The End of Geopolitics Requires a New Concept of Man

Fast-moving developments around the Korean Peninsula indicate how rapidly the global strategic situation is changing in the aftermath of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s stunning March 1 state of the union address.

After receiving a high-level delegation from South Korea, the North Korean government of Kim Jong-un has agreed to negotiate directly with the U.S.; discuss denuclearization, so long as its security is guaranteed; and refrain from any nuclear or ballistic missile tests while the dialogue is ongoing. Top South Korean envoys will travel this week to Washington, D.C. to brief President Trump, and will then visit China, Russia and Japan for similar purposes.

Once the news of the Korean breakthrough was made public on March 6, President Trump promptly tweeted that there was “possible progress being made in talks with North Korea,” that “a serious effort is being made by all parties concerned,” and that the U.S. is “ready to go hard in either direction.”

What is the dynamic underlying these developments?

In a sense, both Russia and China have introduced “new political principles”—i.e. unexpected flanks—into the world strategic situation, which have not only caught the British Empire and their allies on Wall Street and in Washington unawares, but have left them scrambling to even figure out what hit them. They have a gnawing fear that, somehow, their entire edifice of geopolitics is crumbling at the foundation.

They are right.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s weekly webcast, to be broadcast on March 8, will take up this subject of “The Strategic Shift Inherent in Putin’s ‘Sputnik Shock.'” In discussions yesterday, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche emphasized that, in this extremely rapidly changing world, our opponents are getting desperate over the fact that they’ve clearly missed the boat. That has happened because of their arrogance—an arrogance born of their profound commitment to radical empiricism. They deny the very existence of human creativity, and thus that anything like Putin’s military announcement, or China’s Belt and Road success, could possibly occur.

And you can be absolutely sure, Zepp-LaRouche added, that the Russian scientific military achievements, and Putin’s related emphasis on creativity and technological advance as the driver of the physical economy, are coordinated with China. Remember the September 2015 China Victory Day parade, with Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping watching it together, she recalled. Remember that Russia and China have a full-set strategic alliance.

These are the changing strategic realities, Zepp-LaRouche noted. And the West is way behind the curve with respect to the new military reality, the New Silk Road, and also the fact that colonialism has in effect been finished off with the commitments around Africa’s Transaqua great project.

The British are particularly panicked over developments in the U.S., that President Trump is showing his potential to break out of the geopolitical box altogether—as suggested by the Korean developments—a box in which the British have caged most American Presidents of the last 50, even 100 years.

And yet each of these situations—from Africa, to Russia, to the U.S. and even China—require the unique input of Lyndon LaRouche’s scientific method to achieve their stated intentions. Helga Zepp-LaRouche stressed that we are the only force which can bring people from completely different ends of the spectrum—both within countries and internationally—to one table based on higher principles.

To that end, we again quote in this space the opening paragraphs from Lyndon LaRouche’s March 30, 1984 document, “The LaRouche Doctrine: Draft Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.,” (PDF) whose principles remain as incisive and indispensable today, after Putin’s “Sputnik Shock,” as they were when they were written 34 years ago.:

“The political foundation for durable peace must be: a) The unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation-states, and b) Cooperation among sovereign nation-states to the effect of promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all.

“The most crucial feature of present implementation of such a policy of durable peace is a profound change in the monetary, economic, and political relations between the dominant powers and those relatively subordinated nations often classed as ‘developing nations.’ Unless the inequities lingering in the aftermath of modern colonialism are progressively remedied, there can be no durable peace on this planet. Insofar as the United States and Soviet Union acknowledge the progress of the productive powers of labor throughout the planet to be in the vital strategic interests of each and both, the two powers are bound to that degree and in that way by a common interest. This is the kernel of the political and economic policies of practice indispensable to the fostering of durable peace between those two powers.”