In preparatory discussion for the Friday webcast, Lyndon LaRouche made the following comments, paraphrased:
Intelligent people must realize that speculation will not work. The whole gambling system must be cancelled. All gambling debt must be cancelled and we must start all over—but on the basis of different principles altogether. The British System must come to an end. And the post-DeGaulle French system as well. A full global reconstruction is required, no deals. The U.S.-European financial system is impossible. Just say “no.” We must return to a system based on physical values, not money values. We need to start afresh from a Hamiltonian standpoint.
Incidentally, current geopolitical tensions are related, to some extent, to economic uncertainty and the exhausting of the old sources of growth. There is a risk it may increase or even be artificially provoked. It is our common interest to find a creative and constructive way out of this situation.
[There are] enormous existing and growing potential of digital and industrial technologies, robotics, energy, biotechnology, medicine and other fields. Discoveries in these areas can lead to true technological revolutions, to an explosive growth of labour productivity. This is already happening and will happen inevitably;…
In fact, even today we can see attempts to secure or even monopolise the benefits of next generation technologies. This, I think, is the motive behind the creation of restricted areas with regulatory barriers to reduce the cross-flow of breakthrough technologies…. One can control the spread of certain technologies for a while, but in today’s world it would be next to impossible to keep them in a contained area, even a large area. Yet, these efforts could lead to basic sciences, now open to sharing of knowledge and information through joint projects, getting closed too, with separation barriers coming up.
…. we can develop effectively only together, by building cooperation. We believe that such cooperation can be effectively built as part of a flexible and open integration environment that encourages competition in scientific research, a variety of technological solutions that allow the participating countries to fully employ their competence and their potential….
We are aware of the impressive prospects of cooperation between the EAEU [Eurasian Economic Union] and other countries and integration associations. Over 40 states and international organisations have expressed the desire to establish a free trade zone with the Eurasian Economic Union. Our partners and we think that the EAEU can become one of the centres of a greater emergent integration area….
As early as June we, along with our Chinese colleagues, are planning to start official talks on the formation of comprehensive trade and economic partnership in Eurasia with the participation of the European Union states and China. I expect that this will become one of the first steps toward the formation of a major Eurasian partnership. We will certainly resume the discussion of this major project at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok in early September….
Friends, the project I have just mentioned — the greater Eurasia project — is, of course, open for Europe, and I am convinced that such cooperation may be mutually beneficial. Despite all of the well-known problems in our relations, the European Union remains Russia’s key trade and economic partner….
I also understand our European partners when they talk about the complicated decisions for Europe that were made at the talks on the formation of the Trans-Atlantic partnership. Obviously, Europe has a vast potential and a stake on just one regional association clearly narrows its opportunities. Under the circumstances, it is difficult for Europe to maintain balance and preserve space for a gainful maneuver.
As the recent meetings with representatives of the German and French business circles have showed, European business is willing and ready to cooperate with this country. Politicians should meet businesses halfway by displaying wisdom, and a far-sighted and flexible approach. We must return trust to Russian-European relations and restore the level of our cooperation.
We remember how it all started. Russia did not initiate the current breakdown, disruption, problems and sanctions. All our actions have been exclusively reciprocal. But we don’t hold a grudge, as they say, and are ready to meet our European partners halfway. However, this can by no means be a one-way street.
Let me repeat that we are interested in Europeans joining the project for a major Eurasian partnership. In this context we welcome the initiative of the President of Kazakhstan on holding consultations between the Eurasian Economic Union and the EU. Yesterday we discussed this issue at the meeting with the President of the European Commission.
In addition, it would be possible to resume dialogue between experts at the technical level on a broad range of issues, such as trade, investment, technical regulation and customs administration. In this way we could create the groundwork for further cooperation and partnership….
Naturally, we consider it important to continue cooperation on major research projects, such as the ITER thermonuclear plant and the x-ray free electron laser, to name a few. Joint efforts will allow us to seriously increase the technological competitiveness of both Europe and Russia. It is enough to note that in 2015 Russia invested 1.2 billion Euros in high-tech joint projects with Europe….
A presidential council for strategic development and priority projects will be created in the near future. It will be headed by your humble servant, while the council presidium will be led by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev….
The world needs such a powerful country like the United States, and so do we, but we do not need it to constantly interfere in our affairs, tell us how to live, and preventing Europe from building a relationship with us.
FROM THE Q&A:
I do not want to believe that we are moving towards another Cold War, and I am sure nobody wants this. We certainly do not. There is no need for this. The main logic behind international relations development is that no matter how dramatic it might seem, it is not the logic of global confrontation. What is the root of the problem?
I will tell you. I will have to take you back in time. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, we expected overall prosperity and overall trust. Unfortunately, Russia had to face numerous challenges, speaking in modern terms: economic, social and domestic policy. We came up against separatism, radicalism, aggression of international terror, because undoubtedly we were fighting against Al Qaeda militants in the Caucasus, it is an obvious fact, and there can be no second thoughts about it. But instead of support from our partners in our struggle with these problems, we sadly came across something different — support for the separatists…, information support, financial support and administrative backup….
The Soviet Union was no more; the Warsaw Pact had ceased to exist. But for some reason, NATO continues to expand its infrastructure towards Russia’s borders. It started long before yesterday. Montenegro is becoming a [nato] member. Who is threatening Montenegro? You see, our position is being totally ignored.
Another, equally important, or perhaps, the most important issue is the unilateral withdrawal [of the U.S.] from the ABM Treaty. The ABM Treaty was once concluded between the Soviet Union and the United States for a good reason…. The treaty was designed to provide a strategic balance in the world. However, they unilaterally quit the treaty, saying in a friendly manner, This is not aimed against you. You want to develop your offensive arms, and we assume it is not aimed against us.
You know why they said so? It is simple: nobody expected Russia in the early 2000s, when it was struggling with its domestic problems, torn apart by internal conflicts, political and economic problems, tortured by terrorists, to restore its defence sector. Clearly, nobody expected us to be able to maintain our arsenals, let alone have new strategic weapons. They thought they would build up their missile defence forces unilaterally while our arsenals would be shrinking.
All of this was done under the pretext of combating the Iranian nuclear threat. What has become of the Iranian nuclear threat now? There is none, but the project continues. This is the way it is, step by step, one after another, and so on.
Then they began to support all kinds of colour revolutions, including the so-called Arab Spring. They fervently supported it. How many positive takes did we hear on what was going on? What did it lead to? Chaos.
I am not interested in laying blame now. I simply want to say that if this policy of unilateral actions continues and if steps in the international arena that are very sensitive to the international community are not coordinated then such consequences are inevitable. Conversely, if we listen to one another and seek out a balance of interests, this will not happen. Yes, it is a difficult process, the process of reaching agreement, but it is the only path to acceptable solutions….
Why did they have to support the coup in Ukraine? I have often spoken about this. The internal political situation there is complicated and the opposition that is in power now would most likely have come to power democratically, through elections. That’s it. We would have worked with them as we had with the government that was in power before President Yanukovych.
But no, they had to proceed with a coup, casualties, unleash bloodshed, a civil war, and scare the Russian-speaking population of southeastern Ukraine and Crimea. All for the sake of what? And after we had to, simply had to take measures to protect certain social groups, they began to escalate the situation, ratcheting up tensions. In my opinion, this is being done, among other things, to justify the existence of the North Atlantic bloc. They need an external adversary, an external enemy otherwise why is this organisation necessary in the first place? There is no Warsaw Pact, no Soviet Union who is it directed against?
If we continue to act according to this logic, escalating [tensions] and redoubling efforts to scare each other, then one day it will come to a cold war. Our logic is totally different. It is focused on cooperation and the search for compromise. (Applause.) (transcription not complete)
President Vladimir Putin addressed the Plenary Session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) with a powerful political and economic vision for the future of Eurasia, and by implication for the world, countering it to Obama’s belligerent war preparations. He posed that the geopolitical tensions were in fact driven by the economic crisis. He made a strong appeal for the EU nations to end the destructive sanctions regime, identifying the fact that they were the result of Obama’s manipulation. He pointed to the German and French business leaders who have opened up to the restoration of relations with Russia, and called on political leaders to meet them halfway, to reestablish trust between the EU and Russia.
Putin said the world, and Russia, need a strong U.S., but not one which interferes and hinders Europe in building ties. On the TTIP, he said Europe would be severely restricted if tied down to a single regional association. He repeated several times that his vision of a “greater Eurasia,” together especially with China, was open to all—and emphatically to the EU nations.
He reviewed in detail his plans for rebuilding the Russian economy, based on manufacturing, application of technologies to industry, 3 million new jobs in S&M sized industries by 2020, and even more focus on sci/tech in education.
This is what Obama calls his successful “international isolation” of Russia.