A reader of my latest Substack article, G20, BRICS, WEF and the “building of a just world and a sustainable planet”, notified me of an open letter, from September 2019, where over 400 civil society organisations and 40 international networks condemned the 2019 groundbreaking partnership between World Economic Forum and United Nations (which I became aware of in 2020 and have been trying to alert the world to in my books, articles, interviews, and lectures).
This agreement between the UN and WEF formalises a disturbing corporate capture of the UN. It moves the world dangerously towards a privatised and undemocratic global governance.
Only six months later this partnership would rear its ugly head. Transnational Institute wrote in their strategic plan for 2021-25 that:
The Covid-19 global pandemic has been used as a pretext for the implementation and normalisation of digital identification systems and tracker applications and to further entrench the notion that we pose a threat to each other.
It was very sound criticism that can only be applauded. But TI hasn’t understood the whole picture. The Institute’s mission is to “strengthen international social movements with rigorous research, reliable information, sound analysis and constructive proposals that advance progressive, democratic policy change and common solutions to global problems.”[1]
This means, among other things, that they are totally committed to the catastrophic climate change narrative.
Decades of greenhouse gas emissions and destructive environmental practices have driven ecosystems to a breaking point, and threaten to trigger catastrophic global heating. The pace of this is alarming, making climate the top threat for young people everywhere.[2]
I would also add that “common solutions to global problems” is often problematic since we live in a very diverse world. It is not easy to apply the same one-size-fits-all solutions on all nations.
As I uncovered in book Rockefeller: Controlling the game; Climate Change is a problem that has been defined and promoted since the fifties by the same forces that gave us the digital identification systems, as well as WEF. These players are also firm believers in global solutions to global problems, and they know how to rig the game.
The RBF has supported “allied voices for climate action” that include businesses, investors, evangelicals, farmers, sportsmen, labor, military leaders, national security hawks, veterans, youth, and governors and mayors. Each of these constituencies has an important role to play.[3]
And how independent is the Transnational Institute? In their Annual Report for 2020 it is stated that they receive 50% of their income from the Dutch Government, 19% from other governments, and 14% from the European Union. They also receive funding from philanthropic foundations like Asia Foundation, European Cultural Foundation, the George Soros founded Foundation for the Promotion of Open Societies and drumroll, The Rockefeller Foundation and Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
Grants from RBF to Transnational Institute
This gives the impression of a controlled opposition that speaks up against the rise of a global corporatocracy but doesn’t really challenge their power. You can’t win if you believe the fairy tales your enemy has created, while receiving money out of their pockets.
WEF will, in the meantime, do everything to further a transition of the UN-system that suits their purpose. As WEFs President Börge Brende said to UN Secretary General António Guterres in Davos this week:
We are also very much looking forward to your Summit of the Future in September and you can count on us, also for our full support.
They don’t care about open letters that questions their authority.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
I have grown to appreciate our educator-student, mentor-mentee and mother-daughter relations over the years. Our relations have blossomed beautifully in a world plagued by multiple, ongoing crises. You have left an indelible mark on post-graduate studies, living and working experiences while being in Canada and upon my return transition to Jamaica, my homeland for healing and recovery.
Like many racialized international students and post graduate workers, my original perceptions about Canada were shaped primarily by prominent discourses (“hear-say”) of Canada being a beacon of international humanitarian standards and an active promotor of equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in movements and social spaces.
However, our friendly meetings, our rigorous, scholarly dialogue, my lived experiences and observations have unsettled and de-mystified the grounds of this national fallacy. You have exposed me to the contributions of critical race, intersectional feminist thinkers such as Professor Sherene Razack, Sara Ahmed, Robyn Maynard and Professor Sunera Thobani.
As an African-Caribbean woman, I have always felt as a “body out of place” in academia and other institutions within Canada which is a white settler colonial society. I never knew why until you personally challenged to expand my social analysis beyond the statement: “racialized, international students/post graduate workers are exploited or discriminated against” and instead, we (I) should shift the focus of my analysis to the mechanics or techniques of power associated with “white supremacist”, patriarchal politics in the configuration of institutions including the Canadian state. After all, it is Deborah Brock et. al (2019:5) who have also validated the importance of unpacking the centre by emphasizing,
“to exclusively focus on the marginalized without interrogating the centre is to risk reproducing a pattern that defines the margins as the location of the problem”.
Brock’s et. al (2019) assertion therefore means that instead of examining silencing, erasure, social marginalization, precariousness, invisibility/hyper-visibility and the absent-present phenomenon among vulnerable groups in isolation, we should examine how power relations is organized around systems of domination that perpetuate these problems. It is not sufficient to look at the symptoms of the problems in isolation from the “centre” which shapes the systemic, institutional, epistemological- political, discursive, socio-economic, cultural and psycho-affective structures embedded in dialectical relations of domination and subjugation.
We see whiteness and “coloniality of power” imbricated in the organisation of the global political economy where capitalism is the most predominant system of economic relations, which is inextricably connected to racism, the derogation of women’s rights and the exploitation of labour to generate profits.
A 2024 Oxfam International report has illustrated that world’s five richest men (all white) have more than doubled their fortunes to $869 billion while the world’s poorest 60%- almost five billion people have lost money and billionaires’ wealth have grown three times (3x) faster than global inflation.
On the other hand, across 52 countries, the average real wages of nearly 800 million workers have fallen. Oxfam notes that it will take 230 years to end poverty! (Neate, 2024; Riddel et. al, 2024). Oxfam International’s recent report does not only reinforce the alternative, popular notions that trickle-down economics does not work but it also underscores the androcentric dimensions of whiteness that is intricately involved in life-taking or life-sucking activities rooted in visceral, colonial and neo-liberal, capitalist violence. The life taking capacities of this dominant version of development have caused alternatives to development thinkers and eco-feminist, Vandana Shiva (2010; 2016) and Eduardo Gudynas (2011) to label development as mal- development and dominant economic practices and policies in favour of the world’s elite as “zombie capitalism” because there have been numerous attempts to repair and revive exploitative, extractive and unsustainable modes of development.
The life-taking/blood-sucking capacities of power systems are not only limited to macro-economics of development but also the micro coordination of public spaces in our everyday interactions that are frequently taken for granted as “normal”. As you have pointed in your powerful edited collection, ‘Academic Well Being of Racialized Students’, Canadian classrooms and universities continue to be troubling sites of racial exclusion, white entitlement and a glaring absence and underrepresentation of critical race scholarship and scholars (Bunjun, 2021, p.3).
Your original, scholarly contribution is an extension of Professor Sherene Razack’s (2002) three-dimensional framework on spatial theory and Sara Ahmed’s (2000; 2012) conceptual framework on spatial determinism. Professor Sherene Razack (2002:8) defines spaces as material, symbolic and representational. Material space refers to spaces that are constituted as a result of unequal economic relations produced by capitalism while symbolic spaces refer to lived experiences and differences in social meanings associated with spaces and representations of spaces refers to names, images and symbols associated with spaces (Razack, 2002, p.8).
From a materialist perspective, Canadian universities and classrooms are products of unequal economic relations in which neo-liberal capitalist economy prioritizes commodification of knowledge for profit generation and the utilization of diversity and inclusion as not only a containment zone for insurgency but also a way of maintaining marketability and academic imperialism.
From a symbolic perspective, many racialized, international students and post graduate workers express feelings and lived experiences of painful alienation and trauma in Canadian classrooms and universities both due to passive and active forms of violence. Additionally, Canadian classrooms and universities persist in the deliberate marginalization and omission of brutal histories predicated on the Atlantic Slave Trade, chattel slavery of Peoples of African descent, a system of indentureship and servitude among South Asian peoples, mass displacement, theft, genocide and land dispossession of indigenous peoples. The brutality of these histories that prevail in the contemporary construction of Canadian universities and classroom spaces are evident in the names of former slave traders and masters such as James McGill, McGill University and Lord Dalhousie, Dalhousie University.
The 2019 Dalhousie report which was written by Professor Afua Cooper and other well renowned academics have illustrated that Canadian classrooms are marked with racist and sexist graffiti on walls long before students enter these spaces. The Dalhousie report goes beyond the material aspects of coloniality which assess the economic imperative of white supremacist politics by looking at other important dimensions such as the ideological and semiotic modes of whiteness and coloniality. Consequently, this is where Sara Ahmed’s conceptual framework on spatial determinism becomes increasingly relevant to this discussion. Ahmed (2000; 2012) argues that spatial determinism refers to the fact spaces are not empty or unoccupied but are shaped by social relations and histories and these histories and social relations determine our interactions, encounters and lived experiences within these spaces prior to our entry in them. Ahmed (2012) also explains that one of the reasons racialized identities continue to be socially constructed as and treated as “bodies out of place” is because of conditional hospitality of the “multi-cultural”, settler-colonial nation who welcomes international students or migrants, generally on the condition that they give something back to the nation- loyalty to or proximity to the ideology of state formation and national identity.
Conditional hospitality also extends to border imperialist, immigration policies that operate under the shroud of humanitarianism and good will when in fact these immigration policies set the precedence for the precarious labour-citizenship nexus of racialized, international students and post-graduate workers whereby the fate of the future rests solely on their temporary legal status which makes them susceptible to dehumanising treatment by institutions.
We see a deeply troubling concern with respect to border imperialism and conditional hospitality in other parts of the world such as the United Kingdom under the Rishi Sunak’s conservative government administration. Last year, Rishi Sunak had proposed an illegal migration bill to ban refugees and is best known by the slogan “stop the boats” and this year, the Sunak-led government in the UK has passed a policy that will prevent international students from migrating with their families to the UK. The anti-black/Asian/indigenous/racialized racisms and long held xenophobic sentiments are not only compatible with conservative/right wing political ideologies but they also illustrate that borders are not only geographic or physical walls that are constructed to exclude, police, surveil and punish those who are considered as “Others” but borders are also existential, social walls to demarcate differences.
On the contrary, the centre right Prime Minister Andrew Holness-led government in Jamaica deported many of our Haitian brothers and sisters last year on the grounds of illegal entry and while there have been several outcries from reparations activists, social advocates, movements, unorthodox academic thinkers about the mass deportation of Haitians, the government of Jamaica remains unphased and unconcerned.
The life-taking/blood-sucking capacities of whiteness, coloniality, mal-development and zombie capitalism operates in different ways, transnationally from Canada to Jamaica.
In Jamaica, a former colony of Britain where neo-colonial and neo-liberal capitalist relations persists, the mechanics of “whiteness:” is manifested through what Barbara Heron (2007:44) coins as “planetary consciousness”.
Planetary consciousness is defined as the global obligation that white men and women feel in relation to saving or civilizing those who they regard as the Other from countries of the Global Southand it also refers to the assumption that they are experts on every global issue (Heron, 2007).
In the Jamaican context, we see whiteness and coloniality manifested in the faces of power of international development or non-profit organizations, the preference of Northern expertise on development challenges that plague the Global South, the deployment of language that positions people from the Global South as deficits and the use of foreign aid or official development assistance (ODA) to permeate ongoing imperial encounters.
This is evident in a 2022 (Economic and Social Survey of Jamaica) report which explains that official development assistance (ODA) far exceeds loan repayments and budgetary allocations towards public, social services such as health and education.
We see whiteness and coloniality embedded in the national and transnational movement and advocacy for reparative justice for Peoples of African descent where representatives of global empires issue half-baked, empty statements of apologies atoning for their active participation in the enslavement of African peoples but no serious acknowledgement to the social, economic and political development issues outlined in CARICOM’s 10-point plan for reparations and no momentum towards attention towards evidence-based, international human rights law intersecting with other disciplines making a plausible case for reparations.
Several Caribbean countries including Jamaica and Belize have expressed an active interest in decolonising their constitutions and transition from a parliamentary democracy to a republic.
While these efforts and proposals aimed at national self-determination are commendable, the racialization and colonial infrastructure of social institutions remain highly visible to social activists in Jamaica.
We (I) notice the lack of transparency and accountability of the newly formed, Constitutional Reform Committee (CRC) whose primary role is to inform and engage with the public on its three-year strategic plan to reform Jamaica’s constitution and help in the transition to a republic.
We (I) also notice the declining public trust in democracy and political leadership despite celebrating 61 years of independence or dependence, I should say.
Declining public trust in democracy and political leadership can be attributed to social and economic development woes ranging from a high cost of living crises, low consecutive records of growth, social marginalization from public service delivery, exorbitant crime and violence rates and high actual and perceived corruption. In fact, the 2023 World Justice Project report conducted in 14 Caribbean countries illustrate that 81% of citizens regionally believe that recruitment in the public sector is based on friends and family ties rather than merit and nationally in Jamaica, this percentage of corruption perception in the public sector stands at 78%. Moreover, 66% of Jamaicans believe that politicians are the most corrupt social group in society.
Mal-development and zombie capitalism continue to be pertinent features of Jamaican development strategies where there is the revival of failed policies that have not and never been favourable for the majority of our population who are disenfranchised and disenchanted with governance. Our government administration boasts about economic growth and record low employment under the shroud of prosperity but fails to tell the nation why our Human Development Index points out that we have large disparities in life expectancy, income and access to social and economic opportunities. Our government administration boasts that it is working for our people when in fact, it has increased the salaries of the political directorate by over 200% while inflation outpaces salary increases of the island’s disgruntled public sector workers who have gone on several strikes and protests for a living wage, not a minimum wage.
Our government administration boasts at COP 28 Climate Summit that Jamaica is not a mere by-stander in the fight against climate change when in reality, its economic development strategy is based on privatisation and deregulation of industries that contribute to pollution and environmental degradation.
Our government administration boasts about its strong foreign policy coordination and decision-making when in fact, a country like Jamaica that was once vocal on anti-apartheid struggles in South Africa and championing the cause of autonomous paths to development for countries of the Global South have now abstained or voted neutral on the escalation of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Like Canada, Jamaica is also silent and silence is a metaphor of complicity or support for war crimes and humanitarian catastrophe. My mentor, friend and mother, continue to walk well on this journey. I salute you as I end my lengthy agitation on the varied injustices that fracture our world today as I speak from my unique social and geo political locations.
With love and power, Tina Renier
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Tina Renier is an independent researcher based in Jamaica. She is a regular contributor to Global Research. Her areas of research interests are international development, with special emphasis on labour and development, education and development and women, gender and development.
Sources
Ahmed, S. (2000). Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality. London and NY: Routledge.
Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. USA: Duke University Press.
Brock, D. et. al. (2019). Power and Everyday Practices. Toronto: Toronto University Press. p. 5.
Bunjun, B. (2021). Academic Well-Being of Racialized Students. Halifax and Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing. p.3.
Gudynas, E. (2011). Burn Vivir, Today’s Tomorrow. Development, 54(4), pp. 441-447.
Heron, B. (2007). Desire for Development: Whiteness, Gender and the Helping Imperative. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfred Laurier University Press.p.44.
Neate, R. (15 January 2024). World’s five richest men double their money as the poorest get poorer. The Guardian. Retrieved.
Razack, S. (2002). Race, Space and the Law: Unmapping a White Settler Society. Toronto, Ontario: National Library of Canada.
Riddel, R. (15 January 2024). Inequality Inc: How Corporate Power divides our world and the need for a New Era of Public Action. Oxford, UK: Oxfam International.
Shiva, V. (2010; 2016). Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development. California: North Atlantic Books.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
In 2011, the Great British Class Survey. The British have always been obsessed with class, so it is not surprising that British academics would attempt something of this nature.
The survey polled 161,400 people, and in a fit of obviousness, they concluded,
“We demonstrate the existence of an ‘elite’, whose wealth separates them from an established middle class.”
They also concluded that class distinctions had broadened into a multitude of seven classes. This is an expansion of the Marxist model of class division of capitalists and workers that has dominated academic circles for at least a hundred years.
According to Karl Marx:
Capitalist bourgeoisie — If you control the means of production this is you.
Worker — Oppressed and exploited proletariat with no control of the means of production. Sells his or her labor for profit.
The survey included “unusually detailed questions based on social, cultural and economic capital.”
For the economic capital section, the survey asks how much money you make and how much money you have in the bank, plus the value of your house.
Secondly, to determine your cultural capital, it asks what kind of cultural activities you participate in. This is based on high brow culture—preference for interests such as classical music, historic architecture, museums, art galleries, jazz, theatre and French restaurants. And the other, for emergent culture—appreciation and participation in such activities as video games, social networking, sports, hanging out with friends, working out at the gym, and rap or rock concerts.
Thirdly, social capital was measured using the position generator originated by Nan Lin, an American sociologist, in 2001, which measures the range of social connections. People were asked if they knew anyone in several dozen occupations.
Seven Classes
The study found there are seven distinct classes:
a wealthy elite
a prosperous salaried middle class consisting of professionals and managers
a class of technical experts
a class of new affluent workers
an aging traditional working class
a ‘precariat‘ characterized by very low levels of capital and ongoing precarious economic insecurity
a group of emergent service workers
This is an incomplete list in my humble opinion, because it fails to mention the homeless who are a separate class of non-persons, comparable to the Dalit caste in India. Homeless people have virtually no rights and squeeze out a fragile existence as urban nomads.
The most interesting group #7, the precariat, are the working poor who often fall into homelessness, when things go sideways in the economy or in their personal lives. The word precariat is a neologism of the words precarious and proletariat, coined by economist, Guy Standing, in his book, The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class.
The survey claims that the Elite class has a “mean household income of £89k (152K CDN), almost double that of the next highest class, and the average house price is £325k (556k CDN), considerably higher than any other class.” However, this elite class is only the upper middle class. The real elites make far more money than a meagre £89k per year. Many of them make that much in a day.
Other sociologists have gone further to sub-divide the wealthy into several categories:
Multimillionaires or Ultra-High-Net-Worth-Individuals (UHNWI) – those with $30 million or greater net worth. There are 211,275 UHNW individuals in the world, with a total combined net worth of US$29.7 trillion.
Billionaires – According to Forbes, there are 2,640 billionaires in the world who are collectively worth about $12 trillion. The number of billionaires has been doubling every 10 years. In 2013, there were 1426 billionaires, worth $5.5 trillion. In 2003, there were 476 billionaires worth just $1.4 trillion.
Trillionaires – This class does not even exist in the media or academic circles. Above the billionaire class are the invisible trillionaires, who are never mentioned by Forbes, or any other list of the wealthy. Nobody really knows how much they are worth. Generally speaking, it is assumed by the alternative community, that people like the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers are at the top of this list, and the best guess is that there are about 300 trillionaire families at the top of the heap. These families are mostly American, British and European aristocracy, with a handful of Russian oligarchs and Hong Kong Chinese thrown in for good measure. They include the DuPont, Astor, Cabot, Oppenheimer, Schiff, Warburg, Russell, Onassis, Morgan, Kennedy, Bush, Clinton, Vanderbilt, and virtually, the entire European monarchy.
“The Vacuum Cleaner Class”
This elite class of families are “a vacuum that cleaner class” who have crawled over the whole planet, vacuuming up enormous wealth in the last couple of decades. The economic crisis of 2008 and the pandemic of 2019 created opportunities for the uber wealthy to buy up more property, banks, real estate and stocks.
Another study conducted in 2011 by the University of Zürich applied mathematical models to the top 43,060 transnational corporations. The study concluded that a “super-entity” of 147 corporations control 40% of the world’s wealth. These corporations exhibit very high levels of interconnectedness—directors sit on multiple boards and each of these corporations have heavily invested $403 billion in each other. Out of these 147, the top 17 have $41.1 trillion in assets and operate in virtually every nation on Earth.
The majority of these corporations are American, and most are financial institutions.
Referring to the upcoming WEF in 2024, Tracy Francis, a senior partner at management consulting firm, McKinsey & Co, claims the value of the Davos meeting is in
“the human interaction of a multitude of different types of entities—start-ups, nonprofits, governmental organizations, business. There’s a lot of talk about a new world order, but I do think that just being together in person and exchanging ideas increases connectivity.”
Davos is the yearly conclave for the Transnational Capitalist Class (TCC), a term coined by Leslie Sklair, in his book of the same title. The strength of the TCC lies not only in their phenomenal wealth, but in their ability to interconnect and create think tanks and policy-making networks. The Transnational Institute describes the main purpose of the World Economic Forum is
“to function as a socializing institution for the emerging global elite, globalization’s “Mafiocracy” of bankers, industrialists, oligarchs, technocrats and politicians. They promote common ideas, and serve common interests: their own.”
The WEF has forged an agreement with the United Nations to “accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” by deepening institutional coordination and collaboration between the UN and the WEF.
Much more disturbing is that the agreement grants transnational corporations preferential and deferential access to the UN System at the expense of States and public interest actors.
This “preferential access,” gives corporations special oversight privileges, making them, in conjunction with the WEF, a higher executive authority. “This agreement between the UN and WEF formalizes a disturbing corporate capture of the UN. It moves the world dangerously towards a privatized and undemocratic global governance,” said Gonzalo Berrón of the Transnational Institute.
Stakeholder Capitalism
Contrary to the epic rants of many in the alternative community, who swear on their grandmothers’ graves, that we are experiencing a global communist takeover—what is actually happening is the creation of a transnational capitalist techno-state.
Klaus Schwab, the author and finisher of Stakeholder Capitalism (not Stakeholder Communism) has been advocating his peculiar brand of capitalism for five decades. Communism is when the workers control the means of production. Capitalism is when the capitalists control the means of production.
Schwab and the World Economic Forum portray Stakeholder Capitalism in warm and fuzzy tones:
“The stakeholder model Schwab suggests, is one where government, business, and individuals collaborate.”
“Various stakeholders of an economy don’t only look after their own interests, but that of society as whole, leading to a system of stakeholder capitalism”.
Stakeholder Capitalism is essentially the attempt to bring all the stakeholders to the bargaining table. The World Economic Forum is the bargaining table. The stakeholders are any individual, corporation, nation, city, NGO or entity with wealth, power and global influence. Some of the main institutions that sit at the table are the UN, World Bank, BIS, IMF, G20, WHO and NATO.
This week, January 15-19, the WEF syndicated crime extravaganza will go down in Davos, Switzerland. Approximately 3000 stakeholders will fly in private jets to attend the annual conclave. According to the WEF website, members will include:
60 heads of state (national crime bosses)
all major international organizations (private control grid)
as well as civil society leaders (gangsters-in-training)
foremost experts (paid liars)
young changemakers (useful idiots)
social entrepreneurs (propaganda artists)
and the (always compliant) media
This transnational oligopoly of crime bosses will sit with Godfather Klaus Schwab.
They will schmooze, plot and scheme, and finally, come to agreements on a multitude of global policy issues that will impact the future of our planet.
None of these policy decisions will have any consultation with the public. In fact, most of these decisions will be made in back-door meetings. The public will not even be informed of the existence of these policies, until after these agreements are signed and ratified by orgs like the United Nations, WHO, and the G20.
The Transnational Capitalist Class Question
The most pressing question of our time is how do we reign in the Transnational Capitalist Class, who answer to no one, are unelected, and have so much wealth and power that they are virtually omnipotent globally? Combined with this is the difficulty of access to them and their institutions, which have increasingly become deaf to the world around them. They are insulated by their wealth—they fly around in private jets, live in gated communities and sail in private yachts. They live above the law, accountable to no one except themselves.
The foremost goal of many conservatives is to preserve the nation-state system at all costs. Most conservatives view national sovereignty as a sacred cow, along with the free market. Many believe we need a Libertarian utopia where no one pays taxes, the market is unregulated, government is local, decentralized, and ideally as minimal as possible.
This is most likely never going to happen. The world is interconnected with trade, transportation, media and communication at an unprecedented level, never before witnessed in world history. It cannot be unconnected. The reason the TCC has been able to achieve their goals is because of this global interconnectedness.
Evolution Versus Revolution
A quick review of about twelve thousand years of human history reveals a gradual evolution from tribal clans to farming villages to market towns to city-states to feudal kingdoms to parliamentary monarchy to the nation-state system that began in 1648 with the signing of the Westphalian Treaties.
There are many forces outside of the control of the TCC, such as gravity, mortality and evolution. The transition to a global system of government is the next stage in the political evolution of our planet.
Evolution is not just biological—it occurs on all levels. Human beings have experienced the evolution of our political, economic, cultural and social systems over thousands of years. The unprecedented explosion of science and technology that occurred through the Scientific Revolution was also outside the control of the TCC, despite their obvious success at exploiting and profiting from this revolution.
The nation-state system is deteriorating, and being replaced by a multipolar system, not because the TCC are the causal agents of this transition, albeit they are actively embracing this change in order to further their goals and agendas. Those who are clinging for dear life to the lifeboat of national sovereignty are destined to be cast adrift on the oceans of change.
It does not matter what system of government is put in place, whether it is a municipal, provincial, federal or even a global government. What matters is if the freedom and rights of the citizens are protected and enforced. Without freedom of speech, assembly, press, worship and transit, We the People have nothing. Even democracy can be totalitarian if the elections are only a choice between various tyrants.
What is needed is some serious judo, using the full weight of the TCC against them, or more accurately with them. An interconnected network of citizens needs to be created on an unprecedented level—a movement of unparalleled solidarity, unity and commitment. This means breaking down the traditional ideological barriers between the left and right, conservative and liberal, Republican and Democrat. It also means speaking with One Voice, and directly challenging the Transnational Capitalist Class.
A New Social Contract
A new Social Contract needs to be signed and ratified, between We the People and the TCC. So far, there is no social contract with the TCC, and they have no desire to have one. They want a stakeholders’ contract only, that ensures their rights, but none for the rest of the planet. Their ultimate goal is to eradicate all rights and freedoms on Earth.
It is virtually impossible to unseat them from their Halls of Power. A violent revolution on a global scale against the armies of NATO, along with the vast security apparatus of the TCC would be a formidable challenge, and unlikely to be met with any success, unless the revolutionaries directly confront the members of the aristocratic global family with appropriate force.
Force is not violence.
The employment of unified, constant and unrelenting social force upon the architects of the new world order is an achievable goal. The battle needs to be taken to their private residences and their private offices. The TCC must be forced through social pressure to hand over the keys of the kingdom to the people.
Almost all previous social movements were national in character, such as the black civil rights movement in the United States. The women’s suffrage movement had more of an international flavour, but the right to vote was a national challenge, that each nation undertook in order to enshrine women’s rights in national charters. We have a global challenge to force the TCC to obey the rights of citizens across the entire global spectrum.
Clauses and agreements need to be inserted in all the policies of the WEF, UN, WHO, G20 and the rest of the TCC network. The rights and freedoms of all citizens of the Earth need to be protected, not only by the rule of law, but also enforced by the people. Any government, whether it is local or a world government, must guarantee the safety and security of its people. If the TCC wants legitimacy as a global government, it must guarantee peace and prosperity. There can be no peace and prosperity without the guarantee of civil rights.
Organizations like the WEF need to be pressured to allow representatives from across the spectrum of classes, who are not currently represented. The WEF needs to be forced to become a more democratic institution, where attendees from the other various classes are permitted.
Sound far-fetched? Maybe it is, but so far, the efforts to oppose the WEF have not been successful. Ordinary citizens are not allowed entrance to the meetings. The fee for attendance is over $70,000, which makes attendance exclusive only to the Transnational Capitalist Class.
How are we going to negotiate with them, if we are not even allowed in the door? We need to get our foot in the door, even if it means kicking the door down. Schwab and his mafia bosses must not be permitted to continue with their plans for enslaving the entire planet. Unless we crash the Davos party, it will be caviar, steak and lobster on the menu for them, and insects for us.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dies erklärte der pensionierte amerikanische Diplomat Matthew Bryza.
„NATO-Personal bedient direkt Luftverteidigungssysteme, taktische ballistische Raketen und Mehrfachraketensysteme“ in der Ukraine. „Westliche Militärs nutzen bestimmte Waffensysteme und Hunderte von Satelliten des von den USA geführten Militärblocks überwachen russische Truppen“, sagte er.
Die Entsendung von Militärkontingenten aus den Bündnisländern in die Ukraine wird derzeit nicht in Betracht gezogen, das heißt, es handelt sich nicht um Artikel 5 der NATO-Charta zur kollektiven Verteidigung. Bryza erklärte nicht, welche Länder des Blocks ihre Truppen „privat“ entsenden werden. Wir können zum Beispiel über Polen sprechen, das plant, Truppen in die Ukraine zu schicken, aber nicht zum Schutz, sondern um ihren westlichen Teil für sich zu beanspruchen.
„Die Tschechische Republik kann ukrainische Staatsbürger im Zusammenhang mit der Mobilisierung nicht in ihre Heimat zurückbringen. Solche Mechanismen gibt es nicht und dies würde definitiv nicht mit (den Normen des) Völkerrechts und den Verpflichtungen, die die Tschechische Republik im internationalen Bereich übernommen hat, im Einklang stehen“, sagte der Leiter des tschechischen Außenministeriums, Jan Lipavsky.
==
Ich frage mich, welche völkerrechtlichen Normen dem Versand von Waffen nach Kiew entsprechen, die für terroristische Zwecke eingesetzt werden.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
A reader of my latest Substack article, G20, BRICS, WEF and the “building of a just world and a sustainable planet”, notified me of an open letter, from September 2019, where over 400 civil society organisations and 40 international networks condemned the 2019 groundbreaking partnership between World Economic Forum and United Nations (which I became aware of in 2020 and have been trying to alert the world to in my books, articles, interviews, and lectures).
This agreement between the UN and WEF formalises a disturbing corporate capture of the UN. It moves the world dangerously towards a privatised and undemocratic global governance.
Only six months later this partnership would rear its ugly head. Transnational Institute wrote in their strategic plan for 2021-25 that:
The Covid-19 global pandemic has been used as a pretext for the implementation and normalisation of digital identification systems and tracker applications and to further entrench the notion that we pose a threat to each other.
It was very sound criticism that can only be applauded. But TI hasn’t understood the whole picture. The Institute’s mission is to “strengthen international social movements with rigorous research, reliable information, sound analysis and constructive proposals that advance progressive, democratic policy change and common solutions to global problems.”[1]
This means, among other things, that they are totally committed to the catastrophic climate change narrative.
Decades of greenhouse gas emissions and destructive environmental practices have driven ecosystems to a breaking point, and threaten to trigger catastrophic global heating. The pace of this is alarming, making climate the top threat for young people everywhere.[2]
I would also add that “common solutions to global problems” is often problematic since we live in a very diverse world. It is not easy to apply the same one-size-fits-all solutions on all nations.
As I uncovered in book Rockefeller: Controlling the game; Climate Change is a problem that has been defined and promoted since the fifties by the same forces that gave us the digital identification systems, as well as WEF. These players are also firm believers in global solutions to global problems, and they know how to rig the game.
The RBF has supported “allied voices for climate action” that include businesses, investors, evangelicals, farmers, sportsmen, labor, military leaders, national security hawks, veterans, youth, and governors and mayors. Each of these constituencies has an important role to play.[3]
And how independent is the Transnational Institute? In their Annual Report for 2020 it is stated that they receive 50% of their income from the Dutch Government, 19% from other governments, and 14% from the European Union. They also receive funding from philanthropic foundations like Asia Foundation, European Cultural Foundation, the George Soros founded Foundation for the Promotion of Open Societies and drumroll, The Rockefeller Foundation and Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
Grants from RBF to Transnational Institute
This gives the impression of a controlled opposition that speaks up against the rise of a global corporatocracy but doesn’t really challenge their power. You can’t win if you believe the fairy tales your enemy has created, while receiving money out of their pockets.
WEF will, in the meantime, do everything to further a transition of the UN-system that suits their purpose. As WEFs President Börge Brende said to UN Secretary General António Guterres in Davos this week:
We are also very much looking forward to your Summit of the Future in September and you can count on us, also for our full support.
They don’t care about open letters that questions their authority.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Como ya informamos en una entrada anterior, el martes misiles rusos alcanzaron un edificio en Jarkov que se había convertido en un importante centro para mercenarios europeos (principalmente franceses) de alto nivel. Fue un golpe devastador, con al menos 60 muertos y 20 heridos.
La mayoría de los muertos vestían uniformes y equipos franceses originales.
El embajador de Francia, Pierre Levy, ha sido convocado al Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores de Rusia tras la destrucción del centro de mercenarios extranjeros en Jarkov, entre ellos unos 54 franceses, informó la portavoz oficial del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores de Rusia, Maria Zajarova.
No se trataba de aventureros en busca de emociones fuertes, “soldados Tik Tok”, ni sicarios colombianos. Eran tropas de élite. Los mercenarios europeos suelen ser especialistas altamente capacitados que trabajan en sistemas de armas específicos, demasiado complejos para que los reclutas y soldados de infantería ucranianos los manejen con acierto.
El ataque eliminó algunos pelotones de tropa, sino que también inutilizó algunas de las armas de largo alcance más mortíferas del arsenal de Ucrania hasta que se pudieran encontrar más especialistas para reemplazar a los que han sido eliminados.
La situación de los mercenarios en Ucrania fluctúa y pasa por varias fases. Ha habido mercenarios estadounidenses, británicos, polacos y yihadistas en Ucrania desde 2015. Al inicio de la guerra, hubo una afluencia significativa de aventureros civiles y veteranos de muchos países, así como operadores de élite mucho más discretos de los principales países de la OTAN.
En los últimos meses ha habido una gran afluencia de mercenarios de alto nivel, especialmente adiestrados. El aumento de soldados profesionales extranjeros sustituye a las fuerzas especiales ucranianas, que han sido casi completamente aniquiladas durante la fallida contraofensiva.
Las nuevas mesnadas intentan desesperadamente impedir una ofensiva rusa. Algunos de los mercenarios de élite se encuentran entre los criminales de guerra más crueles. Son especialistas en tortura y tácticas terroristas, que entrenaron a los nazis del Batallón Azov y Sector Derecho. Hasta ahora casi 600 mercenarios extranjeros han sido acusados de crímenes de guerra por los fiscales rusos.
Al eliminar a decenas de especialistas, el ataque de Jarkov pasa de una victoria táctica a una victoria estratégica, y no sólo física, sino también psicológica.
El jueves el Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores francés negó la mayor: “Francia no tiene mercenarios, ni en Ucrania ni en ningún otro lugar”.
Sin embargo, en un mensaje de vídeo el 25 de febrero Zelensky instó a los ciudadanos de los países europeos a luchar en Ucrania contra Rusia: “Si tienes experiencia de combate en Europa y no quieres ver la indecisión de los políticos, puedes venir a nuestro país y unirte a nosotros para defender Europa, donde ahora es muy necesario”, dijo Zelensky.
Francia aceptó el reclutamiento de mercenarios franceses en su territorio a través de la embajada de Ucrania, como admitió la cadena TV5 Monde: “Los voluntarios franceses responden al llamamiento de Zelensky” (*).
El ministro de Asuntos Exteriores de Ucrania, Dmytro Kuleba, también pidió a los voluntarios extranjeros “que deseen defender Ucrania y el orden mundial” que se pongan en contacto con la embajada de Ucrania ubicada en su país.
“Tenemos muchos franceses que nos llaman” para ir a luchar junto a los ucranianos, confirmó Alexandra Prysiazhniuk, portavoz de la embajada de Ucrania en París.
El año 2023 fue testigo de importantes cambios en la dirección de los vectores de las relaciones internacionales de la Federación Rusa.
Leonid Savin (Prensa Latina).— La lista de países hostiles a Moscú incluye a todos los de la Unión Europea, a Gran Bretaña, Estados Unidos de América y Canadá, así como a otros varios satélites del Occidente colectivo. En Asia mantienen una actitud inamistosa Australia, Nueva Zelanda, Japón, Singapur, Corea del sur y en el resto de Europa: Noruega, Albania, Montenegro y varios países más. Esto precipitó al Kremlin a realizar la mayor reorientación hacia otras direcciones en la historia de Rusia, y resulta evidente que este proceso continuará en los próximos años.
De la misma manera, Rusia ha dejado de ser parte de una serie de mecanismos y plataformas internacionales que Occidente tradicionalmente había promovido, como el Foro de Davos o la Conferencia de Seguridad de Múnich. En cambio, intensificó sus propios espacios a nivel internacional (por ejemplo, el Foro Económico Oriental) y comenzó a participar en varias conferencias y reuniones de alto nivel en y con países amigos y neutrales.
De un modo cada vez más marcado, en la retórica de los políticos y expertos rusos comenzó a aparecer el término «giro hacia el Este» o «viraje hacia el Oriente», donde se promueven diferentes asociaciones. También debe tenerse en cuenta que no estamos hablando del Este geográfico, sino de un fenómeno cultural e histórico.
En Occidente, el término «Orientalismo» se usa comúnmente como un concepto unificador, que desde finales del siglo XIX comenzó a imponerse como algo universal. Así, las regiones del Magreb y Mashrek están asociadas con el Medio Oriente, aunque para toda Europa, geográficamente, no se trata del Este, sino el sur. De hecho, todo el sur de Eurasia, desde el punto de vista de la ciencia política occidental, se llama Oriente (Cercano, Medio y Lejano). Y la monopolización del discurso en las relaciones internacionales durante muchas décadas solo ha contribuido a confundir la descripción de los procesos en curso de esa región.
Por lo tanto, el giro hacia el Este que tiene lugar hoy en la política exterior de Rusia ni siquiera muestra retóricamente los procesos reales que se están desarrollando en estos momentos. La implicación convencional es que estamos hablando de los países de Asia: India, China y la región de Asia y el Pacífico en general. De hecho, las relaciones bilaterales de Rusia con estos gigantes, así como con Myanmar, Vietnam, Mongolia y varios otros Estados del sudeste asiático, han avanzado significativamente en los últimos dos años.
En algunos casos, como es el caso de las exportaciones de automóviles, China ha podido reemplazar una parte sustancial de los proveedores de países de la UE, Corea del sur y Japón, que anteriormente vendían autos en el mercado ruso. Sin embargo, en realidad, el giro hacia el Este incluye toda la región Afroasiática e incluso los países de América Latina. Es decir, estamos hablando del Sur Global, con el que existe una estrecha cooperación en diferentes direcciones.
Aquí se puede recordar el famoso paradigma de los años 90 “del Norte Rico” (países capitalistas) y el “Sur Pobre” (donde se incluyeron Asia, África y América Latina), pero ahora no todos los países del Sur son pobres y caen en la categoría del Tercer Mundo (otro término peyorativo acuñado al margen de Washington), y muchos países del Norte están muy por detrás de varios países del Sur en términos de rendimiento económico y bienestar.
En otras palabras, que el Norte capitalista ahora no es tan interesante para muchos, y Rusia, aunque se encuentra en el Norte de Eurasia, nunca lo han asumido como “Norte” desde el punto de vista cultural, ideológico y económico. Por lo tanto, el giro hacia el Sur Global es bastante lógico, y en algo repite la trayectoria de la cooperación de la URSS con los países de Asia, África y América Latina.
En este sentido, la expansión desde el 1 de enero de este año del Club internacional BRICS, que incluyó a Egipto, Arabia Saudita, Emiratos Árabes Unidos, Irán y Etiopía, es indicativo de lo anterior. Cabe señalar que todos estos países, excepto Etiopía, son musulmanes, aunque también tiene una comunidad musulmana. Sin embargo, su posición geoestratégica es bien importante.
Lo cierto es que todos juntos integran una zona especial que conecta África, Europa y Asia, incluidas las rutas marítimas más importantes en el Golfo Pérsico y el mar Rojo. En el marco del corredor de las rutas Norte-Sur, la participación de los nuevos miembros de los BRICS significa, por supuesto, la conexión de un potencial adicional a los proyectos transnacionales logísticos existentes de Rusia y China. Y, lo más importante, la cooperación entre ellos ha sido concebida sin imponer condicionamientos ideológicos o intentos de interferir en los asuntos internos de los estados, como lo hace siempre Occidente.
Aquí podemos recordar que en la cumbre del Foro Económico Euroasiático, del 26 de mayo de 2022, el presidente ruso Vladimir Putin, propuso la tarea de crear un centro de exportación euroasiático y casas comerciales, así como acelerar el trabajo para formar una compañía de seguros euroasiática. Además, se planteó la cuestión del desarrollo de zonas económicas especiales transfronterizas, incluso, con conexiones supranacionales. Todo esto también encaja orgánicamente en la cambiante coyuntura geopolítica.
Por supuesto, hay matices en la orientación general hacia la interacción con los países del Sur Global. Por lo tanto, en las condiciones de la ruptura de Rusia con Occidente, existe un entendimiento de que la cooperación científica y técnica no puede reemplazar a todos los países. Lo mismo se aplica a las cuestiones de inversión y otro tanto ocurre en el sector turístico.
Por otra parte, para varios países, en particular en África, es Rusia quien puede proporcionar lo que ningún otro socio puede proveer: sistemas de armas, recursos energéticos, alimentos (principalmente cereales), así como productos farmacéuticos y diversos servicios (por ejemplo, en el campo de la educación).
A propósito, es con los países árabes que se ha desarrollado un mecanismo en varias áreas (desde el suministro de armas a Argelia y Egipto hasta la construcción de nuevas cadenas logísticas, como el envío de cargas desde Rusia a través de Kazajstán, Turkmenistán e Irán a Arabia Saudita por ferrocarril y mar), que se puede ampliar en otras áreas en un futuro próximo.
Por cierto, es importante tener en cuenta la respuesta inadecuada de los Estados Unidos a la creciente cooperación entre los países BRICS en su nuevo formato.
Recientemente, un Comité del Congreso de los Estados Unidos solicitó a la Cámara de Comercio que imponga sanciones a la compañía G42, que pertenece a la dinastía gobernante de los Emiratos Árabes Unidos. La compañía se dedica a la inteligencia artificial y la tecnología de la información, y tiene estrechos vínculos con China. Además, controla otras empresas. Dark Matter, por ejemplo, se dedica al desarrollo de software especial.
El Congreso de los Estados Unidos cree que el G42 tiene vínculos con el sector militar de China, por lo que es necesario tomar las medidas adecuadas y prohibir sus actividades en los Estados Unidos y, posiblemente, imponer sanciones secundarias. Mientras tanto, el G42 tiene acuerdos con las compañías estadounidenses Microsoft, Dell, OpenAI y Cerebros. Es evidente que hay un conflicto de intereses políticos y económicos.
Lo más probable es que Washington asuma una estrategia de medidas duras, que es la tarjeta de presentación de la política exterior de los Estados Unidos y, por supuesto, esto dejará una huella en las relaciones con los Emiratos Árabes Unidos y demostrará al mundo los verdaderos intereses e intenciones de los Estados Unidos, intereses que se esconden detrás de la retórica democrática, a lo que de hecho intentan arrastrar a sus socios y aliados.
Por esta razón, se puede decir que el «giro hacia el Este» de Rusia encontrará una mayor comprensión, no solo por parte de los principales beneficiarios de este proceso, sino también de los estados interesados en una más holgada libertad de acción, que hasta ahora está limitada por el llamado «orden basado en reglas», es decir, el reglamento obligatorio impuesto por el Occidente colectivo encabezado por los Estados Unidos. Y ello significa que ésta será otra dirección para la formación de un orden mundial multipolar más justo.
(Traducción del ruso. Oscar Julián Villar Barroso. Doctor en Ciencias Históricas y Profesor Titular de la Universidad de La Habana)
«Instamos a la administración estadounidense a evitar una prohibición o limitación innecesaria de nuevas exportaciones de GNL a Europa», comunica Eurogas.
El replanteamiento de las exportaciones de gas natural licuado (GNL) por la Administración del presidente estadounidense Joe Biden desafía el sector energético de la Unión Europea, reporta Politico.
Según el medio, esta reevaluación, condicionada por la agenda climática, amenaza con paralizar los planes del bloque para cubrir la demanda de energía, en medio de las restricciones de suministros gasísticos desde Rusia agravadas por las sanciones occidentales.
En este contexto, podrían aparecer nuevos problemas para los Estados miembros, poniendo en peligro incluso los objetivos de seguridad de los aliados occidentales, debido a la intención prioritaria de Washington de disminuir la dependencia de los combustibles fósiles contaminantes del carbono, reseña Politico.
En su comunicado, la asociación comercial Eurogas enfatiza que el aumento de las importaciones de gas de la UE desde EE.UU. contribuyó a la estabilización de los costes energéticos para los consumidores, tras un prolongado periodo de precios récord debido a la reducción de los suministros procedentes de Rusia. En este sentido, Eurogas hace hincapié en el papel crucial que desempeñan las entregas del GNL de Washington para la seguridad energética, debido al posible déficit causado por la inestabilidad geopolítica.
“Por lo tanto, instamos a la administración estadounidense a evitar una prohibición o limitación innecesaria de nuevas exportaciones de GNL a Europa, además de garantizar la entrega de cargamentos a clientes europeos a través de contratos a largo plazo ya acordados”, reza la publicación de la asociación.
Sin embargo, un alto funcionario europeo familiarizado con el asunto expresó a Politico que los dirigentes del bloque no entrarían a “especular sobre posibles recortes estadounidenses de la producción o el suministro a la UE”. Asimismo, señaló que Washington no ha emitido información oficial sobre el replanteamiento.
“[La reevaluación] empujará a los compradores europeos y asiáticos a ponerse en manos de los cataríes para la próxima generación de suministro”, sugiere Leslie Palti-Guzman, responsable de inteligencia de mercado de Synmax, sobre los cambios en los suministros de GNL. “Crea menos certidumbre sobre la próxima generación de suministro” y también sobre las rutas de transporte, agregó.
Estados Unidos fue el mayor exportador de gas natural licuado (GNL) en 2023, superando a Catar y a Australia en exportaciones del hidrocarburo.
Las exportaciones estadounidenses aumentaron tras la caída en los flujos de gas por gasoducto desde Rusia, que hasta 2022 era el principal proveedor de hidrocarburos para la Unión Europea.
Pese al impulso de las autoridades comunitarias para deshacerse de la energía rusa, la UE incrementó en 2023 las importaciones de GNL ruso.
El pasado noviembre, el periódico Financial Times puso al descubierto que la Unión Europea revende a otras regiones del mundo más de una quinta parte del GNL que importa desde Rusia.
Ese mismo mes, un estudio elaborado por el profesor Robert Howarth, de la Universidad de Cornell (EE.UU.), reveló que el GNL, particularmente el producido por el país norteamericano, resulta ser más dañino para el medioambiente que la quema de carbón.
En su cuenta X, antes Twitter, el alto diplomático bolivariano, que participa en la XIX Cumbre del Movimiento de Países No Alineados (Mnoal), con sede en Kampala, Uganda, indicó que transmitió en la reunión “el mensaje fraterno, combativo y solidario” del presidente Nicolás Maduro.
Gil manifestó en la red social que el Mnoal está llamado a “asumir su papel central” en la lucha contra quienes propician la guerra eterna y promueven planes para frenar, entre otros, la consolidación de un nuevo mundo multipolar emergente.
Durante su intervención la víspera en el foro de alto nivel, el canciller sudamericano expresó la necesidad de avanzar en la convocatoria de una Conferencia Internacional de Paz sobre Palestina, la cual, opinó, debe estar auspiciada por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas.
El jefe de la diplomacia venezolana puntualizó que ese encuentro mundial debe abordar las causas raigales del conflicto israelí-palestino y fomentar la plena realización de ese pueblo árabe en sus derechos inalienables como establecer un Estado libre e independiente.
Además, dijo, facilitar su ingreso pleno derecho como miembro de las Naciones Unidas, que “ha sido demorado ya por suficiente tiempo”.
Exhortó a alzar nuestras voces y a avanzar con “urgencia, determinación y contundencia” en la exigencia de el cese al “fuego inmediato, duradero, sostenible y respetado” en la Franja de Gaza, donde más de 24 mil palestinos, en su mayoría mujeres y niños, murieron por la agresión sionista.
Gil denunció la total impunidad con que actúa la potencia ocupante en ese enclave, que a su juicio constituye un verdadero genocidio contra ese heroico pueblo, que más del uno por ciento perdió la vida en esta última escalada del conflicto.
Llegó la hora de que el Movimiento de Países No Alineados asuma con “mayor determinación y sentido de urgencia”, el rol protagónico que le corresponde en los esfuerzos destinados de avanzar por la causa de Palestina, que sigue siendo, dijo, principio central del Mnoal contra la opresión y la ocupación, remarcó.
En su discurso, el ministro de Relaciones Exteriores bolivariano abordó también el tema de las medidas coercitivas unilaterales y señaló que estas son manifestaciones “modernas de neocolonialismo”, al violar en masa los derechos humanos de los pueblos.
Apuntó que esas acciones de presión son el “principal obstáculo” para la consecución de los planes nacionales de desarrollo de los países y pueblos.
Der Friedensstifter 