Author: Alicia

President Trump’s refusal to back down from his accusation that the Obama Administration is behind the surveillance and the illegal leaks of classified wire taps, as well as his refusal to deny the truth of Judge Napolitano’s revelations about GCHQ’s complicity (or, more likely, direct control) over the color revolution against the U.S. government, is driving the British Empire into panicked self-exposure.

The British press lied wildly on Friday that the U.S. had “apologized” for the White House press spokesman Sean Spicer quoting Napolitano’s charge against GCHQ. In fact, the British Ambassador to the U.S. approached Spicer at a reception, and Prime Minster May’s national security advisor called General McMaster, but neither of them apologized. Trump himself, in his press conference with Merkel, said Spicer had only reported the words of a “talented legal expert.”

The New York Times is frantic that the “special relationship” is deteriorating rapidly. “The conspiracy theorizing also tested what is often called the special relationship between the United States and Britain,” they whine today. “American intelligence agencies enjoy a closer collaboration with their British counterparts than any other in the world. GCHQ was the first agency to warn the United States government that Russia was hacking Democratic Party emails during the presidential campaign.” Indeed they were — the first lie of this round. The Times also rolls out a group of Anglo-agents from among the Republicans, the Democrats, and the neocons to cry about the grave danger to the special relationship.

A monitoring of Fox News, owned and run by the British Empire’s Rupert Murdoch, is most revealing in this regard. While the dumbed-down American population was told to believe that “Fox is right and CNN is left and never the twain shall meet,” they are equally hysterical about Trump attacking the British.

As to GCHQ, when Snowden revealed in 2014 that Merkel’s cell phone had been taped by the NSA, the Germans quickly determined that it was both the NSA and GCHQ, and that both had listening posts on the roofs of their Embassies in Berlin. Also, that all intercepts in Europe went to the U.S. through a British cable. Trump’s quip that he and Merkel had something in common goes beyond corrupt U.S. intelligence, and straight to the Brits.

On Monday, March 16, the House Intelligence Committee has called FBI chief James Comey and NSA chief Mike Rogers to testify on all of this. Also, Senator Grassley’s letter of March 6 to Comey, demanding all records of contacts, payments, contracts, etc. (including any role from the White House) with MI6 scam artist Christopher Steele regarding his scurrilous report on Trump’s Russia connections, also demanded that responses be in by Monday.

An interesting week ahead.

Secretary Rex Tillerson is in China, meeting with Foreign Minister Wang Yi and State Council Member Yang Jiechi Saturday, and President Xi Jinping Sunday. In an interview with Independent Journal Review‘s Erin McPike, Tillerson took what could be described as a “Chinese” view of things: “I do think that the Chinese and the U.S. need to have a fresh conversation about what will define the relationship between the United States and China for the next 50 years. We can look back and see how successful we’ve been, 40 years of what I would say has been a very successful relationship with two very powerful nations living with one another without conflict. But now we find that there are issues arising that have gone unresolved. And I think, how we are able to talk about those and how we are able to chart our course forward is going to set, potentially, the relationship in a new era of existing together without conflict, in an era of non-conflict.”

The meeting with Wang Yi reflected this. They spoke for two hours, in part on the North Korea issue. Unlike the war-mongering press coverage in the West about “all options on the table” and “no talks now,” Tillerson said after their meeting that the two sides agree that we must “bring North Korea to a different place, where we are hopeful we can begin a dialogue.”

In his interview, Tillerson also said: “Our objective is to have the regime in North Korea come to a conclusion that the reasons that they have felt they have had to develop nuclear weapons, those reasons are not well-founded. We want to change that understanding …, we do not intend to be a threat to you.” Only close U.S.-China cooperation could convince Pyongyang that this were true.

On Xi Jinping meeting with Trump, Tillerson said: “The overall China-U.S. relationship really needs better clarity that can only be achieved by a meeting between our two leaders — a face to face meeting — and some time for them to be together and some time for us to exchange views in a number of these areas, whether economic or security or cultural and people-to-people.”

“The atmosphere could hardly have been more uneasy between Chancellor Angela Merkel and U.S. President Donald Trump during her visit to the White House. No handshake for the cameras, next to no eye contact, strained faces for both of them. Not only is there no chemistry between them, but it is obvious that in the current trans-Atlantic geometry, no solution for the tensions can be found. There is nonetheless, a way out in sight, but it can only be found on a totally different, higher level: the win-win cooperation with China and the New Silk Road, which the United States and Germany have both been invited to join.”

Such is the opening observation of Helga Zepp-LaRouche in an analysis for the German weekly Neue Solidarität written on March 18, one day after the German Chancellor met with the U.S. President. Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche heads the German political party Civil Rights Movement Solidarity, Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität (BüSo), and founded the Schiller Institute internationally.

Zepp-LaRouche continues: “Given the fact that Trump’s election meant the defeat of the neo-liberal, neo-conservative policy of Hillary Clinton, whom he called ‘America’s Angela Merkel,’ and that Merkel was considered as ‘Obama’s closest ally,’ it was not to be expected that the two of them would be on the same wavelength. Thus, the New York Times headlined its coverage ‘Merkel Meets Trump, the Defender Versus the Disrupter.’ When, during the joint press conference, a correspondent of Die Welt attempted to provoke Trump by bringing up the charges that the British intelligence agency GCHQ had wiretapped him for the Obama Administration, Trump turned to Merkel and commented with humor: ‘at least we have something in common.’ Trump got the laughs for that, while Mrs. Merkel could hardly muster a smile.”

Similar divergences also surfaced, Helga Zepp-LaRouche went on, at the G20 Finance Ministers meeting in Baden Baden, where they were unable to agree on formulations about “protectionism” and “fair trade.”

Much more promising, however, in Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s view, is the dynamic created by China’s diplomatic initiatives to prepare for the May 14-15 Belt and Road Forum summit in Beijing.

The French Constitutional Council announced on March 18 the 11 Presidential candidates who had each received at least 500 duly validated “presentations” from elected officials throughout the country — and Jacques Cheminade is among them, after a hard-fought battle by his whole movement. According to the regulations, signatures must come in from at least 30 different administrative departments (out of 101), and not more than 50 signatures from the same department, to ensure national representation.

After the court’s announcement this morning, Jacques Cheminade held a press conference to make his candidacy official and to present the three books he has written. A written summary of his 10-minute statement is available on his website.

The attempt by the major parties to lock smaller candidates out of the Presidential election under the new law has failed, Cheminade began by saying. “I’m happy about that for the French people and for all those who succeeded in becoming candidates.”

Cheminade continued, “Whoever the next President of France is, will not have a majority. Therefore I present a platform of ideas to fight for.”

He went on to review the major planks of his campaign platform:

* Do what Emmanuel Macron and François Hollande never had the courage to do, which is to effect a real separation of commercial banks from investment banks;

* Re-establish a true national bank to issue public productive credit to finance the France of tomorrow;

* Re-found a Europe of nations and great projects, freed from the financial stranglehold imposed by the EU and the euro, in which NATO is the armed branch;

* Look to the BRICS countries to build a new economic system and to make France an example of peace and development in the world, based on three main drivers: the sea, space, and the development of Africa.”

Cheminade thanked the elected officials and the activists who made it possible for him to run and “to inject some truth and a fresh wind in France.” He called on all Frenchmen in this “dramatic period of history” to read his program more carefully than they ever had before, because “at a time when others are holding forth on the deck of the Titanic and throwing around figures that will be swept away by the impending crisis,” the votes that are called “useful,” because they are given to someone who has a good chance of winning, “must become votes of reason, responsibility, knowledge and passion.”

Cheminade concluded: “Je me bats pour une nouvelle Libération. Cette volonté politique de libération est notre culture française.”  (“I fight for a new Libération.  This political will for liberation is our French culture.”)

Cueing off the chatter-of-the-hour and issue-ism from the mainstream media and most elected officials, you see only confusion and impossibility, or worse. But, step back. When you look at the big picture, in the proper time frame, you see how there are grounds for confidence. The United States can be broken free from its subjection to the policies of the neo-British empire system, of monetarism, warfare, and anti-science guff, which has held down the world for decades.
 
Look where we stand on two action measures, identified by the LaRouche Movement and collaborators, as critical for putting the U.S. into a new paradigm, and moving the world ahead. First, Glass-Steagall, as the gateway for the LaRouche “Four Laws” mode for political economy; and secondly, getting the U.S. to join the “win-win” mode of the New Silk Road for the world. Both prospects are live, and on the agenda to be actualized.
 
This week, the discussion about Glass-Steagall, raised in Washington, D.C. Monday by Thomas Hoenig, Vice Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, commanded Trans-Atlantic general attention, and alarm on Wall Street and the City of London. This is reflected in the coverage, from Germany’s Die Welt to the Financial Times of London. Meantime, critical numbers of lawmakers in state capitals, and others, are demanding that Congress shape up and act on Glass-Steagall.
 
On the potential for the U.S. to align with the New Silk Road approach, the prospect for a meeting in April between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, holds great promise for a new course of relations. This coming weekend, Trump’s Secretary of State will be in China for advance discussions.
 
True, we don’t “control” what exactly Trump or his associates will do. But the international dynamic is favorable, and conducive to a United States break-out.
 
We are now 60 days from the May 14-15 event in China, the “Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation” Look back on what led up to this situation, just over the past six months.
 
In September, there was a confluence of conferences, putting forward the perspective of common-interest development: Vladivostock (Eastern Economic Forum), Hangzhou (Group of 20), Vientiane (ASEAN), and the UN General Assembly, for which China presented its Belt-and-Road perspective for a “common future” of growth, finally ending poverty. Then in October, the Goa, India gathering for the BRICS annual summit. In November in Peru, the APEC Summit. In the midst of which came the November U.S. elections, voting out the Bush/Obama/Hillary/London crowd.
 
Now more and more countries are lining up on the pathway to the new paradigm for development. In Chile today, convened the “High Level Dialogue on Asia-Pacific Integration Initiatives.” Following President Trump’s dumping of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), of which Chile was a signator, the Chilean government organized this two-day summit, to discuss possible options for Asia-Pacific integration, but with China now participating. U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson sent a message to Chile’s Foreign Minister Heraldo Munoz last week, congratulating him on taking this initiative. In attendance will be ministers from the 12 TPP signator countries, plus, China, South Korea, and Colombia. The U.S. Ambassador to Chile will participate. Chile’s President Michelle Bachelet will be attending the May Belt and Road summit in China.
 
Take an even longer view than the last half year, and the grounds for optimism are even greater. Recall that in December, 2014, when the EIR Special Report, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge,” was issued, many—including in China!—did not comprehend the world-transforming process involved, and thought the whole idea strange. Same with the reaction earlier that year, to the “Four Laws” issued by Lyndon LaRouche, specifying what must be done to create a productive economy.
 
Now, to millions, these ideas are becoming self-evident. They are fighting issues. We’re rolling! Enjoy the bandwagon.

(PDF available here)

Section I: Findings and Purposes
(a) To return to a policy of building modern economic infrastructure and productivity which it has lacked for half a century, the United States should return to a Hamiltonian credit and banking system as under the original Bank of the United States; the Second Bank of the United States; the 1841 Fiscal Bank of the United States; the Lincoln Administration Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864; and the Roosevelt Administration’s Agricultural Adjustment Act and Reconstruction Finance Corporation. Alexander Hamilton’s bank and credit policies were extremely successful whenever used in the advancement of productivity and production.
(b) Especially since the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and the emergence of interconnected “universal banks” of enormous size relative to the economy, the Federal Reserve Bank has pursued a policy balanced between the tendencies to suppress commercial bank lending and profits, and to trigger rapid inflation; producing almost a decade of near-zero interest rates with near-zero investment in infrastructure and negligible capital spending in industry.
(c) Under restored Glass-Steagall regulation, the establishment of a Bank of the United States, operating as a commercial bank, will restore the valid profit to the commercial banking system which arises from manufacturing, industry, increasing productivity of lands and soils, and the building of new, technologically advanced infrastructure which promotes these.
(d) It is a purpose of the United States Congress in creating a third Bank of the United States, to return to the level of progress of the United States “golden age of productivity,” 1935–65, when multifactor productivity advanced by 3–4% annually, in contrast to less than 0.5% annually over the past decade and less than 1% annually throughout the 21st Century.
(e) Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton was correct in finding that a public debt is a public blessing when directed through a public bank into advancements in the productive power of the nation’s economy, and when the means for ultimate extinguishment of the public debt are provided.
(f) The Bank of the United States shall be chartered under the legislated means for carrying out the powers of Congress related to the purposes specified in Article I, Section VIII of the Constitution of the United States.

Section II: Responsibilities and Authorizations
(a) By this legislation, the Congress authorizes the creation of a public corporation to be called the Bank of the United States, which is authorized to: provide credit for major national projects of infrastructure; including surface transportation and ports, national intercity high-speed rail transport; water management and supply, drought prevention, flood prevention and storm protection, electrical energy production and distribution, and space exploration; make loans to agencies of the United States authorized for such projects; enter joint ventures with agencies of other nations mutually to provide credit for major international projects of new infrastructure; provide credit to state and municipal capital projects by purchase of municipal bonds as issued; discount bank loans to businesses participating in such projects; and cooperate with the United States Export-Import Bank to provide trade credits to businesses engaged in international infrastructure projects.

Section III: Capitaliation and Circulating Funds of the Bank
(a) The Bank of the United States will be capitalized up to a maximum of $1 trillion by public holders of
(1) outstanding Treasury securities of three (3) years or greater maturity, and
(2) outstanding municipal bonds of Federal states or cities of five (5) years or greater maturity,
who shall subscribe these securities as stock in the Bank, and shall receive in exchange, preferred shares in the Bank, callable during a period of 20 years only by the Bank, bearing a fixed annual dividend to be determined by the Bank’s Board of Directors, but not to be less than four (4)% per annum; dividend and redemption payments on the shares of the Bank to be guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury.
(b) The Treasury shall be an on-call subscriber to the Bank in an amount up to $100 billion in new issues of thirty (30)-year U.S. Treasury bonds, and shall receive the same preferred shares in exchange.
(c) As authorized by the Thomas Amendment to the Agricultural Extension Act, signed into law on May 12, 1933, following the subscription of the Bank’s capital the Bank shall be provided with an issue of U.S. Treasury Notes (Greenbacks), equal to the capital subscribed to the Bank in the form of outstanding Treasury securities under SECTION III (a) (1) above, for use as circulating capital, for lending and investment in the productive purposes of the Bank.^{Precedents: The Thomas Amendment above (never repealed) established the principle that if holders of U.S. Treasury securities subscribe or sell them to a United States government bank (the Federal Reserve in that case), the Treasury may issue the equivalent in Treasury notes (“Greenbacks”).
The Legal Tender Act of 1862, under conditions where neither national bank nor central bank existed, established the issuance of up to $430 million Greenbacks when backed by new Treasury issues purchased by, and forming the mandated reserves of, commercial banks, held at the Office of Controller of the Currency created for that purpose by Congress.
The State and Local Government Economic Empowerment Act of 1999 (HR 1452) by Rep. Ray LaHood of Illinois and 19 others, would have authorized Treasury to print $360 billion in Greenbacks ($72 billion/year for five years) for interest-free loans to municipalities for capital investments in infrastructure projects. This Act provided for increasing the statutory limit of Greenbacks in circulation ($360 million) by 1,000 times, to $360 billion.}
(d) The Bank shall be authorized to receive U.S. government revenue deposits, specifically of the proceeds of the Federal tax on gasoline (the National Transportation Trust Fund), as a fund with which to pay the interest on its preferred stock.
(e) The Bank shall receive into its circulating deposits, regular interest payments from state and municipal agencies whose bonds have been subscribed by their holders as capital in the Bank.
(f) State and municipal agencies which receive capital project support through purchase by the Bank of municipal capital bonds, shall be required to keep on deposit at the Bank, five (5)% of the proceeds of such bond purchases, until the completion and final commissioning of the project involved.
(g) The Bank shall be authorized to borrow from the discount windows of the Federal Reserve Banks for periods of up to one year, against state and municipal capital bonds which it has purchased.
(h) The Bank shall be authorized further to raise borrowed capital for its project investments from the public, from commercial banks and business corporations, and from investment funds, by issuing additional debenture bonds up to a total not greater than its subscribed capital; these liabilities of the Bank shall have a guarantee from the United States Treasury; the bonds of the Bank shall be qualified for purchase by commercial banks operating under Glass-Steagall standards, and shall be discountable at Federal Reserve Banks.
(i) Subscribers to the capital of the Bank who are not U.S. citizens or U.S.-based institutions shall be non-voting shareholders.

Section IV: Private Commercial Banks
(a) The Bank of the United States shall discount loans, made by commercial banks operating under Glass-Steagall standards of regulation, to participants in approved projects of economic infrastructure. The rate of discounting of loans shall be determined by the Bank’s Board of Directors, but shall not be less than 50%.

Section V: Loan Specifications and Restrictions
(a) The majority of loans and discounts made by the Bank should coincide in maturities with the time periods of anticipated profitability and projected useful life of the projects and new facilities financed with such loans and discounts.
(b) The Bank may make loans to companies involved in manufacturing related to the purposes of SECTION II for such companies’ additional needs of capital expansion, where those companies can show that the additional capital cannot be obtained from local or regional private commercial banks.
(c) The Bank may extend the time for payment of a loan, through renewal, substitution of new obligations, or otherwise, with the maximum time for such renewal to be established by the Bank’s Board of Directors. The Bank may make such further loans for completion of projects or additions, improvements, and extensions necessary for the proper functioning of the project, or which will increase assurance of the borrower to repay the entire loan or loans.
(d) The Bank may make new loans for approved projects in cooperation with other lending institutions, participating in such loans by up to 50%.

Section VI: Branches
The Directors of the Bank shall establish an office of lending, discount, and deposit in each of the Federal Reserve Districts, and in any other state where Congress may require it by law.

Section VII: Directors
(a) There shall be 25 Directors of the Bank, appointed for terms of five (5) years by the President, subject to approval by the next annual general shareholders’ meeting. The majority of the Directors shall be actively engaged in industrial or engineering activity or have had at least 15 years’ experience in industry and/or infrastructure, to include at least two (2) representatives from the United States Army Corps of Engineers and at least two (2) representatives from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and aerospace industry. The Board of Directors shall elect one of the Directors to be President of the Bank for a term of five (5) years and as necessary thereafter. The President shall be required to assemble a staff with experience in the commercial banking, engineering, heavy construction, and scientific fields, which he or she shall direct to assess the feasibility, productivity, and cost of project investments.
(b) The Directors of the Bank, at their first meeting, shall decide on the schedule of their periodic meetings, and on a rotating Executive Committee which shall have authority to approve infrastructure projects, including international agreements for projects of particular importance, between regular meetings of the Board.
(c) The Bank shall receive from Congress an authorization of $100 million for the initial organization of the Bank’s Directors and staff.

Section VIII: Restrictions
(a) The Bank shall not purchase public debt of the United States as issued, nor make any loan on the pledge thereof.
(b) The total amount of the debts which the Bank shall owe at any time may not exceed the capital stock of the Bank plus its deposits, unless the contracting of a greater debt shall have been authorized by an Act of Congress.

EIR
Executive Intelligence Review

Louise Mensch, the former British Conservative parliamentarian at the center of the latest “get Trump” operation, has been getting some more undeserved attention. Mensch — better referred to as “Unmensch,” a German word signifying someone who has no redeeming qualities for humanity — was on BBC’s popular Sunday Politics show, calling for Trump’s impeachment because of his “obvious” ties to Russia before the election.

“That’s cheating,” she said, “in the sense he’ll be impeached for it and should go to jail for it, rightly, really, and so should everybody in his campaign that colluded, which is more or less everybody in his campaign.”

Ms. Unmensch has been featured by the Daily Beast claiming that she has had firm reports since October of FISA Court FBI warrants in the United States revealing Trump ties to Russia. She had them, she says, due to her close ties to British intelligence, and their “trust” for her. Now, in a March 12 NBC-TV interview, Unmensch said that Trump’s charge of intercepts at Trump Tower is “real news, not fake,” but by revealing it during an ongoing investigation [of himself], he had committed the “impeachable crime of obstruction of justice. He’s in impeachable trouble, obstruction of justice trouble,” she repeated.

Unmensch was also the center of a feature article in Sunday’s (Murdoch-owned) London Times, and articles last week in NPR and the Daily Beast. The picture that is emerging, however, is one of a troubled operative, who believes she is a “temporary superpower,” one who, because of “raging ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder], is capable of intense concentration, not to mention that, she “really cares.” One source, commenting on her allegation of Trump having Breitbart killed in order to advance Bannon, said, “This is crazy talk,” another more bluntly saying, “She’s batsh*t crazy.”

With 178,000 “followers” of her Twitter feed, Mensch churns out a steady stream of expletive-laden tweets, determined to prove what she argues is “blindingly obvious,” that Donald Trump won the election only with Russian help. In December, 2016, she “quietly relinquished” her control of Heat Street to “pursue unspecified digital projects at the site’s parent company, News Corp.,” according to the Daily Beast.

Today, Mensch told the Times, her one desire is that she “really [wants] to meet Chris Steele” — British intelligence author of the infamous “dossier” on Trump’s alleged bribery by Russians. She said of Steele, “I ‘heart’ you so much and I just really want to meet you in the worst way. I am such a fangirl.”

Louise Mensch, the former British Conservative parliamentarian at the center of the latest “get Trump” operation, has been getting some more undeserved attention. Mensch — better referred to as “Unmensch,” a German word signifying someone who has no redeeming qualities for humanity — was on BBC’s popular Sunday Politics show, calling for Trump’s impeachment because of his “obvious” ties to Russia before the election.

“That’s cheating,” she said, “in the sense he’ll be impeached for it and should go to jail for it, rightly, really, and so should everybody in his campaign that colluded, which is more or less everybody in his campaign.”

Ms. Unmensch has been featured by the Daily Beast claiming that she has had firm reports since October of FISA Court FBI warrants in the United States revealing Trump ties to Russia. She had them, she says, due to her close ties to British intelligence, and their “trust” for her. Now, in a March 12 NBC-TV interview, Unmensch said that Trump’s charge of intercepts at Trump Tower is “real news, not fake,” but by revealing it during an ongoing investigation [of himself], he had committed the “impeachable crime of obstruction of justice. He’s in impeachable trouble, obstruction of justice trouble,” she repeated.

Unmensch was also the center of a feature article in Sunday’s (Murdoch-owned) London Times, and articles last week in NPR and the Daily Beast. The picture that is emerging, however, is one of a troubled operative, who believes she is a “temporary superpower,” one who, because of “raging ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder], is capable of intense concentration, not to mention that, she “really cares.” One source, commenting on her allegation of Trump having Breitbart killed in order to advance Bannon, said, “This is crazy talk,” another more bluntly saying, “She’s batsh*t crazy.”

With 178,000 “followers” of her Twitter feed, Mensch churns out a steady stream of expletive-laden tweets, determined to prove what she argues is “blindingly obvious,” that Donald Trump won the election only with Russian help. In December, 2016, she “quietly relinquished” her control of Heat Street to “pursue unspecified digital projects at the site’s parent company, News Corp.,” according to the Daily Beast.

Today, Mensch told the Times, her one desire is that she “really [wants] to meet Chris Steele” — British intelligence author of the infamous “dossier” on Trump’s alleged bribery by Russians. She said of Steele, “I ‘heart’ you so much and I just really want to meet you in the worst way. I am such a fangirl.”

A column by George Koo in the Asia Times of March 13, recommends to the Trump Administration, a presentation given by Daisuke Kotegawa at the June 2016 Berlin Conference of the Schiller Institute on the New Silk Road. Mr. Koo has worked as scientist and engineer at the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and is an entrepreneur, one of the “Committee of 100” of prominent Chinese Americans.

Kotegawa’s “lesson” which Koo is recommending to Trump, was that Japanese investment of billions in new infrastructure in China decades ago, has today become wealth for Japan in the form of Chinese tourists and other investments in Japan’s economy now, because China has prospered. Similarly, China’s “win-win” policy now is that its investments of this kind will “blow back” to it, because other countries will prosper from those investments.

Citing the huge infrastructure deficits just reported by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and Trump’s intentions in this area, Koo writes, “This is where China comes in. It has  gone from being a recipient of soft loans and foreign assistance to becoming the world’s largest investor, partner and builder of infrastructure projects. The Chinese have taken their Silk Road initiative around the world, and countries are eager to work with China because it has developed a reputation producing quality results on schedule and at low cost — and with attractive financing terms.

“All the Trump administration needs to do is be willing to take a different approach to bilateral relations with China, a new look based on what’s in the national interest of the United States.”

The Committee of 100 has taken an active role in promoting the Belt and Road Initiative within the United States, including conferences in New York and San Francisco at which LaRouche PAC has been very active.

Daisuke Kotegawa – Canon Institute Japan, former representative of Japan to the IMF addressing June 2016 Schiller Institute conference, Berlin, Germany.