From Volume 2, Issue Number 5 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published Feb. 3, 2003

This Week You Need To Know

LaRouche's Approach on Iraq

On Jan. 28, the leading American economist and Democratic Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon LaRouche presented his "State of the Union" address in Washington, D.C. to a live audience, plus a worldwide audience listening and watching on an Internet webcast.

LaRouche's address, which kept the large audience in rapt attention, lasted for two and one-half hours, with an additional hour and one-half of questions. It covered four major areas: 1) the causes and nature of the present economic crisis; 2) the emergency measures which must be taken now; 3) the global strategic conflicts which overlap this economic crisis; and 4) the urgent measures needed to correct the current panic-driven notions of "Homeland Defense."

Toward the end of the question period, LaRouche responded to the many questions which had come in, asking him to further address the matter of the drive for a war against Iraq, and wanting to know what his instructions were. LaRouche responded as follows.

* * *

Basically, I tried to deliver an instruction on this occasion, under these circumstances, to #43 [George W. Bush]. And, as I said, it's not just to 43; it's to the Presidency around him.

Look, let's be realistic: We're living under an empire, and you will not solve the problem, by trying to find out what individual countries can do to change the situation. They can't. This is an empire! It's an English-speaking empire. It's acting as such.

What we've done so far, in trying to stop this war, was to get other countries to stop being pessimistic. Don't use the words, "The war is inevitable." It is not inevitable! The end of civilization is not inevitable. The point was, that while the Democratic and Republican Parties have been essentially useless in the matter of effective action, effective forms of action—some people have done some good things; but they won't cut the mustard; they won't do the job. Other countries, protest movements, and so forth, may contribute to the environment, but it won't solve the problem: We have to solve this problem of war, here! Inside the United States! It can not be solved any place else.

Since the Democratic and Republican Parties are generally, as parties, at the moment, rather worthless—even though there are many useful people I would like to have working with me in them—as long as they have Lieberman and McCain in the positions they occupy in the party, you don't have a party. Not one that functions.

Therefore, in this matter, of stopping this war, which is not only war—it's a war of civilizations, which will not be contained to Iraq. In stopping this war, the institutions are those of the Presidency! The military, the professional, regular military, not the idiots, the Chickenhawks. Not Lewis Libby, the Marc Rich lawyer, sitting in Dick Cheney's office. No, the people who are going to stop it, are the people in, and associated with, the institutions. Look, the people who have worked with me, and with my friends, in working to delay this war so far, have come from those institutions, who are associated with the Presidency, and know what the Presidency is, and what it means. So I'm acting, as a President should act, while not a President; to try to mobilize the conscience of the institutions, to a more effective—.

For example, there's one problem, the problem I've discussed under other auspices. There are people who say, "How can we make the kind of agreements that you propose be made, how can we trust these other countries, to make these kinds of agreements?" And, what they're arguing from is Hobbes' conception of innate conflict among individuals or individual nations; Locke's conception of property, and so forth. They're arguing from that standpoint. My problem in dealing with leading politicians in the United States, is, they are chauvinists on this question: They believe in the legacy of Hobbes and Locke. And, therefore, if I can get the institutions of the United States to recognize—for example: We have now, among Russia, China, South Korea, some people in Japan, Southeast Asia, and to some degree India, we have a new agreement on the organization of this planet. We have, in Germany, implicitly in France, and Italy, we have—as I know these countries—we have an implicit agreement, that we want an arrangement under which Western Europe needs the market, is now going to cooperate with the largest market in the world, which is the Strategic Triangle group. That's what these countries need.

And, the United States must put its shoulder to that wheel. We must take Donald Rumsfeld, and give him a new set of dentures, and stop the crazy things he's saying! We need Europe, but Europe is not capable of solving this problem. It's capable of providing a key element of the solution to the problem, if we, from here, provide the other side. The countries of Asia can not solve this problem, none of them! Nor all together. But, they're crucial to solving the problem. We must solve the problem, by adding the critical factor from here. We must give new meaning to the role of leadership of the United States. We must become a world leader, in the sense that I've indicated, here today; not by force (though I would not be a President you would want to take on, from any other country). But, on the basis of having a sense of mission, of how we're going to reorganize this planet, as a system of cooperation among perfectly sovereign nation-states.

We are going to transform the world! As a mission. We are going to have a 25-year, 50-year forward perspective of what the world should look like. And we're going to work to those ends, with long-term programs and cooperation. We can do it! My job is to get the Americans, themselves, especially those associated with the institutions of the Presidency, the ones who are the doers of anything coming out of the Executive Branch, and elements of the parties in Congress, into a united force, for a new expression of what the United States was born to be. We are not to dominate the world. We are to say, "Come! The United States takes this position and invites you to come. Let's get this thing straightened out." We are, de facto, the world empire, the world imperial authority. Let's say, "Let's get rid of this imperial business. Come join the organization. We'll do it jointly."

My problem is, getting these people to understand that. And I require your help, to help me to convince them to do it. I'm telling you: If enough in the Congress, in the parties, in the institution of the Presidency, agree with me, I don't care if it's Humpty Dumpty in the White House—we'll get the job done.