.S. to Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately, it does not seem to be impacting the horrendous situation in Gaza, which has reached a point beyond any description.
SCHLANGER: We have a number of questions going in more deeply to these particular cases: First of all on Ukraine and Russia, several people wrote to say they have no trust that Zelenskyy is serious about peace, especially as the European leaders—Starmer, Macron, Merz, and Tusk, dubbed by one viewer as “the Three Stooges Plus One”—seem committed to permanent war. Do you believe that the insistence from Europe for a ceasefire first, rather than negotiating for an end to the war, is designed to provoke Putin to refuse to negotiate, so they can place the blame on him?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yeah. That was an obvious attempt by these four countries, or their leaders, to basically create a trap for Putin. But Putin, I think very swiftly judoed this: After all, he has a black belt for judo, so he has proven one more time that he can put these European leaders on the floor rapidly. So, I think that was successfully judoed.
SCHLANGER: And it seemed that Trump was backing him up, by saying that Zelenskyy should be there to negotiate.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Yes, yes. I think so. I think it’s very clear, that with all ifs and whatnot, you can say there is an agreement between Washington and Moscow to end that war, and the difference between those Europeans is becoming utterly clear to the whole world.
SCHLANGER: Now, you brought up the question of the horrendous situation in Gaza, with the Israelis committed to a policy of starving people, openly suggesting that that’s what they intend to do. But, at the same time, you have previously unthinkable developments, such as the U.S. going around Netanyahu to negotiate with Hamas, with Yemen, with Iran. A journalist from Iran asked this question: “Do you think President Trump has a coherent plan, or is he improvising day by day?”
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I don’t think he has a long-term plan. I think he has an impulse, and I think he ended the war with Yemen, because even the New York Times had a lengthy article, saying that it completely failed; and several commentators in the recent period pointed to the fact, you know, it becomes more and more clear that military means to settle conflicts have utterly failed, all of them! Vietnam, complete failure! Afghanistan, shameful failure! Iraq, failure. Libya, catastrophe. And now, Ukraine: Ukraine is lost. Prime Minister Orban of Hungary, just at the recent meeting in Budapest, said, the Ukraine war has been lost and the Western leaders have a tremendous difficulty to admit it, because losing such a war is not such an easy thing to digest, and now the war with Yemen was lost, because Trump was presented with figures that the Pentagon had tremendous losses, you know, drones, jets, high costs, but no result. So Trump decided to end that war as well.
And I can only say that the Trump position on Iran seems to be that he, indeed, says, as long as Iran agrees to have no nuclear weapons, that this conflict can be settled, too. And given the fact that there’s still a fatwa in Iran it is contrary to Islamic religion to go for nuclear weapons, I think there is a good chance that that conflict can be settled peacefully, as well.
SCHLANGER: Now, the same reporter asks: “Is Trump’s present trip just about selling military hardware?” But then, there was also a question from Iran, “Do you have anything to report on the progress around the Oasis Plan?”
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think that Trump, if you look at how he behaves, you know, many people have been noting that, and I’m not saying anything terribly surprising, but I think, if you want to understand how Trump acts, he does most things, what other people do with diplomacy, or visions or so forth, he does as a businessman. And he sees the way how to increase the influence of the United States in Southwest Asia, basically, by business deals. And this became clear in the speech he made in Saudi Arabia, where he said, he wants to see the region building cities, instead of throwing bombs against each other; making deals, creating stability through economic cooperation, so that is obviously fitting with, you know, Saudi Arabia seems to play both sides. They want to have on the one side, good relations with the BRICS; they are sort of in it, but not really. But at the same time, they have now a plan where they put pretty much their entire defense system on U.S.-delivered weapons.
So, I think that, as far as this goes, it’s definitely a step in the right direction, but it does not address the horrendous situation in Gaza, and I don’t want to anticipate your questions, Harley, but it’s really—this has reached a point, and in case our viewers are not fully in tune, let me just restate where we are: Yesterday, there was a UN Security Council meeting, where the main UN responsible for the situation, in the most dramatic way, said that this is an ongoing genocide; it fulfills all the criteria for the legal definition of what genocide is; and even Josep Borrell, people may remember, he was the so-called “EU Commission High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,” the person who had said that Europe is a garden and the rest is a jungle. Now, he said, what is happening in Gaza fulfills with all legal criteria the condition of an ongoing genocide. Now, the UN representative at this UN Security Council meeting basically made the crucial point, he said: We have to confront the fact that future generations will ask us, what have we done to stop this, given the fact that it was absolutely known, and what is going on on the scene, Netanyahu just announced that the IDF will go in for another intervention in the next days. For 60 days, there has been no food, medical supplies, or water, so the official qualification is that there is now an official condition of famine; the whole Gaza at Level 4, and 22% of the people at Level 5, which means that they are dying like flies as we are speaking here! And the other ones are not far behind.
Now, the Israeli forces have basically dismantled the previously existing 400 distribution points for food, water and medical supplies, to only 4; and the service, given that there was a huge campaign to eliminate UNRWA from the scene, is now given to a private firm, where Tony Blair, of all people, is somehow involved. And that means that the starving people have to run through the rubble field to get to one of these distribution points, and then, they are not allowed to ever go back!
So, this is part of a generally acknowledged now, even by the mainstream media, the effort to completely go for ethnic cleansing, drive out the Palestinians altogether, and basically for Israel to take over the entirety of the Gaza Strip.
Now, there is an Australian journalist, Caitlin Johnstone, and she made a point, commenting on the fact that finally, after 19 months, some Western media are starting to report the horrendous truth about what is going on, by saying, “well, it is now clear, the wind is shifting, and it can no longer be hidden any more, and therefore, some media are starting to report, in a CYA mode (meaning “cover your a-dot-dot”), to be able afterwards, to say, “oh yeah, we reported on that.”
