Guk GAZA segituko dugu aipatzen.
oooooo
Segida
@tobararbulu # mmt@tobararbulu
USA and EU Are DESTROYING Their Own Order! | Prof. Dr. Alfred De Zayas (… https://youtu.be/b2Supi7tUD8?si=aNGu4idKX5SFmx_L
ooo
USA and EU Are DESTROYING Their Own Order! | Prof. Dr. Alfred De Zayas (Ex-UN Official)
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2Supi7tUD8)
[Part 1 of 2] Today I got with me an extraordinary scholar, thinker, and activist with many years of experience in the UN system, especially in the field of Human Rights. I’m talking to Dr. Dr. Alfred de Zayas, a Professor at the Geneva School of Diplomacy, who used to work as a senior lawyer in the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights and later became the first UN Independent Expert on International Order, serving in that capacity from 2012 to 2018.
Part 2: 
• Ukraine War EXPOSES 30 Years Of Weste…
Born in Cuba, Dr. de Zayas holds a Doctorate in Jurisprudence from Harvard Law School and a PhD in modern history from the German University of Göttingen.
Dr. de Zayas is also a member of the Geneva International Peace Research Institute where he and his team are currently working on a legal case against Ursula v.d.L., Charles Michel, and Josep Borrell.
Transkripzioa:
0:00
they’re going to put it aside and they’re not going to act on it and we have an information war going on if you
0:06
want to have uh things move in international law you have to have a
0:12
movement you have to have uh people riled up uh at what is happening and
0:20
that’s what of course we see today in the uh University campuses that students
0:25
who see it on television that genocide is actually happening before their eyes they are protesting but uh the United
0:32
Nations and the international court of justice should help them with
0:37
provisional measur should have speak clear language and say this is genocide
0:43
and nothing
0:50
less hello everybody this is Pascal from neutrality studies and today I got with me an extraordinary scholar thinker and
0:57
activist with many years of experience in the UN system especially in the field of Human Rights I’m talking to Dr Dr
1:05
Alfred desas a professor at the Geneva School of diplomacy who used to work as a senior lawyer in the office of the UN
1:11
High Commissioner for human rights and later became the first un independent expert on International order serving in
1:19
that capacity from 2012 to 2018 born in Cuba Dr desas holds a doctorate in Juris
1:25
Prudence from Harvard Law School and a PhD in modern history from the German University of gutan Dr desas is also a
1:32
member of the Geneva International Peace Research Institute where he and his team are currently working on a legal case
1:38
against urela under lion Charles Michelle and Joseph borell it is an extraordinary privilege of talking to
1:44
you Professor desas so thank you very much for coming online thank you Pascal for inviting me
1:51
and as I say I think we are both uh Swiss citizens I’m very proud to be a
1:56
Swiss citizen since uh 2017 [Music] uh my wife originally Dutch she’s also a
2:04
Swiss citizen and she’s actually a coner Municipal here in so we’re actually
2:11
quite well integrated in Switzerland and we believe in direct democracy which is
2:16
what seems to be lost in the world and at least we haven’t missed a single
2:22
referendum in the seven years that we have been citizens and I wish we had
2:28
referenda in the United States I wish we had referenda uh in uh Germany and in
2:33
France and in United Kingdom because ask the people do you want peace or War you
2:39
know that the people want peace it’s the governments and the elites but we we we
2:45
know that the elites are scared of that and you know in Switzerland we we can prove time and again that people vote
2:51
differently from what the national government would actually want and we keep doing that I just I’m involved into
2:57
this in this referendum for more neutrality and we have good hopes of actually turning things around so we and
3:02
the government listens to that I wonder other countries don’t want to do that which is why I keep saying the United States Germany they don’t have very good
3:09
democracies they have like not democracies period we’re oligarchies and
3:14
there’s the revolving door I mean you are member of government when you’re
3:20
voted out you go into a think tank and you get a huge salary like uh uh
3:25
Victoria newand and then you come back into government and you’re not
3:30
accountable uh to your electorate you’re not accountable uh to the people you’re
3:37
accountable to those who finance your campaign and the campaigns in the United States go into the millions and millions
3:43
and millions of dollars so that uh unless you have a sponsor in the military industrial Financial complex uh
3:50
you don’t get elected so I mean there’s no one there’s very very few uh
3:56
congressmen and Congress women who are independent I mean they are as I say
4:03
responsible to the Ron loid Martin boing uh the
4:11
pharmaceutical industry which has enormous lobbies I mean the lobbies have completely destroyed uh democracy I mean
4:19
uh the United States is a disgrace there is a breakdown in the rule of law in the
4:26
United States domestically and internationally because we don’t respect international law at all and uh our
4:35
foreign minister you know I’m also an American citizen our foreign minister Anthony blinkin uh dares talk about
4:43
rules based International order but we do have it it’s the United Nations Charter the problem is that the
4:50
United States does not want to respect the UN Charter does not act according to
4:56
the letter and the Spirit uh of the charter but you have questions no let’s
5:02
go there and let’s start with this one first actually with human rights international law and and what’s currently going on I talked on this
5:08
program to John dugar uh about a year ago uh who used to be the special
5:13
reporter on human rights in Palestine and who who is an international law expert and he wrote the first kind of uh
5:20
comprehensive piece on why the hum the international um the the the
5:25
rights-based international order is is not at all an international law concept
5:30
I think you would subscribe to that very much why is it that at the moment the West the West is tearing down the
5:36
international law institutions it has been building up for more than 100 years
5:42
why well we have been tearing down uh the most
5:47
fundamental general principles of law we have given up on good faith on
5:56
keeping your word uh obviously what uh
6:02
Bill Clinton did to uh the Russians when
6:07
he ignored uh The Binding oral agreements between uh President George
6:14
HW Bush and gorbachov and our secretary of state James Baker I
6:22
mean in international law uh for it to function uh you you
6:30
cannot just simply apply it alak cart you apply it today this way tomorrow
6:36
that way uh you cannot uh uh give your word as a um
6:44
uh uh head of state or as a foreign minister uh and then ignore it tomorrow
6:50
because then everything is built on trust when there’s no more
6:56
trust uh then you don’t have and Order uh you have the jungle and that’s the
7:04
direction that we are going and uh um we
7:09
seem to uh uh have a narrative uh we
7:14
give lip service uh to Human Rights Etc but we
7:19
violate them uh consistently and the problem is that uh we’re giving a very
7:27
bad example of to new democracies or new States in
7:34
Latin America and Africa and Asia so they’re not blind they’re not stupid if
7:39
they see that the United States uh breaks international law uh with
7:45
impunity they figure if they do it we can do it too and uh the old shall we
7:55
say admiration that existed uh for the United States uh as a beacon uh of
8:03
international law and of Human Rights uh that has lost its luster uh nobody
8:11
believes that narrative anymore in Latin America or in Africa on Asia but
8:17
Washington is not quite aware of it yet I mean we keep living in this U
8:23
delusion that uh people still think that we are the leaders and we have lost that
8:30
leadership for our own fault yeah yeah but you know the history of Human Rights
8:35
and human rights laws the history of breaking those laws right and and and the constant struggle to trying to to
8:41
create some form of of uh institutions or mechanisms that help amarate the
8:47
horrible situation right and one of the things one of the step forward really was the the uh the creation of the ICC
8:55
back in 2002 the Rome statute you know when there was a lot of hope that now you can push this thing forward and in
9:00
the last 10 days we have seen this amazing unprecedented uh moment when when there
9:07
was suddenly IC in in in in the spotlight and Netanyahu made a little Twitter video saying like oh they want
9:13
to they they want to um issue arrest warrants and 12 senators in the US write
9:18
a threatening letter that we will retaliate if you do that and I mean the
9:23
ICC has been politicized before and maybe you can explain to us why the ICC is so politicized as opposed to the icj
9:29
which is a little bit more uh uh independent maybe we could talk about that but this is unprecedented this
9:35
attack on on an international court that just a year ago one and a half years ago
9:40
was so praised for actually uh issuing arrest warrants against Vladimir Putin right so this is such a this is such a a
9:48
cognitive dissonance that hurts so badly can you talk about that it is Shameless
9:54
but of course we are Shameless in the United States I mean it’s um there are a
9:59
handful of great professors of international law and professors of international relations you know like uh
10:06
Richard folk and Jeffrey saaks and John mimer Etc uh but there most of them uh
10:15
are careerists and most of them are accommodated to power and they know that
10:20
if they want uh they aspire to anything higher uh they have to play the game so
10:26
that has corrupted uh the system back 40 years ago I was writing uh articles
10:32
about the possibility of international criminal court and I was professor in
10:38
Chicago and together with Professor Sharif basuni at the deole University
10:45
and we wrote a a book together uh on human rights in the uh administration of
10:51
Criminal Justice and we were pushing for a um an international criminal court uh
10:59
basuni was basically the drafter of the first statute of the international
11:05
criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia uh and um uh he believed very
11:12
much in the ICC he passed away about five years ago I think it would be deeply deeply hurt and deeply
11:21
disappointed uh seeing what came off of it uh I mean it’s not just now uh that
11:28
uh the United States senators and others are threatening the IC back uh uh seven
11:38
years ago uh Trump uh threatened uh the then uh prosecutor uh Fatu Ben suda uh
11:48
and uh actually imposed sanctions on her and her team because uh she dared to
11:55
investigate into NATO crimes and crimes against human in
12:01
Afghanistan and the first thing that the successor of Fuda did Kim Khan is to
12:07
discontinue the investigation into uh American and NATO crimes in Afghanistan
12:14
but continue the um uh investigations about Taliban uh war crimes now uh the
12:21
president has been set uh by the international criminal uh court that a
12:28
sitting Head of State uh the first one was uh Al Bashir
12:34
of uh Sudan uh can actually be indicted
12:39
that actually follows article 27 uh of the
12:44
statute of the international criminal court the statute of Rome and so there’s
12:50
no more immunity uh since in the past according to judgments of the international court of justice take the
12:58
Judgment in um Congo against Belgium Judgment of 2002 quite clearly you know
13:04
a sitting head of state has total immunity you cannot indict him that changed with the statute of Rome and uh
13:14
so Al Bashir of Sudan then Putin so now if the court fails to issue
13:23
an indictment against President hok or against uh netan or against uh avor
13:31
liberman and all the others who have actually expressed genocidal intent with
13:37
regard uh to the uh Gaza uh population uh then the court has lost
13:46
whatever little credibility it already had I see the possibility of an a
13:54
stampede of countries leaving the statute of Rome I mean this almost
14:00
happened uh back uh in 2015 when Al Bashir uh went to uh a
14:09
meeting uh of the African Union in South Africa and South Africa did not arrest
14:15
him and did not deliver him to the ICC so the ICC got you know very angry and
14:21
they started a case against the South South Africans and in the end they more or less discreetly left it because
14:30
several States in Africa had already said okay if that’s the way you’re playing the game goodbye and uh if the
14:38
court now fails to issue a uh an arrest warrant in a case
14:46
as clear as this one I mean this is far clearer and far worse than what was
14:52
accused uh what Putin was accused of uh so that uh uh the court uh would of
15:00
course the United States would protest and they would impose sanctions they impose um you know lateral course and
15:07
measures on everybody you know onethird of the population of the world is
15:13
suffering unilateral for of measures uh from the US so I mean that it it would not be surprising but the United States
15:20
is in open Rebellion against uh international law that is what we are
15:26
witnessing can you help me for a moment the if we compare the ICC to the icj in
15:32
the icj the process is that a member country needs to drag another country in front of the court and then you have a
15:38
1517 judge panel that will weigh everything and the evidence and d d and in the IC how does it work why is the
15:44
prosecutor General so powerful in deciding what the court does and what not can members not initiate things against each other well members
15:52
certainly can and members have I mean certainly it’s not just Motu proprio
15:57
that Karim Khan uh starts a case I mean he’s been pushed by uh Algeria and by
16:04
jibuti Etc to indict netan what I would like to see is an avalanche of countries
16:13
states parties to the uh statute of Rome to uh demand of the court to indict all
16:21
of these people and uh to act quickly
16:26
because one of the shall we say practices uh both of the ICC and of the
16:32
icj is to drag their feet when they’re scared of the political consequences uh
16:39
of a particular case they will not decide on it and they have too much
16:45
discretion actually and uh they are playing the game now the uh IC as I said
16:54
is very much corrupted I explained that in a chapter of my book uh the uh the
17:00
human rights industry something that worries me a great deal because I do believe in international law I do
17:07
believe in the necessity of international law the necessity of the United Nations if we didn’t have a
17:12
United Nations we would have to found one if we didn’t have a Human Rights
17:19
Council we would have to establish one uh it’s better to have rules even if the
17:24
rules are broken than to have no rules at all uh on the other other hand it is
17:30
possible to reform the system it is possible to um impose shall we say uh a
17:37
commitment of all states to play by the rules and to have consequences if you
17:43
don’t uh but the international court of justice uh is not above criticism uh I
17:53
know several of the judges personally I’ve been actually on very friendly terms uh with many judges over the years
18:02
uh and without a doubt uh it is not just a
18:09
Judicial organ it is a political organ uh it is
18:15
inconceivable that uh the United States would nominate an
18:21
independent judge through the court they’re going to nominate that they have always om nominated um uh judges who
18:30
will tow the line but in her last ruling on on Israel the American judge actually
18:35
was fairly un squarely on the side of those who said provisional measures on Israel well but they did not issue a
18:43
provisional measure ordering a ceas fire yeah that was uh of course it was a
18:48
compromise I mean in uh a collegial body there’s always um shall we say horse
18:55
trading and uh they don’t go as far as they could in cases that demanded and
19:03
this case demanded it uh I was pleased uh with the first set of six uh
19:10
provisional measures and with a second set of provisional measures because there were two 10 26 of January 105 uh
19:17
of March which Israel has completely ignored and violated with impunity because the United States continues
19:24
issuing the voto The veto uh in the security Council to Shield uh Israel uh
19:31
from uh criticism but the essential problem with the international court of justice I mean I personally know the
19:38
Japanese member I personally know the German member uh I have known in the past uh the members from um Jordan and
19:48
uh from um um India and from China as a
19:54
case may be the current uh composition is very Pro Western is very heavily uh
20:02
pro-western you have an Australian member you have an American member you
20:08
have a French member you have a German member you have a Romanian members
20:14
members of NATO members of the European Union that are in there uh but you don’t
20:19
have a a judge from Russia or from uh Bell Russia you don’t have a judge uh
20:26
from Cuba or huras or nicaragu or Colombia the fact is that you need more
20:34
representation from um Africa more representation uh from Asia and even if
20:42
you have an African or an Asian or a Latin American if that person was
20:48
educated uh in the United States or in the United Kingdom uh that person has a
20:55
mindset uh that is Akin that is related uh to uh the Western approach to
21:04
law and I think you have to have all of the schools of legal thinking
21:11
represented in an international court of justice uh as I said right now it is
21:17
heavily pro-western and uh it is surprising when
21:22
they do adopt a decision um uh as they did in the case
21:27
of South Africa against Israel but I’m highly disappointed uh with uh the
21:35
denial of uh provisional measures demanded by Nicaragua in the Nicaragua
21:41
against Germany case I mean it’s quite clear that Germany is complicit uh in
21:48
the genocide uh complicit by giving not only Aid and comfort uh to um to Israel
21:54
politically and otherwise but by delivering lethal weapons that have been used in the genocide now uh the uh the
22:03
court uh affirmed this jurisdiction the court kept the case on the list Germany
22:10
went all out to say uh the case must be struck from the list you have no
22:15
jurisdiction the case is inadmissible that has not been um accepted by the
22:21
court the court kept the case but I expect that Nicaragua uh uh against uh Germany we
22:30
will put on the back burner and they probably won’t touch it you know once
22:35
they did not issue the provisional measures now uh it’s going to be fan as
22:43
the Germans say they’re going to put it aside and they’re not going to act on it and we have an information war going on
22:51
if you want to have uh things move in international law you have to have a
22:57
movement you have to have uh people riled up uh at what is happening and
23:04
that’s what of course we see today in the uh University campuses that students
23:10
who see it on television that genocide is actually happening before their eyes they are protesting but uh the United
23:17
Nations and the international court of justice should help them with provisional measur should have speak
23:25
clear language and say this is genocide and nothing less I keep saying to my
23:31
students that at the end of the day although I completely agree with you international law matters it matters
23:36
what states want and don’t want to do and they do want to perceive in a certain way and therefore Norms have a
23:42
role to play um but politics Will trump law because it’s politics that makes the
23:47
law so hence it’s it’s it’s it’s primary now what you’re just talking about is
23:54
also the public perception of what is going on and we have seen in my view and in views of others the most Relentless
24:01
propaganda probably ever since May maybe probably since the 1960s since the Red Scare that that that we have seen like
24:08
Relentless uh approaches at trying to shape public narratives in in mainstream media which is one of the reasons why uh
24:15
alternative Medias like this one like shows on YouTube become popular because people want alternative and an actual
24:22
analysis of what is happening how do you see this interplay between law politics and uh media
24:29
propaganda well uh the theory is that
24:36
uh uh politics should be in the service of Law and not law in the service of
24:43
politics that’s a theory uh the situation is totally different the
24:49
situation is that uh governments set the narrative and in the past uh the media
24:58
uh was the Watchdog uh of Human Rights was the Watchdog uh of the rights uh of the
25:06
electorate uh that has changed um over the last 40 years uh the um shall we say
25:14
the independent uh newspapers have disappeared everything has been bought
25:19
up by Cong conglomerates and those are responsive to uh the government they are
25:26
Echo Chambers uh for the Pentagon and for the uh State Department uh I used to
25:33
write uh regularly in Germany for the frankurt alaman talk I used to get you
25:39
know entire papers uh I used to write for um D I did many many uh opets uh in
25:46
The Bu they wouldn’t touch anything of what I’m writing now because they are
25:52
completely in the service of uh shall we say this uh elitist uh uh oligarchical
26:01
uh system and um which is actually far more powerful than anything that um
26:09
George Orwell thought in his 1984 or for that matter Aldo hutley uh in um Brave
26:17
New World um it’s the Relentless brainwashing uh of the population that
26:24
allows uh government to get away with it of course and and the average person as
26:31
his wife his children his concerns uh International politics is
26:36
not uh the priority uh of most people so
26:42
uh they kind of say okay they’re not too bad let them do their work and they
26:48
don’t think it’s students who have more time who still don’t have the
26:53
responsibilities of having a family uh that uh actually realize that something
27:00
is going on that is very very very wrong and that’s why uh we are demonstrating I
27:06
used to demonstrate back 50 years ago uh against the Vietnam War and when I was
27:12
at Harvard I demonstrated quite regularly against the Vietnam War and of
27:17
course we were also beaten up the police was thrown against us more than once and
27:23
um what we see now in um uh Harvard in Colombia and Berkeley at UCLA at
27:31
Michigan Etc uh gives me hope uh that people have said enough is enough we’re
27:37
not going to put up with this and uh our governments have to stop their
27:42
complicity uh in uh in genocide but it is not yet we’re not yet there because
27:48
governments do not listen to the people as I said here in Switzerland we have referenda here in Switzerland the people
27:56
are consulted not only consulted they are informed because I’ve never seen in any other country and I’ve been monitor
28:03
of Elections etc etc I was monitor for the U uh United Nations in the Ukrainian
28:10
presidential and parliamentary elections uh in 1994 Chris Cross the country etc
28:17
etc and uh or bless that was uh performa
28:24
uh the um uh in Switzerland you get a booklet uh with the positions of all the parties
28:31
with the position of the con Federal with you know exactly what is that issue
28:37
what are the arguments pro and con and then you can decide and you go on the internet and you can say the these are
28:43
my preferences and uh the computer will tell you then you’re closest to the PS
28:51
or you’re closest to the four spot high or you’re closest to uh the greens or
28:56
your closest uh to the uh the Christian democrats or whatever uh so that is here
29:03
shall we say a matur system uh of democracy where people are consulted and
29:10
people are informed uh the rest of the world uh elections don’t make much of a
29:17
difference so you may recall the statement uh of uh Kur
29:22
toal uh
29:28
abaft you know if um if elections would change anything
29:34
they would be abolished I mean it’s uh and the funniest thing is that the
29:42
propaganda just by sheer repetition that we are a democracy that Germany is a
29:50
democracy that Israel is a democracy people tend to believe it and but EX
29:58
except when the United States uses this little word democracy and uh it has of
30:04
course the National Endowment for democracy uh but what we mean is
30:10
National Endowment for capitalism democracy is equated uh with uh capitalism so
30:18
countries that uh Embrace capitalism are democratic countries that uh are a mixed
30:25
bag or that um uh uh accept only certain tenants of
30:31
capitalism but not not the rest uh are authoritarian uh dividing the world uh
30:37
in this manner uh seems to you and seems to me uh completely infantile completely
30:45
um primitive uh on the other hand uh it has been effective in uh shall we say
30:54
keeping the population down uh in more or less uh tranquilizing them
31:03
so that they don’t realize that they’re being manipulated all the time and uh I
31:09
must say I was a great believer in American democracy and it took me
31:15
decades I’m not saying years decades uh to realize that uh my my Illusions were
31:23
not based uh on fact they were based uh on on propaganda we were based uh on
31:31
what I have been taught uh in U high school and in college and university and
31:39
what you know you read in the press and what you saw in Hollywood uh so the real
31:44
world is totally different from that uh which we have been taught but I must say
31:49
once you break uh with these Illusions once you
31:55
realize that Santa Claus doesn’t exist you are actually liberated you you you
32:00
you initially you’re disappointed you’re sad uh you you are even upset but after
32:07
that uh then you go forward then then you are a free person and then you can
32:12
as uh patus and uh Emmanuel K used to say sa out uh you can have the courage
32:21
of your own convictions you can use your own brain you don’t depend on group
32:27
think you don’t have to Simply Echo whatever nonsense you heard last night
32:32
in CNN uh you have access to information you can fact check uh the news that you
32:41
get and then you can arrive at a synthesis that is far closer to reality
32:46
than what we’re getting yeah and I you know the interesting thing to me is that obviously the question of democracy or
32:53
autocracy is absolutely dumb because it’s obviously not a deoy it’s obviously a scale right and you have certain
32:59
countries that function according to more democratic principles and such according to less or just masquerade I
33:05
would never ever say that the Chinese political system is on the same is
33:10
functioning in the same way that the German political system does although to the outside they have like similar
33:16
sounding institutions and so on but under the hood everything works differently and in the US and and and the UK too it works very very different
33:23
and if we do the scale of good democracy bad democracy then definitely Switzerland is far higher up than than
33:28
the United States or Germany because of this this representation issue the interesting thing to me in international politics is that international law
33:35
actually doesn’t give a damn it doesn’t care on whether a country is is is Democratic or autocratic it all the only
33:41
thing it cares about is it is it recognized by others if yes then so be it you’re part of you’re part of the
33:47
club and now let’s discuss together so all in all international law is a very pragmatic way of structuring the inter
33:53
international relations and we see that every country wants to be perceived as a good guy nobody wants to be perceived as
34:00
a bad guy U nobody wants to be perceived as Unbreaking law they all make up reasons why what they’re doing is is
34:06
legal so do you have hope um in in international law actually um helping us
34:11
to structure our 8 billion self-organizing Planet further well if we win the information
34:21
War yes because international law is rational and it has uh logic that what
34:29
that I adhere to uh what I do not accept is double standards what I do not accept
34:37
is international law alak cart and the United States in its uh shall we say
34:43
pragmatism in its uh shall we say Imperial prag pragmatism uh does not
34:51
adhere to international law the United States perceives itself as the
34:56
indispensable country as the exceptional country and it perceives itself as above
35:04
uh international law and that’s why the United States does not uh submit itself
35:10
uh to any uh adjudication by International tribunals uh the United
35:16
States uh had given the famous uh declaration under article 36 of the
35:23
statute of the icj it withdrew it after losing several cases in the
35:29
icj uh notably the Nicaragua against United States case of
35:36
1986 uh and uh there were still C certain treaties that provided for
35:42
automatic uh referral uh to the um uh
35:47
International court of justice among them uh the genocide convention article
35:52
9 thereof but when the US finally ratified the genocide convention vention
35:58
44 years after its adoption in 1992 that
36:03
was under George H W bush he accepted it but with a
36:09
reservation he put a reservation to article 9 so you cannot bring a case
36:15
automatically through the icj on the issue of genocide unless the United
36:21
States agrees and of course the United States does not agree uh the shall we say the last REM
36:28
uh of uh acceptance of international adjudication uh was the optional
36:33
protocol uh to the uh Vienna convention on diplomatic relations and the Vienna
36:39
convention on Consular relations uh there was number of cases against the
36:44
United States because um especially because of the death penalty uh against
36:52
um citizens of other countries uh you had the LR case uh the LR others uh were
36:59
Germans uh who had the uh the parents had divorced and the mother took the
37:05
kids to the states and of course they didn’t have a proper upbringing etc etc
37:10
they engaged in a berky that went bad and uh so uh when uh Germany found out
37:16
that two of their citizens who were under death sentence they they asked for a
37:22
um uh an order provisional order uh from the international court of justice that
37:27
they should not be executed of course the order was granted and they were executed United States doesn’t care and
37:34
then came uh another case aena and 51 Mexicans um and the court again uh
37:41
issued a an order not to execute them the United States went ahead and executed them and um and then the United
37:49
States said n uh we are denouncing the optional protocols so we will never
37:55
again be brought uh to the Court uh obviously the United States continues
38:00
violating the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations and the Vienna Convention of cul of relations uh so the
38:07
violation of international law is there uh but you cannot uh bring it to the
38:12
international court of justice for adjudication because the United States has removed uh the uh recognition of the
38:20
icj uh to adjudicate the case uh so um
38:25
United States similarly does not accept any kind of um uh individual complaints
38:31
procedures not in in the human rights committee or in the committee on economic social cultural rights or in
38:37
the um uh uh Committee Against torture etc etc that’s why the United States
38:43
commits just monstrous crimes like the torture in Abu and in Guantanamo and the
38:51
extraordinary Renditions under George W bush I was particularly ugly period as
38:57
the case may be uh other than uh criticism in the Human Rights Council uh
39:05
there’s nothing because uh you cannot condemn the United States uh uh uh
39:12
before a uh a tribunal yeah no but but the United States is the largest
39:18
superpower we’ve ever had and these these beasts never let themselves be constrained by by higher rules that are
39:25
not their own I I understand the logic of that but what we have seen what was that five six weeks ago
39:32
Israel attacking a Embassy compound and and for everybody watching and consulate
39:39
is part of an embassy compound and is covered by the Vienna convention and if you know this is so blatant and then the
39:48
argumentation that because there was military personnel of of of an enemy State uh uh present that makes it a
39:55
military Target is so utterly ridiculous because every single Embassy in the
40:00
world usually has military atach and that would blow up the entire concept
40:06
now if this continues I mean is are we going to lose the Vienna convention are
40:12
we going to lose these these Norms because states are going to say like well flip it I’m not going to do this
40:18
either I’m now going to attack any kind of Embassy I want because it hurts my
40:23
enemy well uh we need the Norms we need
40:29
to return uh to shall we say an acceptance uh that these Norms are a
40:38
common denominator for modus vendi in the world for uh uh
40:45
living together uh if we don’t have Norms uh then it’s really going to be uh
40:51
Total War permanent War throughout the planet we we don’t want that uh so we
41:00
realize that it’s being violated crashy by Israel in the case of of the embassy
41:08
uh in um uh in um Syria uh in Damascus and um
41:17
25 years ago we just uh remembered uh the illegal totally illegal attack by
41:25
NATO uh against uh uh Belgrade against the civilian
41:30
population of Serbia uh and the attack on the Chinese uh Embassy in Belgrade
41:38
and when he was there uh recently uh visiting uh the Serbian government uh he
41:47
specifically made reference uh to the destruction of the Chinese um Embassy in
41:55
Belgrade in 1999 but for this one the US actually apologized and paid rep reparations very
42:03
different yeah yeah well now you have a case in the international court of
42:08
justice uh the case of Mexico against Ecuador because uh Ecuador did something
42:16
that not even uh in the horrible years uh of the military hunters in
42:23
Chile and in Argentina uh you did not have the government uh
42:30
sending its troops or sending its police uh to break into uh an embassy
42:39
and to uh kidnap uh a person who had
42:44
diplomatic asylum in that um uh Embassy
42:49
and uh no doubt Ecuador is going to be solidly uh convicted uh for having
42:57
uh broken into the Mexican embassy in Kito and having kidnapped the former uh
43:04
vice president uh of uh uh Ecuador um Jorge glass who had sought uh and
43:12
obtained diplomatic uh Asylum uh in in the embassy now uh the arguments uh of
43:22
uh Mexico are very clear uh the Vienna convention on U uh diplomatic relations
43:29
was clearly broken uh by um uh by Ecuador not only that the the Ecuador
43:37
actually broke the the Treaty of Amity between Mexico and and Ecuador and the
43:45
regional international law uh convention that applies there which is uh the
43:51
1954 uh diplomatic Asylum um uh convention and The Diplomatic Asylum
43:58
convention is very clear in article four that it is for uh the country uh uh granting
44:08
Asylum uh to determine whether the person uh is a
44:15
political uh uh Refugee who uh deserves
44:20
um uh diplomatic Asylum it’s not a question that uh Ecuador calls him a
44:26
criminal call him a common criminal and uh that would
44:32
remove uh The Sovereign right uh of Mexico to Grant uh diplomatic Asylum so
44:40
granting Asylum is actually a humanitarian act uh that I mean uh
44:47
Mexico did not have to Grant um uh diplomatic Asylum tolas but it
44:54
spent two months investigating or all the allegations against horor glass and
44:59
determined that this was law fair determined uh that all these trump top
45:04
charges against him were like the trump top charges against Julian Assange uh in
45:10
uh in Sweden they were politically motivated so he certainly had the right
45:17
uh to invoke uh the right to Asylum to invoke uh the Geneva uh Refugee
45:23
Convention of 1951 and the International court of justice will decide
45:30
accordingly uh but I said there’s a breakdown in the rule of law
45:35
domestically and internationally uh I see that more and more uh in the last few years and I
45:43
wonder whether uh you know this is um the last uh effort uh of the capitalist
45:52
the Western world uh to hold itself
45:57
um I would see uh that international law will evolve uh further but uh the uh
46:06
motive for the evolution of international law is no longer not going to be the United States or Europe it’s
46:13
going to be the global majority it’s going to be the thinkers uh in Latin
46:20
America and Africa and in Asia that are going to take the lead in establishing
46:26
uh International AAL law and uh I think it’s necessary because uh we have uh uh
46:36
caught ourselves in our own web and in our own parallel uh world uh we are not
46:43
acting on the basis uh of facts and evidence uh we are uh still somehow lost
46:52
in our own ideology and in our desperate effort uh not to lose uh our
47:01
exceptionalism and we’re incapable to realize that we’ve already lost it I
47:07
mean that is um if you want tragic it’s it’s worse uh you know one of the great
47:16
uh Greek tragedies I mean we need a Sophocles or an edes or actually to take
47:22
it on the comic side you need an Aristophanes to write what is happening
47:29
uh in the world right now but my concern uh is not just literature my
47:36
concern is uh that since we live in a nuclear world since uh we have 10
47:45
countries uh with nuclear weapons uh and uh the United States is
47:52
saber rattling and is provoking and uh uh there can be a miscalculation
48:00
somewhere I I know I I know of nine which one is the number 10 that you just
48:06
added uh well I mean you’re counting Israel I count Israel as part of the nine counting Israel and counted uh uh
48:15
North Korea of course no I’m not counting Teran yet I
48:20
mean so the so the P the P5 right uh P5 have it but also Pakistan has India
48:27
North Korea and Israel is there a 10th one are you suspecting is Iran uh well I
48:35
wouldn’t put it past it uh but whether it be nine or 10 it is highly dangerous
48:40
okay uh because take uh the uh insane
48:46
idea uh of um you know putting these um
48:51
uh missiles in Ukraine etc etc uh
48:57
if NATO uh were to try a preemptive uh strike on
49:04
um on uh uh Russia and let’s remember that the only country that has ever used
49:12
the atomic weapon is the United States uh uh Russia has had Atomic weapons uh
49:18
now for 70 years and has never used them the United States uh had them and tried
49:23
them out in Hiroshima and Nagasaki certainly won one of the mega Crimes of
49:28
the 20th century uh but the United States keeps trying to uh whitewash it
49:36
and try to explain it away when indeed uh was uh a genocide it was a crime
49:44
against humanity uh so uh in any event
49:49
uh I don’t see Russia uh doing uh a
49:54
preemptive strike on the United States but the United States and the crazies uh
50:00
in NATO are capable of uh thinking of a Preen of strike on Russia but even
50:08
assuming that they were to annihilate St Petersburg and um and uh Moscow and vad
50:15
Divas talk you realize that the oceans are alive with nuclear
50:22
submarines uh that have nuclear warheads so if uh the United States were to uh
50:31
attack Russia forget New York Washington Los Angeles San Francisco they’re
50:38
gone uh and they have Hypersonic uh missiles which we don’t yet and uh so uh
50:46
in a situation like that uh the only thing you can do is to deescalate
50:52
deescalate uh just do not create a situ situation in which someone can make a
51:00
mistake uh or even a computer glitch because sometimes it this can happen can
51:05
be activated uh by artificial intelligence and then that’s the end of
51:10
humanity
oooooo
Lavrov’s Stunning Press Conference On Multipolarity. https://youtu.be/WeH_NHgusz4?si=zBJS6dIlvosCPSgl
youtube.com
Lavrov’s Stunning Press Conference On Multipolarity.
Last week I showed you the speech that Sergey Lavrov gave at the UN on July 16 (https://youtu.be/K
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeH_NHgusz4)
Last week I showed you the speech that Sergey Lavrov gave at the UN on July 16 ( • Russia Outlines The Future Of Interna… )
After that speech, he gave a press conference at the UN headquarter in which he touched on many important topics, including Russia’s position on peace negotiations with Ukraine and the horrible situation in Gaza. The full press conference is here: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1i/k1i…
But one aspect I found particularly interesting, which is how Russia sees multipolarity arising now naturally and how Moscow is supporting this process. I clipped these parts together so you can get an idea of what to expect from Russia in this multilateral and organic process.
Transkripzioa:
0:01
now when they repeat like a mantra we
0:03
will support Ukraine for as long as it
0:05
takes I’m curious how long will it take
0:08
like in Afghanistan where it took 20
0:10
years to realize that you lost or in
0:12
Iraq where you also left although now
0:15
you are trying to stay despite the Iraqi
0:17
parliament’s decision that the US should
0:19
withdraw its troops or like in Libya
0:22
where the state collapsed and now
0:24
everyone is trying to piece it back
0:26
together a multi-polar world is a
0:28
reality it’s not something someone
0:38
invented hello everybody so last week I
0:42
showed you the speech that Serge lavro
0:44
gave at the United Nations on July 16th
0:47
you can watch that one here if you
0:49
haven’t seen it already right after that
0:51
speech he also gave a press conference
0:53
at the UN headquarter in which he
0:55
touched on many important topics
0:58
including Russia’s position on peace NE
0:59
negotiations with Ukraine and the
1:01
horrible situation in Gaza the full
1:04
press conference is linked in the
1:05
description but one aspect I found
1:08
particularly interesting and I would
1:10
like to point that out to you that is
1:12
how Russia sees multipolarity arising
1:15
now naturally and how Moscow is
1:17
supporting this process I clip these
1:20
parts together so that you can get an
1:22
idea of what to expect from Russia in
1:24
this multilateral and organic process
1:27
I’ll give some more comments after the
1:29
videos but but now have a listen first
1:32
Mr Minister I represent Chinese
1:34
television on May 28th US President
1:37
Biden said in an interview that China’s
1:39
economy is on the brink of collapse in
1:42
your opinion what are the results of the
1:44
Chinese economy’s
1:45
performance could you explain why an
1:47
economy that according to Biden is on
1:49
the brink of collapse is called a
1:52
decisive Factor by nato in the Ukrainian
1:55
conflict how can an economy on the brink
1:57
become a decisive Factor contributing to
1:59
the conflict
2:00
as stated in NATO’s commun regarding
2:13
China how does this statement relate to
2:15
reality the Chinese economy is
2:17
developing powerfully and rapidly yes
2:20
attempts are being made to stop it just
2:23
recently when chairman Xi Jinping was in
2:25
France he was not only in talks with
2:28
macron but also with Ursula V
2:31
liion representatives of the European
2:33
Union publicly stated following these
2:35
negotiations that they demanded China
2:38
reduce the production of high-tech Goods
2:40
because the West has lost its
2:42
competitiveness how does this align with
2:44
the principles of a free market and Fair
2:47
competition the West wants to slow down
2:49
China’s economy in addition to demands
2:52
to stop producing a lot of cheap and
2:54
highquality products sanctions are being
2:56
applied to slow down the technological
2:58
development of China in other sectors of
3:00
the economy but there should be no
3:11
doubt the more restrictions that
3:13
completely discredit the model of
3:15
globalization and unity of the world
3:17
economy promoted by the West the more
3:19
actively and effectively the countries
3:21
against which these sanctions are
3:23
applied will work and create their own
3:26
Technologies and
3:28
products this of course includes the
3:30
People’s Republic of China the Russian
3:32
Federation and many
3:34
others regarding China it is interesting
3:37
that I read a statement I can’t remember
3:39
exactly now but I think it was made by
3:42
stoltenberg he was commenting on the
3:44
military exercises that took place
3:46
between China and Belarus on belarian
3:57
territory and he seriously with such
4:00
pathos declared that this is a dangerous
4:03
matter because China is approaching NATO
4:05
but the fact that the Americans
4:07
approached China long ago that they are
4:08
surrounding China and Russia too where
4:11
all this is happening on our borders
4:13
with block structures like OAS and the
4:16
USA Japan Korea the USA and South Korea
4:19
are making agreements on joint nuclear
4:21
policy and much more they are trying to
4:24
split the region to pull some countries
4:27
into their ranks into the ranks of these
4:29
closed block structures and NATO itself
4:32
has decided to advance the
4:34
infrastructure of this block into the
4:36
indopacific
4:37
region and practical steps are already
4:39
being taken stoltenberg stated in
4:42
response to the question how come you
4:44
always called yourselves a defensive
4:46
Alliance an alliance for the protection
4:48
of member country’s
4:50
territories he says yes we remain a
4:53
defensive Alliance but there are threats
4:55
to our alliance
5:05
now it is global so we must go to the
5:07
indopacific
5:08
region but I think the aggressive and
5:11
unjust nature of such a position is
5:13
clear to
5:15
everyone together with the People’s
5:17
Republic of China and our other partners
5:19
within the framework of the Shanghai
5:20
cooperation organization in contacts
5:23
with aan with the cooperation Council
5:25
for the Arab states of the gulf we
5:28
advocate for a security model that will
5:30
be EUR Asian it will be based on
5:32
equality the indivisibility of security
5:35
and full Mutual consideration of
5:37
interests on the balance of these
5:39
interests I think this model has a
5:41
future but it will take a lot of
5:52
time when the United States entered the
5:54
world stage in Afghanistan Iraq Libya
5:58
how did it end what what peaceful
6:00
changes for the better occurred there
6:03
now when they repeat like a mantra we
6:05
will support Ukraine for as long as it
6:07
takes I’m curious how long will it take
6:10
like in Afghanistan where it took 20
6:12
years to realize that you lost or in
6:14
Iraq where you also left although now
6:17
you are trying to stay despite the Iraqi
6:19
parliament’s decision that the US should
6:21
withdraw its troops or like in Libya
6:24
where the state collapsed and now
6:26
everyone is trying to piece it back
6:27
together a multipolar world is a reality
6:31
it’s not something someone
6:41
invented if you look at the share of the
6:43
USA and the West in the global gross
6:45
domestic product 50 years ago 20 years
6:47
ago and now you will see that the
6:50
situation has
6:51
changed a couple of years ago bricks
6:54
countries in terms of gross national
6:56
product by purchasing power parity
6:58
surpassed the G seven countries and now
7:01
with five more countries added to Bricks
7:03
this ratio will only
7:05
increase but the USA is doing everything
7:08
to ensure that this real weight in the
7:10
global economy and finance of New Growth
7:12
centers is not reflected in the
7:14
activities of the international monetary
7:16
fund and the World Bank the USA holds on
7:19
to the voting package that belongs to
7:21
them about 15% which according to IMF
7:24
rules allows them to block
7:27
decisions although to be fair
7:39
it has long been necessary to
7:40
redistribute these quotas these votes as
7:43
the bricks countries insist this will be
7:46
one of the main economic and financial
7:48
issues at the bricks Summit in Kazan in
7:50
October this
7:52
year in the World Trade Organization
7:54
which was promoted to all of us as the
7:56
optimal and fair regulator of World
7:58
Trade the situation has changed as soon
8:01
as China began to surpass the United
8:03
States in competition developing its
8:05
economy on the principles of
8:06
globalization that were invented by the
8:08
Americans and offered to everyone the US
8:10
started to act China began to outplay
8:13
them on their own field in the economy
8:16
and the us simply shut down the World
8:18
Trade organization’s dispute resolution
8:20
body technical tricks were used and now
8:23
there is no Quorum for many years all
8:26
the complaints that China rightly
8:28
directed at the Us’s protectionist
8:30
policy have been lying
8:36
[Music]
8:42
dormant therefore the reform of the
8:44
World Trade Organization is on the
8:45
bricks agenda we will strive for this
8:49
and these topics are already and of
8:50
course will be among the main ones at
8:53
the G20 Summit in Rio de
8:55
Janeiro this structure should fairly
8:57
consider real matters in the global
8:59
economy and take steps for its
9:01
development in such a way that there is
9:03
mutual benefit corresponding to the
9:05
contribution to the world
9:08
economy now if we take Eurasia there is
9:10
the Shanghai cooperation organization
9:13
the Eurasian economic Union
9:15
aan all these structures have agreements
9:18
with China on harmonizing integration
9:20
projects with the Chinese one belt one
9:22
road project the countries of the
9:25
Persian Gulf are also located here which
9:27
by the way is also Eurasia
9:37
and so all these organizations
9:39
establishing contacts among themselves
9:42
create the fabric of future material
9:44
interaction on the Eurasian continent
9:46
based on the comparative advantages of a
9:48
unified space rich in natural resources
9:51
and important from the perspective of
9:52
Maritime
9:54
Communications we actively encourage
9:56
these
9:57
processes at the same time after the
9:59
United States together with its allies
10:02
imposed unprecedented sanctions against
10:04
Russia Iran and Venezuela as well as
10:07
against China and many other countries
10:10
nations in Africa and Latin America
10:12
began to think about how to protect
10:13
themselves from such
10:23
whims because no one knows who the
10:25
Americans will get angry with in the
10:27
future
10:30
for example at last year’s G20 Summit
10:32
president Lula actively promoted the
10:34
idea of creating alternative payment
10:36
platforms and settlement mechanisms
10:38
within brics this is being handled by
10:41
the finance ministers and Central Bank
10:43
governors of brics recommendations will
10:45
be prepared for the summit by the way
10:48
president Lula also suggested
10:50
considering the move towards a common
10:52
currency within
10:54
CAC everyone is trying to protect
10:57
themselves recently Saudi Arabia stated
11:00
that in a situation where the United
11:02
States and the entire Collective West
11:04
want to freeze Russian money they will
11:06
think about how to be less dependent on
11:08
the dollar the process of dollarization
11:11
is underway and it cannot be
11:22
stopped by the way Donald Trump was
11:24
mentioned today he said that it is
11:26
suicidal for the United States
11:29
but this process was initiated by the
11:31
United States
11:32
itself therefore Regional structures
11:35
such as the African Union CAC and Asian
11:37
organizations which I mentioned are
11:39
already in contact with each other and
11:42
of course on a global level brics has
11:44
all the capabilities to serve as a
11:46
harmonizer of processes in other regions
11:49
of the global majority the group of 20
11:52
which I mentioned will certainly remain
11:54
where the global majority will continue
11:55
to communicate with the West if of
11:58
course the West is ready to do so
12:00
honestly the United Nations will remain
12:03
where everyone is represented and
12:05
everyone must
12:15
communicate yesterday Peter Sarto the
12:17
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Hungary
12:19
spoke on this topic he said that he had
12:22
always been sure that the UN was created
12:25
to communicate with everyone not to
12:26
support the Ambitions of the West now
12:29
everything is different the West has
12:31
decided that the UN was created to
12:33
reinforce its excessive Ambitions and to
12:36
play the role of hegemon on the world
12:38
stage I think that at some point the
12:41
United States will understand that it is
12:43
better to be part of a constructive
12:45
process than to use sanctions in
12:46
military force making everyone dance to
12:49
its tune moreover the tune often changes
12:53
four years and a different tune everyone
12:56
tries to adapt somehow but now already
12:59
understand that it is not easy
13:01
considering the specifics of the
13:03
internal political processes in the
13:04
United
13:10
States okay so let me add just a few
13:13
comments first about the content and
13:15
then lastly about the form of what we
13:17
just saw first I think it is quite
13:21
remarkable that overall Mr lavro just
13:25
like Mr Putin before actually view what
13:28
is currently going on on with this drive
13:31
toward multipolarity as a process and
13:34
they view it first and foremost as a
13:36
process and not as an end goal it’s not
13:39
the case that in the end we get to
13:41
multipolarity we are already in a
13:43
multipolar system and whatever is going
13:46
to come is going to come out of this
13:48
process that we’re seeing playing out in
13:51
front of our eyes and then he gives a
13:53
couple of um reasons or factors why this
13:57
is happening so this is to me an
14:00
important diff difference from how I see
14:02
how NATO countries and the collective
14:05
West generally frames issues they they
14:07
always look at the outcomes they want to
14:10
achieve like having a war with China or
14:14
um militarizing borders they don’t look
14:17
at the general system in which they want
14:20
to live or that that you would want to
14:23
produce the entire Globe the the NATO
14:26
approach is always trying to Define um
14:29
where to do what and how it has to
14:32
happen and then and then reason
14:34
backwards of like what do we need to get
14:35
in order to do uh to have the
14:37
capabilities to do interventions what
14:40
Russia is laying out here is how they’re
14:42
viewing how the system is now developing
14:45
and in the system they are just one part
14:47
and then you’ve got the other parts and
14:48
then you look at the push and pull
14:51
factors um for for the following
14:54
developments and interestingly that’s
14:56
the second
14:57
point the future that they they’re
14:59
seeing coming does not exclude the
15:00
United States he’s saying that very
15:03
clearly the US has a space has a place
15:05
in this as well and of course it will
15:07
play a role because it would be lunatic
15:09
to think that the US will just disappear
15:11
or that you can build a system that um
15:14
that that doesn’t take into account the
15:16
United States naturally any kind of
15:18
global uh order that will come or that
15:22
that’s going to develop will include the
15:25
United States because it is such a
15:27
powerful country and every country
15:29
moress is included I mean we don’t get
15:30
rid of of plots of land so the Russian
15:33
analysis of what’s going to come still
15:36
includes the US and the the question to
15:40
to the global South countries really is
15:43
how to manage this trans transition in a
15:45
way to get the US to become cooperative
15:48
and collaborative in this uh in this new
15:51
environment uh without actually um
15:55
without Wars and ensuing all the time
15:58
and I think that’s what’s going through
16:00
their mind the third point is that um
16:04
they are clearly viewing us actions and
16:07
NATO actions secondary I mean we know
16:10
NATO is basically the extension of of US
16:12
foreign policy right and then down
16:14
downstreams some where theirs is Europe
16:16
also following but they the Russians
16:20
view their actions as one of the driving
16:23
factors so it’s not necessarily
16:25
something that the Russians still need
16:26
to do very much I mean of course Russia
16:29
uh and China as lvov sees it have to do
16:32
a lot to counter these actions but it’s
16:35
actually the the primary reason why we
16:37
have a development toward multipolarity
16:40
is because the US is acting the way it
16:43
does it is because NATO is trying to to
16:46
push itself in into other regions it’s
16:49
because there is this constant drum beat
16:52
of uh follow the rules based order
16:54
follow the rules based order that is not
16:56
an a fair distribution ution of how the
16:59
world world is and other countries see
17:02
that and hence you’ve got a counter
17:04
reaction and he viewed that as a natural
17:06
counter reaction of which Russia is a
17:08
part of but it’s not the only uh it’s
17:11
not the only participant so overall I
17:14
think the the Russians are relatively um
17:18
uh relaxed about this because they do
17:22
understand that the that multipolarity
17:25
is not something that they need to to
17:28
whip up with with a big long stick it’s
17:31
something that’s going to come naturally
17:33
as long as they and as long as they play
17:35
a constructive role then you can
17:37
facilitate the uh the move into this
17:40
into this future where where power is
17:42
going to be more distributed although it
17:45
already is right it it that’s that’s a
17:47
very important part but to me the inside
17:49
here is that um Again part of this
17:53
process where that Russia sees itself as
17:55
one part of this whole thing and then
17:57
the fourth point really is also this
17:59
unequal nature of the system that is
18:03
being championed by the United States
18:05
and that that goes together with the
18:07
point before right that this counter
18:09
reaction that we’re seeing is a counter
18:11
reaction not necessarily against
18:13
Washington per se and it’s certainly not
18:16
a counter reaction against all of the
18:18
values that are being uh touted from the
18:22
from the collective West against it’s
18:24
against Freedom against Liberty against
18:26
democracy it’s not about that the Cor
18:29
issue as Mr lavro presented is this
18:33
rules-based International order system
18:36
which is not international law which is
18:39
not equal and fair to all the member
18:42
states it is as Chaz Freeman in a um in
18:46
a in a in a brilliant talk recently that
18:49
I that I uploaded about a week ago um
18:51
explained and I’ll I’ll try to link it
18:53
as well the rules based International
18:55
order is the principle of rule by
19:00
law that you use the law in order to
19:03
make everybody follow and you you keep
19:06
saying that the law is what the law is
19:07
what the law is what the law is and you
19:09
have to follow follow follow but only
19:11
the groups of uh targets have to follow
19:14
that you designate as such and you take
19:16
you other groups you completely exempt
19:18
from that you exempt yourself often and
19:20
the rules of the rules by law are never
19:23
spelled out they’re not written down
19:25
because as soon as they’re written down
19:27
you would actually you would run the
19:29
risk that you have to follow those as
19:30
well but you never actually write them
19:32
down you just claim that they’re there
19:35
and then the designate who has to follow
19:38
what’s what’s apparently being said but
19:40
there’s constant constant exemptions for
19:42
yourself and your buddies right that
19:45
it’s the opposite of the rule of law
19:47
where the law is written down and we
19:49
have that we have international law but
19:51
we see time and again how the US how
19:53
Europe how NATO is breaking these rules
19:56
and that’s that’s why they don’t don’t
19:58
call them uh their their rules for them
20:02
so they use this differently right they
20:04
they have a differential understanding
20:06
of um who has to follow what kind of
20:09
rules and that that is
20:11
something that a lot of other countries
20:14
around the globe in the global South
20:16
that they don’t accept it they see it
20:19
they understand it and they intuitively
20:22
now rally against it and they try to do
20:24
something about it and the harder the US
20:26
tries to push this down the throat of
20:28
every body the harder the counter
20:29
reaction is going to is is is coming and
20:32
the more they will start building the
20:35
Frameworks that will allow them to
20:37
escape so it’s not making an alternative
20:40
structure for the sake of having
20:41
alternative structure it’s the
20:42
alternative structure for the sake of
20:44
not um being dependent anymore of what
20:47
can be used to whip them into uh into
20:50
submission and in this sense a fair
20:52
world doesn’t necessarily mean uh one in
20:56
which um everything is all the problems
20:59
are solved it’s a world in which the
21:01
rules are more clearly spelled out and
21:04
where the decision-making power is more
21:06
distributed now the um the last thing
21:12
maybe then about the form of what we’ve
21:14
seen what I find most remarkable is that
21:16
the uh this analysis or this this this
21:20
press conference really resembl more an
21:23
analysis of world affairs than a um a
21:27
reprodu
21:29
of the standpoint and Viewpoint of
21:32
Russia although that was also included
21:33
especially when it came to Ukraine and
21:35
so on but what we are seeing with Mr
21:38
lavro here and with with
21:41
other world leaders from the global
21:43
South as well is that what they’re
21:44
trying to do is to explain how they view
21:48
international relations at the moment
21:50
and to me it seems that they have a
21:53
pretty realistic view of what is going
21:56
on and how these different these
21:58
different um uh Action
22:02
Reaction uh uh uh processes then work
22:05
and create what we are seeing and in
22:07
this sense what we are getting from
22:09
Washington from Berlin is often more of
22:11
a kind of a fantasy world and uh you who
22:14
are listening to this you you probably
22:16
understand what I mean we we we hear a
22:19
lot of what the West wants to be the
22:22
case like when we’ve been hearing for
22:24
two years that uh Ukraine is winning
22:26
Ukraine is winning Ukraine is winning uh
22:28
Russia’s losing Russia’s losing and the
22:30
Russians are going to run away and they
22:32
create this outcome that they want to be
22:36
the case and then the argumentation
22:39
starts whereas it seems to me that the
22:41
Russians are really making a point of
22:43
trying to analyze what is actually going
22:45
on on the ground and what is going on in
22:48
different places and then take decision
22:50
decisions based on that they don’t
22:52
create a fantasy world and in this sense
22:55
I do think the analysis is just more
22:58
appropriate and this is then where
23:00
people from the collective West and who
23:02
are inside the collective West bubble
23:04
get angry at us and call us Putin
23:07
puppets and repeating Russian talking
23:10
points they usually don’t say we repeat
23:12
Russian lies because they know that that
23:14
all of these things that Mr lro says
23:16
over there are actually not lies they
23:18
are actually facts but a talking point
23:20
is not the same as a lie and they know
23:22
that they just don’t like it when this
23:25
this counter analysis of international
23:28
relations when that is being propagated
23:30
what they want is their version of
23:32
reality to be believed internalized and
23:35
then acted
23:36
accordingly um no whether they do that
23:39
knowingly or not now um lavro and and
23:43
and and uh colleagues from China and
23:45
colleagues from from Asian and so on
23:47
that I talk that the people also the
23:49
people that I talk to I I never talk to
23:51
lavro but the people that I talk to who
23:53
have similar analysis they understand
23:55
that this that this fantasy world of the
23:58
the West it just has nothing to do with
24:00
the realities that they are seeing and
24:02
then they take they take different um
24:05
they learn different things from what
24:08
the collective West believes should be
24:11
learned and that’s then where this
24:13
friction starts um were were um
24:17
especially um like people indoctrinated
24:21
within the little bubble then start uh
24:23
accusing everybody else of of not living
24:26
in reality because they don’t live in
24:28
their reality they don’t judge things
24:30
the same way and M that’s why this one
24:33
of the most powerful things uh Sergey
24:35
labov can do time and again is just give
24:38
good and proper
24:40
analysis and even though it is
24:42
absolutely clear that he too of course
24:44
gives it a spin and and adds the adds
24:48
the the points that Russia would would
24:50
want to be believed and would want um
24:52
everybody else to also follow along that
24:54
at the end of the day the most important
24:57
thing is to give a proper um overview of
25:01
what is what can be observed and then
25:04
the fact that the collective west
25:06
countries are
25:09
unable not NE not not just unwilling but
25:11
unable to understand the world from the
25:13
Viewpoint of other people and other
25:16
places you know what the what what the
25:18
world looks like from looking at it from
25:20
Jakarta looking at it from Singapore
25:22
looking at it from Beijing looking at it
25:24
from Moscow the inability of doing that
25:27
that’s really what what currently is is
25:30
driving a lot of the madness that we are
25:32
seeing coming out of the US and and
25:34
Europe this little mental prison that
25:37
they’re in so uh Serge lavro I think
25:40
correctly here um approaches this by
25:43
simply giving more of the uh more
25:46
analysis of how things should be looked
25:49
at in a more um in a more rational
25:53
rational Manner and Action Reaction
25:56
patterns and he he they he keeps
25:59
repeating that in most of his speeches
26:01
in in most of the things that he does
26:04
like be less angry or although sometimes
26:07
there’s anger too of course but uh just
26:09
do analysis and then for us the the the
26:12
challenge is to to figure out whether
26:15
that analysis then um stand will stand
26:18
the test of time and whether um
26:21
historians in the future will actually
26:23
be on a more or less same page or
26:25
whether we are we are being misled into
26:28
into another way of thinking that
26:30
doesn’t that doesn’t portray everything
26:33
that’s going on on the ground um
26:35
properly but um well that’s the
26:38
challenge of a thinking world thank you
26:40
very much for your attention today
26:42
[Music]
oooooo
@tobararbulu # mmt@tobararbulu
Francesca Albanese Criticises Israel On Brutality, Impunity Over Palesti… https://youtu.be/KuZEzKJgztQ?si=xDqy81JVZxoR2-Or
ooo
Francesca Albanese Criticises Israel On Brutality, Impunity Over Palestine At UN | Dawn News English
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuZEzKJgztQ)
UN Rapporteur Francesca Albanese addresses Israel’s actions in Palestine, focusing on its impunity and the international community’s inaction. Speaking at the UN headquarters in Geneva, she calls out the lack of sanctions on Israel despite its brutality and barbarism against Palestinians. Albanese’s powerful remarks highlight the growing global frustration.
Transkripzioa:
0:01
good afternoon
0:02
everyone um after 14 months I’m burned
0:07
by having to yet again explain the
0:10
unbelievable amount of suffering and
0:12
grief the Palestinians people the
0:14
Palestinian people have endured in the
0:16
last year for crimes the member states
0:18
have the clear responsibility of
0:20
preventing stopping and punishing among
0:23
which is genocide today the situation on
0:26
the ground is catastrophic the crisis in
0:29
Gaza has become a global crisis that
0:31
concerns all of us and that is why I’m
0:33
particularly humbled and honored today
0:36
to stand before you with colleagues who
0:38
are legal experts in their own domain
0:40
and whose analysis captures equally
0:43
critical aspect of the very of of this
0:46
very deep uh
0:48
crisis um but let me start by putting
0:52
the occupied Palestinian territory in
0:54
your mind again as it disappears from
0:58
the from the news in Gaza more than
1:01
44,000 people have been ass certain
1:05
killed uh by Israeli snipers and bombs
1:08
70% of whom women and children from the
1:11
beginning more than 100,000 in counting
1:14
are the wounded thousands are are unable
1:17
to be treated let alone cured for the
1:19
most Bas basic diseases and if it was
1:22
not
1:23
enough they will now have to go through
1:25
the second winter living in makeshift
1:28
camps without adequate food or clothing
1:32
the entire population of Gaza has been
1:34
uprooted and often multiple times
1:36
hundreds of thousands have lost their
1:38
homes forever children do not know if
1:40
they will be able to get back to school
1:42
in the past four months alone nearly
1:45
19,000 children have been hospitalized
1:47
for acute malnutrition famine today is a
1:51
reality and this is all the more
1:53
outrageous as we see humanitarian Aid
1:55
being blocked in the West Bank including
1:58
his Jerusalem militar Israeli Security
2:01
operation settlement expansion evictions
2:03
demolitions violence and threats of
2:06
annexation are inflicting further pain
2:08
and Injustice on the Palestinians who
2:10
are subject to an unlawful and
2:13
intensified shotto kill policy it’s
2:16
nearly 800 that the Palestinians who
2:18
have been killed and thousand injured uh
2:21
this year amidst ongoing restriction on
2:24
their movement and access to basic
2:26
Services livelihood and farmlands
2:30
what is the the how did we get here
2:34
impunity this is the key word to
2:37
understand the barbaric scale of the
2:39
isra that Israeli genocide has taken
2:41
since its birth Israel has never been
2:43
held to the same standard as as most of
2:46
the members of the International
2:48
Community Israel has defied countless
2:51
General Assembly Security Council
2:53
resolutions International court of
2:55
justice advisory opinion and has
2:57
targeted un personnel and facilities and
2:59
also declared the personas nrata not
3:01
only me but the Secretary General
3:03
himself without everbearing consequences
3:06
there are never sanctions on Israel
3:08
judicial processes are either ignored or
3:10
circumvented and trade continues and
3:12
diplomatic ties remain intact member
3:16
states seem to be to be paralyzed or
3:18
struck many of them still normalizing
3:21
the occupation the repression of the
3:23
Palestinian people depicting their
3:25
resistance in the territory that Israel
3:27
occupies as terrorism or at best as a
3:30
tantrum of an unruly population
3:32
incapable of abiding in silence to what
3:34
the International
3:35
Community has decided as its faith it is
3:39
uncons to me that many in the united for
3:42
many in the United Nations Palestine
3:44
continues to represent an issue to be
3:46
negotiated where the Palestinians have
3:48
to accept sooner or later the status quo
3:51
their fight to self-determination
3:53
reduced to a humanitarian crisis and
3:55
accept quietly the L of the the loss of
3:57
their land their failure to confront
3:59
imperialistic force of settler
4:02
colonialism as a human rights expert and
4:04
as a human being I have to stand against
4:07
this and amidst all of this structural
4:09
Injustice I want to conclude with three
4:11
main messages to ensure Justice
4:14
accountability first the halting of any
4:17
direct or indirect arms transfer to
4:20
Israel second the revision the revision
4:22
of Israel credentials to be part of the
4:24
United Nations to show that impunity
4:26
will no longer be tolerated in this
4:28
situation if he wants to fulfill its
4:30
mission to preserve the security and
4:31
peace for all and third and last
4:34
resolving once and for all the question
4:36
of Palestine in line with international
4:37
law means three things and the genocide
4:41
now and the occupation by September next
4:43
year because this is this is the
4:45
deadline that the general assembly has
4:47
given uh Israel to comply with
4:49
International court of justice advisory
4:51
opinion which has ordered this year that
4:53
Israel dismantles the occupation the
4:56
settlement and the control of natural
4:58
resources to totally and unconditionally
5:01
no exception this means realizing the
5:03
right of starting to realize the right
5:05
of self-determination of the Palestinian
5:07
people um for we need to understand and
5:11
embrace once and for all that this is
5:13
not a conflict conflict as a term is a
5:16
misnomer here because there is a settler
5:18
Colonial framework uh at play when it we
5:21
talk of Palestine and I’m not using this
5:23
language as an ideological slogan but as
5:25
a framework capable of accurately
5:28
describing the reality in the occupied
5:30
Palestinian territory that is becoming
5:32
more and more catastrophic as uh as the
5:34
time passes thank you
oooooo
Geure herriari, Euskal Herriari dagokionez, hona hemen gure apustu bakarra:
We Basques do need a real Basque independent State in the Western Pyrenees, just a democratic lay or secular state, with all the formal characteristics of any independent State: Central Bank, Treasury, proper currency, out of the European Distopia and faraway from NAT0, maybe being a BRICS partner…
Ikus Euskal Herriaren independentzia eta Mikel Torka
ooooooo
MMT: Modern Monetary Theory
Understanding how money works so that we can address climate change easily and prosperously plus address AI’s impact on humanity.
Members: https://x.com/i/communities/1672597800385921024/members
oooooo
