Great Opportunities on the
Eve of President Trump’s Asia Tour
Harley Schlanger: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger from the Schiller Institute and I’d like to welcome you to this week’s webcast with Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Helga, this has been an extraordinary week of crucial strategic developments, which, as is often the case, have been hidden from most of the people in the West. We can start with the fact that President Trump will be going to Asia in a couple of days, and he has a pivotal Nov. 8 meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. President Xi gave a very significant message yesterday, where he said he’s looking forward to the opportunity to cooperate with the United States on a “win-win” basis.
There are all sorts of Chinese activities, including Russian Prime Minister Medvedev coming to China, and developments on the Silk Road in Ukraine, Portugal and elsewhere. But also, as you had forecast in one of the earlier webcasts, there’s an effort to stop all this from taking place, and we saw that with the intervention by the special counsel—the legal assassin Robert Mueller—with a really fraudulent set of indictments on Monday of this week, of Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager (June to August 2016), and his aide Rick Gates; and then a classic British FBI sting operation with George Papadopoulos, a former member of the foreign policy advisory panel to Trump’s Presidential campaign. Right on cue, David Gergen, former presidential advisor who served in the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Clinton administrations, went on CNN and said President Trump should not go to Asia in the middle of this.
|View full size
So where do things stand, as we’re sitting here today?
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: It is very dramatic and very hopeful. I think both Presidents, Trump and Xi, have signalled ahead of the summit their best intention to make this a breakthrough. President Trump gave an extremely interesting interview to Fox TV’s Lou Dobbs, where he said that he expects the relationship between the United States and China to be absolutely great; that China is a great country, and that he has an excellent relationship with President Xi Jinping. And then President Xi, from his side, addressed the advisory board of Tsinghua University’s School of Economics and Management in Beijing, composed largely of high-powered American business and financial leaders. He told the board that he is looking “far ahead and aiming high” in the relationship with the United States. Tsinghua University is a very prestigious university, and I think this is a very interesting conception. You can also say it’s a “vision”—looking “far ahead and aiming high,” and I couldn’t help but compare that to the policy approach of German Chancellor Merkel, whose policy is always one of “little steps.” She once even said that one can only steer as far ahead as one can see.
That’s quite a difference in approach! This comes immediately after the 19th National Congress of the CPC, where Xi Jinping managed to unite the whole party behind his vision of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), based on the idea of a community of a shared future of mankind. He said that that is going to be discussed in the meeting with President Trump. Therefore I think that the signs are that the relationship between the two most important countries in the world will turn out to be positive. I’m very, very hopeful.
The Western media are just ridiculous. I monitored in particular the German coverage of what’s going on in the United States, and it’s as if the FBI were running the German media! Because they only report the one side—the Obama, intelligence community side—and they don’t report at all what Trump is actually saying. And of course they don’t report anything about his upcoming visit.
So I think people will be in for a surprise, because I think the developments cannot be hidden, and my expectations are very high that they will be very positive.
Schlanger: We also have, as I mentioned at the outset, a very active Chinese engagement in the world. There are developments in Portugal with the Maritime Silk Road, and with Ukraine as a possible transit point into Europe. And also, by the way, an important discussion going on between India and China: What can you tell us about that?
Zepp-LaRouche: I think President Xi Jinping has a grand design to overcome all tensions. The “win-win” concept applies to every single country. You can see that, for example, in the case of Japan, whose Prime Minister Abe is moving closer to working with China and the BRI. And the same goes for India, which until very recently had a border conflict with China in Doklam in Tibet [known as Donglang in China], where they actually had a stand-off between the militaries of both sides. But that has apparently been quite successfully calmed down, and relations between China and India are now much improved.
|View full size
Russian Prime Minister Medvedev was just in Beijing meeting with President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Li Keqiang and others, and talking about integrating the New Silk Road, the Belt and Road Initiative, with the Eurasian Economic Union. They even talked about creating a “Silk Road on Ice” by joining efforts for the development of the Arctic. So you have all kinds of efforts to overcome tensions in all kinds of conflicts, and I think there is a grand design behind all of this, which is the idea of moving the entire world community up to a new level of relations among nations, overcoming geopolitics.
This is something most people have not yet even started to think about. This is a revolutionary new concept, of overcoming geopolitics by finding a collaboration in the interest of the other, uniting actually all of mankind. I don’t know if it will succeed, because there are important forces who are opposing it, but I think the intention, by China, and by President Xi Jinping, to establish such a new model of relationships, is unquestionably real.
Yet people are sort of brainwashed by the Western media. We find many times in the streets, at our information tables, people telling us, “Oh, but I don’t trust the Chinese.” I would ask these people just to investigate for a little while, and make themselves more familiar with the Chinese grand design, and not simply buy the media reports against China. Why should people believe the media on China, when they are obviously lying on so many other issues? So I would wish the audience—you—to open your minds and to open your hearts, and find out for yourself. Because I think, what we are witnessing right now is one of the most exceptional changes in human history. If this model of the Chinese succeeds, the danger of war and the danger of the extinction of the human race through the use of thermonuclear weapons, for example, will be overcome forever. And that is definitely something which I think is worth trying to accomplish.
Schlanger: Last week, you mentioned that Jim Umpleby, the CEO of Caterpillar, a company that manufactures heavy machinery used for agriculture and construction, said that he’s very optimistic about a U.S. role in the New Silk Road. In an interview published by The Diplomat, with a leading establishment figure, someone who is inside the institutions, Joseph Nye, former Dean of Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, stated that he favors U.S. cooperation with China. What is it that the neo-cons and neo-liberals in the establishment fear so much about U.S.-China cooperation?
Zepp-LaRouche: It is so clear that the Chinese model—which is also reflected in the new banking institutions, such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the New Development Bank of the BRICS countries, the Silk Road Fund, and many similar institutions—is explicitly oriented towards investment in the real economy. And yet, rather than looking at this emerging system of alternative credit institutions as a savior, as something which may eventually even be the lifeboat when the next financial crash hits—which is about to happen at any moment—the West looks at it as a threat. Because as you can see, the entire Western system, especially as it emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union, was based on the idea of a unipolar world, based on the “special relationship” of the Anglo-Americans, running the world through financial control of the dollar-denominated system.
Against the Old, Dying System
This system obviously worked for some people very well, because they became richer and richer—I mean, just shamelessly rich billionaires, two-digit billionaires—while a growing majority of the people became poorer, and the middle class was afraid of being put out on the street. So these billionaires defend that system, because that is the basis of their privilege, that is what their money is attached to. And they look askance at the idea of China promoting a model which is truly devoted to the common good—not only the common good of the Chinese people, but very explicitly investing in people and in countries left behind by the trans-Atlantic financial system.
The Chinese are providing credits for infrastructure, for industrial parks, and for agriculture, and this should be seen as a more attractive model. Rather than saying, OK, let’s recognize the fact that the Western model did not work; it led to all kinds of rebellions; it led to the Brexit; it led to Hillary Clinton losing the election; it led to the rise of populist parties in Europe. It’s actually contributing to the dissolution of the EU at a rather amazing speed, if you look at Spain, if you look at the situation in other areas such as Eastern Europe, for example, which is clearly turning away from the EU…. So it had all of these side-effects—rather than reflecting upon all this and changing, and maybe adjusting to the new offers, they are determined to oppose it by the old tricks, lies, set-ups and coups, if they can. That is why they have not given up.
It’s a small elite, but existing in many countries. Those who are going after Trump in the United States, are definitely determined not to let that new system emerge, and we have in Europe, unfortunately, similarly minded people. But they are in trouble, in my view.
Schlanger: Let’s turn our attention for a moment to the latest developments in the United States on this: In particular, I want to focus on this plea agreement with this character Papadopoulos, which was based on the fact that they say he lied to the FBI. What did he lie about? Supposedly he was told that the Russians had hacked emails; supposedly he met with a Russian professor—who turns out to be from Malta—and the Russian professor introduced him to Putin’s niece—who turned out not to be Putin’s niece—and the whole story just reeks of a classic FBI-British sting operation.
Now, you reminded people yesterday, I think it was, that your husband once said that when you’re in a battle like this, you can’t just counterpunch—and of course Trump is a fairly effective counterpuncher—but you have to outflank the enemy. How could he do that?
Zepp-LaRouche: One option which already has been publicly discussed in various publications, is the idea of appointing a new special investigator, this time to investigate Mueller, the FBI, and the role of the British—because that’s what’s most important. If you look at what came out in the recent ten days or so about this whole affair, there are all the signs now that the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and the Obama White House all paid the law firm Perkins Coie, which in turn paid Fusion GPS, which in turn paid former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, to produce trash. So they paid cash for trash. Steele produced this unspeakable “dodgy dossier” about Trump, which has no substance to it, but was used by the FBI and by the Clinton campaign, and by Obama, of course, to smear Trump.
Is that legal, to use the intelligence service—and the intelligence services of a foreign country at that—to attack your political opponent in a Presidential race? That’s the real question here, and even the Wall Street Journal, of all places, and also the New York Post, and also a British newspaper called The Week, have all started to say that there must be an investigation of the role of the British. And if you remember, already early this year, I wrote an article saying “.” That’s exactly the issue: the role of the British meddling in the internal affairs of the United States, and the collusion of the secret services of the Obama administration in doing that. I think that that is the real issue.
I think that Trump should pick this up and boldly move ahead with it, because it is precisely this apparatus that brought the world so close to World War III in the confrontation with Russia just before the election.
That is one important flank. Another, maybe equally or even more important flank, is to boldly move in the direction of what the whole Russia-gate operation was aimed to prevent: Namely, to improve the relationship with Russia and with China, and do it in this upcoming Asia trip, where the potential also exists that Trump will meet not only with Xi Jinping—that is certain—but also possibly with President Putin [at the APEC summit in Vietnam], and consolidate the relationship between the United States, China, and Russia, and in that way, outflank the people trying to prevent exactly that.
Schlanger: The indications we have are that the attempt to stop this trip will not work, that the President is committed to it, and that he’s made several statements about looking forward to meeting with the Chinese President.
Yet another flank that you have mentioned in the past which is very much associated with the LaRouche movement is Glass-Steagall, as a starting point toward the basic , as a way of defeating these bankers. In the last couple of days, there has been speculation about who’s going to become the new Federal Reserve Chairman, and whether [European Central Bank President] Draghi will start shedding the junk assets and so on; but so far, there’s been very little talk about Glass-Steagall. This is obviously something that has to be brought forward, especially if we’re going to succeed in integrating with the New Silk Road.
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes. The unfortunate, and unfortunately also not surprising news, is that the EU Commission has now implemented guidelines which prohibit the separation of the [commercial from investment] banks in the EU. That’s really stupid. Because by doing that they turn away from the only way to prevent the oncoming financial crash. But obviously that’s not the end of it, because in the Italian parliament, for example, there is big motion for Glass-Steagall; I know that there is even some collaboration between some people in the U.S. Congress and the Italian members of parliament on that. But I think there must be a renewed effort, because if we continue with the present system, it is just a question of time until this whole thing detonates.
And as I mentioned earlier, one consequence of the looming economic collapse is the rapid dissolution of the EU. The situation in Spain remains quite dangerous. The Spanish government of Prime Mininster Mariano Rajoy Brey outlawed the Catalan government; Carles Puigdemont, the former president of Catalonia, is now in Brussels. This could lead to a very tricky situation, because if he goes back to Spain, he could be arrested; if this crisis continues, then the Spanish government may demand from Belgium the expulsion of Puigdemont. This is European politics, you know! Obviously, there is no solution within this geometry, because the reason this conflict between the Catalans and the Spanish government exists, has everything to do with the ongoing problems of the financial system—and if there is a crash, everything could really end up in total chaos.
So, as I mentioned earlier, there is a huge effort to destroy the nation-state. I’m quite amazed that the woman from the European Council on Foreign Relations, Ulricke Guérot—this council is very much associated with George Soros—has been given quite some media presence on the First Channel of German television. She was on Deutschlandfunk this morning, pushing very hard for a reform of the EU which would get rid of the nation-state to have a Europe of the regions. This is an old policy: It comes from the Coudenhove-Kalergi, Pan-European Union—European federalists —and it’s pushed by all the British media. It’s the idea that you can have a Europe of only regions—maybe 50 or 60 independent regions—and then a supranational government in Brussels. Naturally, these regions, individually, would be much too weak to protect the common good of their inhabitants, while the nation-state, especially in times of crisis, is potentially the only institution which can defend the common good of the people.
Those who are pushing the liberal model want to get rid of the nation-state for that reason. There are some banking houses in the United States, which already years ago said the existing European national constitutions must be gotten rid of, because these constitutions were all written in the post-war period, where too much emphasis was given to sovereignty and the common good—and we should change that.
So I think this is a very important battle, and unfortunately, there is a lot of disunity in Europe. The East European countries are basically all going in the direction of working with the New Silk Road, which is much more advantageous for them; there is a new Balkan Silk Road, and there are tremendous developments in the 16+1 countries—that is, the Central and East European countries, working with China. But the only way to elevate that would be for the European governments more clearly to accept collaboration with the BRI.
But the EU has dug in its heels, and [EU Commission President] Jean-Claude Juncker, in his so-called state of the union address in September, said that the EU will now implement mechanisms to control Chinese investments. They’re just stuck in geopolitics.
I have much more hope in the short term for things which could come out of this trip by Trump. If there is a positive result, then I think things in Europe will change also, because the idea that this disunited Europe could remain in opposition to Russia, China, and the United States working together, is rather ridiculous.
So I think it is overall very dangerous. I’m not telling people to let down their guard, because the world is not yet in safe waters. But I think it’s very hopeful. I appeal, again, to all our listeners and viewers to come on board the Schiller Institute. We are a very important think tank, and we have a cultural movement, fighting for a new cultural Renaissance, the idea that the cultures must be known, that people must know the beauty of the other cultures, and that all the mistrust and chauvinism, and indifference or whatever, will go away, and people will understand that the world is actually very beautiful. When Xi Jinping said, at the 19th National Congress, that China wants to work to make the whole world beautiful for all people by the year 2050, I think this is something absolutely achievable: We should all join in this effort. The Silk Road Spirit catches on, once you come to know it.
Schlanger: Helga, I have one final question for you on the situation in Europe, in particular in Germany, where you’re probably the most authoritative person on these kinds of questions: What’s happening with the possibility of Chancellor Angela Merkel pulling together a new government? There was just this crazy thing from the Greens, where they said they want to completely eliminate coal power in Germany by 2020. How is that going to work, with the coalition of the CDU and the CSU? Is there any way we can see a new government in Germany?
Zepp-LaRouche: It looks very difficult, because the liberal party, [the Free Democrats] already said that they will not go along with it, and it’s not workable. These Greens just have a different agenda—they want to turn Germany into a Morgenthau Plan country, which says something about the authorship of their ideas.
I don’t think it will work. They only agreed on the so-called Black Zero, which is the idea of debt brake, which is already in the German Constitution, unfortunately—but I don’t think they have a vision. None of these parties have expressed any opinion of the New Silk Road; they have not commented on it. In part, their publications, or publications associated with them, have even opposed it. Some people are now saying it may take until next year before any results can be known; others are talking about early elections.
|View full size
I think the prospects to form such a government are not exactly good; they’re not exciting, for sure. My policy has always been to outflank Germany, because Germany under present conditions is too much under the control of the EU bureaucracy. But all around Germany, countries are joining the Belt and Road Initiative. I already mentioned the East and Central European countries and the Balkans. Italy is in a much more positive direction, as well as Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, and Austria. Many German cities are now waking up and creating partnerships with Chinese cities, and industrial associations are organizing local events. So, I think the idea is spreading, and the more quickly we can help it spread, the more quickly the world will get to be a better place.
Schlanger: Well, as you’ve emphasized, this is an unstoppable momentum. No matter what its opponents try to do, they can’t stop it. But we’ve got to make sure it can succeed in the West. One of the most important things that we’re presenting to you, the viewer, is that the Schiller Institute, as a membership organization, has been at the lead of this, going back its founding in 1984. So, check out our . we’ll be back next week, and I’m sure there’ll be quite a bit more to talk about. We’ll be in the middle of President Trump’s trip to Asia.
So we’ll see you next week, Helga.
Zepp-LaRouche: OK, bye-bye.