LaRouche To Russian Academy, Youth: Give Humanity A Future

LaRouche in Moscow Press 'The U.S. Economy Has Become a Scandal'

'A Very Special Quality of the Mexican Patriot': LaRouche on Monterrey TV

From Volume 3, Issue Number 16 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published Apr. 20, 2004

Latest From LaRouche

LaRouche To Russian Academy, Youth: Give Humanity A Future

by Rachel Douglas

Link to pdf version of this article.

U.S. Democratic Presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche, famous in Russia as economist, strategist, philosopher and—in the words of one recent press release written by his Moscow friends—"the conscience of America," was the lead-off speaker at the "Science and Our Future: Ideas To Change the World" conference, which took place April 14-16 in Moscow. The three-day event, held at the Vernadsky State Geological Museum (SGM) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, was cosponsored by the SGM and the Schiller Institute, as well as several companies.

LaRouche and his wife, Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, arrived on their Moscow visit at a moment of high interest in LaRouche's evaluations, ideas, and proposals, on the part of Russian scientists and political analysts. This month marks ten years since LaRouche's first in-person trip to Russia, as the guest of the late Pobisk G. Kuznetsov. During that time, his stature in Russia has grown at an increasing rate, as LaRouche's economic forecasts are borne out and his statesmanship is in ever greater demand, as against the spread of war under the domination of U.S. policy by Dick Cheney's synarchist clique.

More than 70 scientists, students, and members of the press were welcomed to the conference by the director of the SGM. As announced in pre-conference printed materials, the organizing committee had received 115 papers from 177 scientists, ranging in age from 13-85 years. The emphasis was on non-standard approaches and novel ideas, which were discussed and underwent competitive evaluation during the conference. An article ahead of the event appeared in the Nauka (Science) supplement to Izvestia newspaper and Itar-TASS put out a wire—both of them mentioning the participation of LaRouche and his colleague Jonathan Tennenbaum.

In his presentation, titled "Entering the Economy of the Noosphere" (see page 38), LaRouche took up a central theme of his discussions with members of the Russian intelligentsia over the past decade and a half: Russia's mission as "Eurasia's Keystone Economy," in making Mankind's way out of a looming dark age. It is concretized in the project for Eurasian Land-Bridge with corridors of dense physical economic development. The identity of Russia that suits it for such a historic mission is defined not merely by geography, but by a national tradition of scientific genius, best exemplified by the chemist and economist Dmitri Mendeleyev in the 19th Century and the Ukrainian and Russian biogeochemist Vladimir Vernadsky in the 20th. It is in Vernadsky's Noosphere, the realm of human creative mental action, that the potential to develop new types of resources, and eventually manage the Solar System, is found.

LaRouche's most recent book is titled The Economics of the Noosphere.

By way of contrast to the unlimited power of human scientific work and economic development, LaRouche counterposed the danger of a "fish-bowl" mentality, which traps people in their axiomatic assumptions, and so dooms them. That was a timely polemic to be delivered in Moscow, just a few days after President Vladimir Putin had warmly received in the Kremlin a group of purveyors of the planet's currently worst set of failed axioms: economists from the neo-liberal school of Friedrich von Hayek's Mont Pelerin Society. These are the apostles of free trade, globalization, brutal selfishness, and greed.

After LaRouche's keynote, the Vernadsky Museum conference heard from a representative of the European Union, who discussed the importance of programs to support young scientists, including in Russia. Academician Dmitri V. Rundkvist, the senior scientist at the SGM, spoke about fostering new ideas and intellectual creativity, and the need to study "the laws of development of the Biosphere and the Noosphere," the realm of the infinite mental resources of Man.

LaRouche also visited the Moscow Academy of Finance and Law, April 15, where he addressed an audience on the post-1971 phases of collapse, in the interrelated spheres of global finance and the physical economy, and the New Bretton Woods alternative. On April 14, he was the guest of the "Student Evenings" program at the prestigious Moscow State University (MGU).

The LaRouche Youth Movement

At MGU and at the Vernadsky Museum conference, LaRouche reported to his Russian audiences about the emergence of the LaRouche Youth Movement around the world, and discussed the importance of this next generation of leaders—in order that Mankind have a next generation, at all. In a hall in the main MGU building, LaRouche held a two-and-a-half-hour dialogue with close to 100 students—a full house, which included students from other universities.

The MGU event had been advertised on the youth web site www.almater.ru, with an excellent biographical sketch of LaRouche and his political and scientific work. The announcement concluded: "LaRouche's activity and the civic positions he takes, which incur extreme hostility from the world oligarchy, are of extraordinary importance in world politics. Reminding Americans and the world about the principles on which U.S. policy was originally founded, in particular under George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and, later, Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon LaRouche personifies the conscience of America. Giving due to the genius of Russian scientists, LaRouche speaks about Russia's mission with breathtaking historical optimism, which our own compatriots so lack. His evaluations, forecasts, and initiatives are of unique value both for scientists and for the public, for people who are engaged in thinking about the prospects for world history and Russia's strategic role in the resolution of the contradictions in the world, which have reached a critical level in our time and require resolution without delay."

Introducing LaRouche in person was Professor Andrei Kobyakov, who teaches economics at MGU, as well as being a published writer on the financial bubble process in the world economy, an editor of Russky Predprinimatel (Russian Entrepreneur) magazine, and author of a recent, devastating critique of the neo-cons in the U.S. government. Kobyakov's latest book, co-authored with Mikhail Khazin, is The Sunset of the Dollar Empire and the End of Pax Americana. Kobyakov and Khazin describe LaRouche as "probably the only American expert who has forecast, over a long period of time, the inevitable collapse of the now-reigning liberal monetary and financial system."

Kobyakov said that LaRouche's first visit to the exclusive premises of MGU was an historic event, bringing to the University a unique historical person of our time, a universal thinker like Leonardo da Vinci.

In the context of a presentation on the economic development of Eurasia, LaRouche further developed Russia's potential multi-level role. The Asian population centers need the creation of modern transportation corridors and are hungry for raw materials. Russia and Kazakstan have great raw materials reserves in thinly populated, underdeveloped areas. In the Soviet period, there was a perspective for the development of the Asian part of Russia, which needs to be renewed. At another level, though, mineral resources are finite. The question arises, of how to create new resources. Mankind could develop means for the transmutation of elements and the creation of synthetic materials. Here, Russia's unique role is rooted in the tradition of Peter the Great, Leibniz and the Russian Academy of Sciences, Mendeleyev, and Vernadsky ("my hero, for Russia," LaRouche said).

LaRouche told the Moscow students that around the world, youth are posing the question to their parents' generation: What world have you left to us? Like fledglings who have been booted out of the nest, university-age young people are looking at the world they've come into, and what they see is the basis for an acute conflict between the generations.

LaRouche concluded with a personal discussion of immortality and the importance of dedication to a mission in life. He challenged the Russian youth to be optimistic and to find the meaning of life in doing something good.

The Russian students asked LaRouche several questions about religious and cultural conflicts among nations, which he answered with the example of how he, as President of the United States, would deal with religion by centering on the fundamental difference between Man and Beast, as an ecumenical issue. Asked about the war in Iraq, and U.S. policy, LaRouche gave the background of synarchism. "These are my enemies," he said. The synarchists brought the Nazis to power; then, after World War II, Nazi elements were incorporated into Anglo-American intelligence. That is where Cheney comes from, and LaRouche is leading the fight to get them out.

The "Science and Our Future" conference concluded on April 16 with a round table discussion among the leading participants. Here, LaRouche propounded the concept of education that is the central principle of the LaRouche Youth Movement. It is a principle of truthfulness, he said, which discerns the difference between knowledge and mere opinion. Youth who come to LaRouche, looking for the real education they have not found in the universities, master Karl Friedrich Gauss' 1799 work on the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, which mastery can serve them as a criterion of truthfulness in their study of history and engagement in current history.

Igniting a wave of excitement among youth about scientific discovery, LaRouche said, can revitalize an entire society. "You recall this quality of excitement," he told the senior Russian scientists who were present; it is what can revive science and give a mission to the generation now 18-25 years of age, who are key to humanity's future.

At the Vernadsky Museum conference, as elsewhere, LaRouche's remarks were warmly received.

LaRouche in Moscow Press 'The U.S. Economy Has Become a Scandal'

Link to pdf version of this article.

The Moscow financial monthly Valyutny Spekulyant (Currency Dealer) came out April 12 with a new interview of Lyndon LaRouche, headlined "The U.S. Economy As a Whole Has Become a Scandal." LaRouche's answers were provided in written form on March 1, to questions from VS correspondent Ivan Zakarian, who had attended the Schiller Institute Presidents' Day conference in Reston, Virginia, on Feb. 14-15.

An introductory note identifies LaRouche as pre-candidate for the Democratic Party Presidential nomination, noting that "John Kerry, the leader in the primaries, is not yet the only Democratic candidate for head of state; the final decision remains to be taken by the Democratic Party convention in July." The fact that LaRouche's views are supported by many Americans, it says, is demonstrated by his having more campaign contributors than Kerry does.

Zakarian reports that the conference was held simultaneously in Reston and Los Angeles. "It should be noted," he writes, "that all of the speakers, including the youth, demonstrated remarkable erudition, of a sort not often found in America, and deep involvement with LaRouche's ideas about the economies of the world and the U.S., politics, and the future of mankind."

The interview was slightly abridged in its published form. What follows below is the original text.

Q: The readers of our magazine are traders and financiers, who surely understand the significance of the American financial markets for the entire world and for Russia in particular. So, what do you think about relationships between Russia and the U.S.A.?

LaRouche: Hopefully, the expected re-election of President Putin will open a new phase in the post-1989 history of Russia, a phase of greater nationalism and sense of a mission-orientation toward reconstruction and progress from the ruinous developments of more than a decade. I see signs of the reawakening of the memory of Russia as a great power, politically on a level of equality with other great powers. This would be of crucial strategic importance for a crisis-stricken U.S.A. which understands its own vital self-interest in a new form of productive relations with the nations and economy of continental Eurasia, in particular. A partnership with a more confident Russia is crucial for reviving the presently shattered economies of western and central Europe, and for the urgently needed partnership between all of Europe and, especially, the nations of the populous rim of south, southeast, and east Asia.

Such cooperation will require the immediate reform of the world's presently, hopelessly bankrupt, floating-exchange-rate monetary-financial system. This requires putting the strategically significant, but failed monetary and financial institutions into receivership for reorganization in bankruptcy by the relevant sovereign states. We require rapid expansion of productive employment, to break national and regional economies back up to a currently operating break-even level. For this, we require a fixed-exchange monetary system, with primary interest rates in the range of 1-2%, to make feasible long-term capital formation through aid of corresponding treaty-agreements among relevant sets of nations. This must be supplemented by long-range scientific-technological mission-orientations, in which Russia's aging science-establishment must be fully re-energized to the level it is able to play its part in a continuing, expanding role in support of the global effort for mankind as a whole. We require, above all else, the replacement of the destructive forces of "globalization" by the development of a community of principle among perfectly sovereign nation-states.

A Russia and the U.S.A. which will each refuse to liquidate their nation's sovereignty, must serve as the great cornerstone of present history, around which the other sovereign nations of the planet can build the needed edifice of consensual cooperation for the common good. That is my policy. I believe that Russia would be prepared to accept such an offer. I intend that offer shall be delivered.

A world witnessing such a partnership between the two former superpowers, would be a world encouraged to consider building the kind of order among sovereign states which I am committed to bring into being.

Q: Stock market traders around the globe were very concerned about corporate scandals with big American companies like Enron, Adelphia, Worldcom and so on. What did America do, or should it do, in order to improve confidence in its business institutions?

LaRouche: We must not be excessively occupied with the individual scandals as such. The U.S. economy as a whole has become a scandal; the scandals involve only some of the overripe, already rotten fruit dropped by a mortally sick tree. The problems of the U.S. and European economies are not those of individual enterprises or merely groups of enterprises. The economic and moral crisis is systemic. It is the result of the combination of two leading factors, as follows.

First, there was a right-wing turn in Anglo-American policy, after July 1944, in which a powerful faction within the financial circles of those countries adopted the policy of seeking to establish what Bertrand Russell proposed as "world government" achieved through the threat of airborne nuclear-weapons bombardment. After the Soviet development of an experimental thermonuclear weapon was discovered, Russell's policy of preventive nuclear warfare-attacks was put on the shelf, and a policy of detente through mutual thermonuclear terror prevailed, until the revival of the preventive nuclear warfare doctrine by U.S. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney's incumbency under President George H.W. Bush, Sr. Since Sept. 11, 2001, Cheney's policy has been openly revived as hegemonic, although there are signs Cheney and his policy might be defeated soon.

In the meantime, through aid of the 1963 missiles-crisis, the Kennedy assassination, and the launching of the official U.S. Indo-China war, the U.S. and U.K. led much of the world in a plunge into "post-industrial" utopianism accompanied by increasingly radical "free trade" policies. This turn toward a Roman-style society's imperial bread and circuses at home, was accompanied by the consolidation of the relative supremacy of an assortment of more or less radical, nuclear-utopian factions. This cultural-paradigm shift was spread, through the effect of the so-called "68ers," from the U.K. and U.S.A., into continental Europe and other parts of the world.

Today, while we must not blind ourselves to the many evils which did exist during the 1944-1964 interval, there is a profound, systemic difference between the U.S. of 1964 still committed to its role as the world's leading producer society, and the plunge into moral and economic decadence which has produced the bankrupt world system of today. While we must not ignore the earlier roots of the catastrophic net effect of the past four decades cultural-paradigm down-shift in the world economy, these four decades represent a distinct phase in world history. What we are seeing in U.S, corporate life, and related places in government, is not an increase in isolated cases of criminality; this is a symptom of that underlying rot of the system as a whole which has brought such morally criminal and destructive practices into more and more of the board-rooms and governmental agencies of the U.S.A. It is the systemic rot, the epidemic, not the individual cases of corporate mortality, which must command our leading attention.

Q: What do you think about dollar-euro rates in the near term future and in 2-3 years?

LaRouche: No one could competently predict any trend over an interval that long, not even six months. We must accept the fact that any attempt to define medium- to long-term statistical trends is a fool's errand. We are now at the point of a global phase-shift of the entire world monetary-financial system. One of two choices of general phase-shift out of present trends is available. First, if we try to defend the present world monetary-financial system, as the leading financier oligarchs are determined to do, the planet as a whole will be plunged into a prolonged dark age, comparable to what the continuing policies of the infamous Holy League unleashed in Europe during the middle of the Fourteenth Century. Under those conditions, a collapse of world population to less than one billion during the course of the next generation, or even a shorter time, is virtually inevitable. Or, second, we may scrap the present world monetary-financial system through reorganization in bankruptcy conducted by sovereign governments. This, the leading financier circles of today will resist virtually to the point of death, preferring other people's deaths to their own bankruptcy. In the case we succeed in our preference for the lives of our people, we can survive and prosper, but the conditions and trends will not be those adduced from the factors affecting the attempted continuation of the observed statistical trends today.

Q: Do you think that the main competitor of the United States in the 21st Century is China? And what can you say about dollar-yuan rates? What would be desirable rates?

LaRouche: China is extremely vulnerable to the effects of present U.S. trends. The dependency upon the U.S. internal market, a dependency conditional on very cheap labor in China, threatens a deep cut in China's foreign earnings at some point in the immediate period ahead. For a while, China's monetary reserves and related factors would be a cushion against the impact of the currently onrushing U.S. collapse; however, the physical realities would soon outpace the ability to maintain the monetary cushion as a protection against successive waves of international shocks. China's secure future is thus dependent upon what I, for example, am able to do in leading the effort to bring about the needed political-economic changes in the U.S.A. itself.

Q: What should our countries do in order to completely remove consequences of the Cold War and Hollywood stereotypes?

LaRouche: Any effective steps to that effect will depend upon a U.S. President doing the kind of thing which Franklin Roosevelt did in changing Russia policy from the outset of his first Administration. A sense of long-term common interest among peoples, is the foundation of well-built, durable improvement of a therapeutic sense of the actually existing common interest.

Also, one may have observed my efforts to afford leaders and others in the U.S.A., and other places, to throw away some popular myths in favor of knowing some of the crucial features of the real history of European civilization since its birth, in the shadows of the pyramids of Giza, in ancient Egypt. When the mortal individual is able and encouraged to know his or her immortal place in the continuing historical process which is mankind, the love of one nation for another nation finds its place in each sentient individual so affected.

'A Very Special Quality of the Mexican Patriot': LaRouche on Monterrey TV

Link to pdf version of this article.

Monterrey's Multimedios TV on April 11 broadcast an interview of Lyndon LaRouche, by Architect Hector Benavides. The interview had been taped on March 18 during the candidate's three-day visit ("LaRouche Takes Battle To Defeat Synarchism to Mexico," EIR, April 2) in which he spoke to the Monterrey Technological Institute, youth audiences, and other supporters.

Multimedios: Well, a few months after having spoken with Lyndon LaRouche, a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, in the city of Saltillo [Mexico], we now have him here in Monterrey. Welcome, Mr. LaRouche. What brings you to Monterrey?

LaRouche: Of course, the invitation I received to speak here [at the Institute]. And also, for me, my own motivation of what I might be able to do here. We are in the worst financial crisis, monetary crisis in over 100 years, and we are also in a great security crisis, which is spilling over now, from Spain, into Mexico. And therefore, I'm very happy to have the opportunity to express my personal solidarity with Mexico. And I hope I will do something useful.

Multimedios: You mention the Spanish events of last week, of March 11. What is your interpretation, your reading, Mr. LaRouche, of what happened in Spain?

LaRouche: We know, from my personal knowledge of the profile, and from my consultations over the past 24 hours with people in Europe at a high level: This was an attempted coup d'etat against the Spanish monarchy. I understand the King of Spain refused to. It was conducted by the same organization created by the Nazis, which is represented by Blas Pinar. It includes people in Italy and France, and in South America.

Multimedios: Al-Qaeda is not connected to these events?

LaRouche: That's rubbish, nonsense. Only idiots believe it.

Multimedios: Movie director Pedro Almodovar yesterday made a serious denunciation that there was an attempted coup d'etat. But it is an accusation against the Popular Party, the party of [Prime Minister Jose Maria] Aznar.

LaRouche: This comes from the extreme right wing in Spain, which is trying to cover this up. We know who's behind this. This comes from an international network, which is Nazi Party-based. It's based in the SS security apparatus, which was supported by some factions of the North Americans in the post-war period. The best-known figure in the Americas for this, is Blas Pinar of Spain, whose son played a role in the coup in 1981.

Multimedios: The Tejero affair...

LaRouche: Exactly.

Multimedios: How does this affect Mexico and the countries of South America?

LaRouche: There was an attempt, as we saw with the other extreme right wing—inside the United States—to create a conflict between the Hispanic-speaking population of the Americas and United States—a "Clash of Civilizations," analogous to the so-called Clash of Civilizations with Islam. We know where this comes from, and it is threatened in South America; it is threatened across the border. As you know, the largest so-called minority group inside the United States, whether citizens or immigrants, is the Hispanic-speaking population. And the crucial nation in this, for the United States, is Mexico. Therefore, solidarity between leading, conscious people of Mexico and the United States, is crucial for preventing this from blowing up.

Multimedios: What is the relationship between Sept. 11, 2001 and March 11, 2004?

LaRouche: Sept. 11, 2001 is the larger part of what we are now seeing in the case of Spain in March.

Perhaps I should explain this a bit, because this is a thing most people don't understand. In 1944, a certain pro-fascist element in the U.S. command, which included Allen Dulles and others, through a fellow in Switzerland called Francois Genoud, was negotiating an agreement with the SS security apparatus in Germany. This is the group which, with Goering, took much of the Nazi stolen wealth, and planted it in parts of the world outside Europe. This organization exists, and it's powerful today. This is what killed Kennedy—this crowd. This is embedded in a certain right-wing faction inside the U.S. security services. This is what you're dealing with in the right wing in Italy. For example, Alessandra Mussolini, the granddaughter of Benito, is a key part of this.

So, in this case, what happened is that, patriotic forces used the Spanish Socialist Workers Party [PSOE] as a vehicle to bring down Aznar, who was cooperating with these people.

Multimedios: So, ETA and al-Qaeda were not involved?

LaRouche: Aznar spread "ETA"; it's not true. The Spanish security forces had virtually eliminated the sting of ETA.

One thing is very important to understand about this kind of terrorism: Al-Qaeda in the Middle East is largely a generic name for many different kinds of groups. ETA is also similar, in that sense. All of these people are what we call "ideologically motivated": It's very important to them to build their base, through motivational approaches. No acts must contradict their ideology.

But when you're dealing with the third generation of the Nazi SS security apparatus, there is no mission but a coup, by their methods. In other words, you have to look for the historically determined motive of the terrorists.

Multimedios: All of what you're saying, Mr. LaRouche, we look at it as if it were some sort of fantasy, or a conspiracy theory. What do you say to those who believe that?

LaRouche: What I would say, is that people who say that this is merely a conspiracy theory, are the ones who are trying to cover up the agreements that were made with those Nazi SS organizations at the end of World War II. And there are some people who repeat that foolish phrase, "conspiracy theory," because they're like fools: They like to repeat whatever they are told.

Multimedios: I'm not a fool. I'm raising it because I think it's my responsibility to ask you.

LaRouche: Absolutely! And, it's my responsibility to answer!

Multimedios: Why don't the newspapers, the information agencies, talk about these matters that you're telling us about?

LaRouche: I'll give you a case: One of the key figures, who was a member of the Nazi-allied organization, during the World War II period, Andre Meyer, ran the Washington Post. He was tied to Felix Rohatyn, who is also tied to Lazard Freres, who was also part of this Nazi operation in France during World War II. The Time magazine syndicate was a pro-fascist organization. These people don't like me!

Multimedios: I've noticed! Well, they are represented in Mexico by what group, by what party?

LaRouche: Well, you have a history which has two levels: You have the original PAN. It was set up through the Nazi Party organization out of Berlin, through Madrid, into Northern Mexico and into South America. I have the detailed intelligence documentation on that, from the period up through 1945. U.S. services associated with Franklin Roosevelt, and the patriots of Mexico, cleaned that mess up.

But then, at the end of the war, after 1945, through the Franco government in Spain, the Schellenberg SS operation came back into Mexico, and into Argentina, along with what was called the "rat line." Now, these people were also tied to reactionary financier groups.

Now, this becomes complicated, because some reactionary groups tend to be more or less patriotic. Others look at their international connections as more important than their national ones.

Multimedios: What is happening in Mexico with all these attacks on the political parties: the videos—I'm sure you know about this—the corruption in the PRD; corruption in the PRI; corruption in the PAN. Today, an attempted assassination, an attack on the governor of Oaxaca, [Jose] Murat. What's happening?

LaRouche: On the one hand, there is corruption which comes, principally, since 1982, from the United States. If you destroy and rape a country, as Mexico was raped in October of 1982—and this city, which was an industrial leader in Mexico, was raped in that period—and then, you make the people very poor, it creates the environment of corruption, which people then exploit. If you weaken the patriotic institutions of a country, and their authority in their own country, you open the doors for corruption. Therefore, most of the corruption in Mexico comes from the policies of the United States.

Multimedios: Who raped Mexico in 1982, and who raped this city of Monterrey?

LaRouche: Essentially, there are people, like Henry Kissinger, who are part of this apparatus. He's only a pawn of those interests, but he is part of the apparatus. As you perhaps know, I was right in the middle of this thing: I know who did what to whom in that period, and I have some, still-living friends in Mexico whom I am very close to, emotionally, on this question. I'm determined: We're going to take our freedom back.

Multimedios: But who raped Mexico and Monterrey? Their names? Kissinger, and who else?

LaRouche: Oh, the whole crowd behind him. This was the Nixon Administration crowd, as continued with the same crowd that came in around George H.W. Bush. The international financial interests of the IMF, with the World Bank: They all participated in this rape of Mexico.

Remember, it was also done to the United States. It was done with the change, from 1964 on, the change from the world's leading producer society—which was the positive relationship between Mexico and the United States in that period—to the United States becoming like the Roman Empire, a parasite, sucking the blood of the poor of the world. The infrastructure, the industry, the agriculture of Mexico, was looted by a policy of monetary manipulation.

Multimedios: Which of the three parties with greatest support in Mexico—the PAN, the PRI, and the PRD—could be a barrier against this type of interests?

LaRouche: For various reasons, the PRI is the party with the greatest concentration of my friends in Mexico, for obvious reasons. Now, the important thing about that, is precisely the protection of Mexico's sovereignty against the war, against the internal war. So that, even where the PRI will tend to disagree among themselves, there is a group which understands the importance of that agreement upon which modern Mexico is based. I also know people in other parties, who share that common principle. My position, as an outsider: I have my friends, but, I have to be faithful to the right of the Mexicans to choose their own political leadership. Therefore, I respect all leaders.

Multimedios: What are the risks that Mexico faces, coming up to the 2006 election, with all of this that we see: an economic recession, a drop in employment, distrust in the institutions, lack of leadership?

LaRouche: Two issues are decisive, and the rest comes from these two. One is typified by the case of Vice President Dick Cheney. I do not give President Bush credit for knowing what he's doing. Cheney's not too intelligent, but he's like a Gila monster: his bite is poisonous.

So, we have this war policy of Cheney, which is the same policy as the fascists, like the Nazi networks involving Blas Pinar in Spain, and the fascist wing inside Israel, for example. That's number one.

But, the related question, is the world monetary-financial crisis. This is, as in the 1930s: Wherever you have a breakdown of the international monetary system, you have a struggle between political forces which say, "You have to defend the people," and those who say, "You have to defend the financier interests." And our consciousness of that problem now, with the historical examples in our mind, will determine the issue.

Multimedios: What's your view of Mexico? Is there more corruption now than there was in earlier years?

LaRouche: There's more poverty. Poverty is the essential corruption.

Multimedios: What are the factors that have led to this pauperization of Mexico?

LaRouche: Well, first, the peso's devaluation—again and again; the degradation of the Mexican population to a virtual slave-labor population; the pauperization of Mexico, to the point that people working as virtual slave labor in the United States; their remittances to states in Mexico are a large part of the income of that state.

Therefore, what I do, is I define the problem of corruption, largely in terms of the alternative. That the United States must cooperate with Mexico, in supporting a new credit system, in which the historic aspirations of Mexico for infrastructural development: the agro-industrial expansion, so Mexico is able to feed its own population. And also, Mexico, faced from the United States, from my faction going back to the 1820s, has always been the key nation of Central and South America, as our partner in our hemisphere. The key to U.S. relations within the hemisphere, is U.S. relations with Mexico.

Multimedios: It has lost that leadership, it is said; Brazil is now the leader of our countries of Latin America—Mr. Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

LaRouche: In some cases, this is a very commendable emotion, very proper. But one should not encourage its being exaggerated. The most important quality in the hemisphere is intellectual, the intellectual quality of being able to lead. Mexico has, historically, this quality. During periods of trouble in the past, before 1983, you think of all the refugees who were living in Mexico City, as guests of Mexico, from various countries in the Americas. That is leadership. This was not—Mexico was not trying to create an empire. Mexico was concerned with the nations on its borders, the nations of South America and their stability. Mexico has been the leader.

Multimedios: Not Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva? And Fox?

LaRouche: Look, Lula is himself a "fox." Take the case of the current negotiations: Lula waited, to see what would happen with [Argentine President Nestor] Kirchner and the IMF. When Kirchner won the fight, Lula said, "Now I want to talk to you!"

I don't object to Lula doing that. But, I would respect him more if he'd stepped in before.

Multimedios: The nationalization of Pemex and the electricity sector in Mexico is an impasse, it is said, for there to be the required reform— the structural reforms of Mexico—so that its economy is reactivated. That is the thesis of President Fox and his team. And he blames the gentlemen of the Congress, the legislative branch, that they are not with it in that sense: "No" to the reform.

Is the reform necessary, as Mr. Fox understands it?

LaRouche: No, those reforms are unnecessary. I would hope to be able to explain to President Fox the ABC's of economics. This comes in part from the fact that the President of Mexico believes, perhaps, that the present President of the United States might be re-elected. I'm determined that that catastrophe shall not happen. Under my Presidency, or under a Presidency which I influence, we will decide to reverse that policy by the United States.

In that matter: first of all, we must have—Mexico's oil is its patrimony, as it has been referred to in the past. It's a vital asset of the nation, for which the nation must assume responsibility.

On the power thing, what I propose—as I've proposed otherwise—is, the United States and Mexico must enter into a certain special kind of cooperation, along the border, on cooperation of developing new sources of water, on the development of power generation and distribution; and do this especially in the arid area between the two sides of the Sierra Madre.

This is the great area for development of basic economic infrastructure, which can only be done under statist influence and cooperation between governments.

Multimedios: Recently, at a meeting here in Monterrey of the OAS, it was said that George Soros was going to put millions upon millions of dollars into stopping the re-election of Bush. George Soros and you agree on that.

LaRouche: He has a mission, Soros has a mission, which is different than mine. Let me be more precise, since I am an insider, and can speak exactly about what is going on.

There are presently, in terms of active political support, two leading candidates for the Presidency in the Democratic Party. I am one, and Senator Kerry is the other. All the others have been eliminated. But the problem is, the Democratic Party needs money. The big-money people hate me. So, the Democratic Party policy now, of the wiser ones—the wiser ones say, "Let's get the money. After we get the money for the campaign, then we'll bring in LaRouche."

Multimedios: Why has so much been said about Kerry, and so little about LaRouche?

LaRouche: What we just talked about: the money.

Multimedios: For that reason?

LaRouche: Yes.

Multimedios: Andre Manuel Lopez Obrador, Roberto Madrazo, Mrs. Martha Sahagun (the wife of the President), Carlos Medina Placencia, perhaps, of the PAN, Francisco Barrio Terrazas of the PAN—you have heard of them. Of the people I mentioned, who do you think has the capacity to govern a country such as ours, beginning in 2006?

LaRouche: I don't know for sure. What I do know is that the negotiations and discussions which Murat held with individuals such as Madrazo, were very important. There's a practical problem here: Mexico thinks of itself as a sovereign state, in principle, but sees itself as a temporarily occupied country in practice. The practical politician will react to these two things. If he's getting a more friendly President from the United States, you're going to find that the politicians of Mexico will show who they really are. My job is to encourage them to bring out their best side.

Multimedios:Finally, Mr. LaRouche, who is the Blas Pinar of Mexico?

LaRouche: I don't think there is a Blas Pinar of Mexico. Blas Pinar is an international figure. Remember, he was a former Franco official. He emerged under Franco as the leading person allied to the Nazi SS organization throughout the Americas. In Argentina, the Nazi organization is Blas Pinar. In Venezuela, the Nazi organization is Blas Pinar. And you have to look at the attempt of certain—go back to the religious wars. Blas Pinar will play two lines: Blas Pinar will play a secularist line, anti-church line; he will also try to penetrate Opus Dei.

Multimedios:What are the interests, then, which are closest to Blas Pinar in Mexico? The political groups, businessmen, intermediate organizations, communications media.

LaRouche: It's largely manipulation. They will change their costumes depending upon what the United States does. I know how to pull the chain; I just need the power to do so. Because, the Mexican people, once they're aroused to defend their sovereignty will eliminate anyone who's got this kind of characteristic. The Mexican people have lived through so many wars; so much blood has flowed because of these religious wars. For how long?

Look at the Napoleonic wars in Europe. In the last century, wars leading into the formation of what became the PRI, is an example of this. You have to understand the history: These things are deeply embedded in the Mexican people, even if they themselves do not fully understand it. I see that in my own experience in Mexico. There is a very special quality of the Mexican patriot, which is unique to Mexico. That is the greatest power in Mexico for the long term.

And let its enemies fear!

Multimedios:Thank you very much, Lyndon LaRouche. You have been very kind. I hope things go well for you in the campaign.

LaRouche: Thank you very much.

All rights reserved © 2004 EIRNS