• Biden-Soros Regime Illegally Funds Hungarian Opposition Media with $320,000 to Bring Down President and Former Justice Minister
    by Richard Abelson Feb. 13, 2024 10:00 am
    “Don’t let him get the last laugh!” – Hungarian ad campaign against Soros 2017
    The Biden regime is once again trying to overthrow the conservative Christian government of Hungary with US taypaxer money, paying over $320,000 via Soros-funded NGOs to 15 opposition media outlets ahead of the European Parliament elections June 6 to 9. A campaign by Soros-tied media forced the resignation of Hungarian President Katalin Novák and former Justice Minister Judit Varga.

    A campaign by Biden-Soros financed 444.hu media has forced the resignantion of popular Hungarian President Katalin Novák and charismatic Justice Minister Judit Varga of Victor Orbán’s Fidesz party. They were accused of pardoning a man convicted of covering sexual abuse of orphans.

    In 2019, the director of the orphanage in Bicske, János V., was sentenced to eight years in prison for the sexual abuse of underage male wards in ten cases between 2004 and 2016.

    His deputy, Endre Kónya, was sentenced to three years and four months in prison for allegedly assisting the orphanage director to coerce one of the victims into retracting their statement. Endre Kónya began serving his prison sentence in November 2021 and transitioned to a halfyway house beginning of 2023. Ahead of the visit by Pope Francis in April 2023, Endre Kónya’s wife appealed to Novak to pardon her husband, who only had a few months left to serve. Novák pardoned the man 27 April 2023 with the signature of then-Justice Minister Judit Varga.

    For a Limited Time: Deals At The Gateway Pundit Discounts Page At MyPillow Now Come With Free Shipping On Your Entire Order


    This pardon was then revealed by 444.hu media and turned into a campaign by EU- and Soros-backed socialist Momentum party, which organized protests outside the President’s office February 9th and 10th. Novak resigned as President Feb. 10th, and Varga stepped down as MP and European Parliament candidate. Varga had stepped down as Justice Minister in June 2023 to run for the European Parliament.

    Fidesz spokesman János Halász called Momentum part of the “Soros plan” in 2020.

    On Jan. 27, Hungarian political analyst András László and American conservative expat in Hungary Rod Dreher had posted receipts on X showing that 444 and other media involved were funded by the Biden regime.

    László wrote that “left-wing NGOs announce which Hungarian media outlets will receive direct financing from the US Embassy. More than a DOZEN, a total of 15 media will receive US taxpayer money.”


    “US taxpayers are funding anti government media in Hungary, a NATO ally,” Rod Dreher wrote.

    Foreign-funded Soros opposition radio station Klubradio published an opinion piece calling the parting President and Justice Minister “whores”:


    Today Gateway Pundit can reveal the Biden regime funded the outlet that conspired with the Hungarian socialist opposition and Soros media to bring down the popular Hungarian President and Justice Minister – strong conservative Christian women fighting to protect the family and the civilization.

    Hungarian Rock Star Justice Minister Judith Varga in Texas: “Weak America” Leads to War – Hungary Doesn’t Want US Wokeness

    According to the documents posted by László, parent company Magyar Jeti received 10,025,048 Hungarian Forint ($27,939.23) from the US State Dept. via Ökotars Foundation for 444 media and 6452024 Hungarian Forint ($17981,42) for the Qubit publication. Klubradio, which László called “filth”, recieved 5,135,146 Hungarian Forint ($14311,35) from the US State Dept.

    Magyar Jeti was directly funded by the EU with €460,000 in 2022 and €130,000 in 2021, according to the EU Financial Transparency System.

    Ökotars Foundation received €3.86 M from the EU 2018-2022, and Mérték Media Monitor received €260,000 from the EU 2017-2022.

    “The U.S. Department of State entrusted Soros-funded Ökotárs Foundation and media watchdog Mérték Media Monitor to hand over $320,000 in taxpayer dollars to 15 media outlets critical of the pro-freedom Hungarian government, according to NGO and government documents”, Media Research Center wrote:

    Soros has funded Both Ökotárs and Mérték. Between 2017 and 2022, Soros gave $306,147 to the Ökotárs Foundation and $88,113 to Mérték Media Monitor. According to descriptions provided by the Open Society Foundation, all three donations to Mérték Media Monitor aligned with the current goals of the State Department.

    At least five of the media outlets that were awarded grant funding were funded by Soros. Soros has funded Nyugat Media for years, giving them $259,142 in five donations from 2017-2020. “Let’s make democracy together,” a $25,000 donation claimed in its description. ” A second donation referred to Nyugat Media as “the largest, independent media site in the Hungarian countryside.”

    Trending: Mitch McConnell and Senate RINOs Help Pass Ukraine Funding Package that Includes Language for Automatic Impeachment if Trump Terminates Funding for Ukraine War!

    Soros gave $129,962 to the Tilos Cultural Foundation from 2016 to 2022, four grants in total. Two of the grants reference support for “independent community media in Hungary” and “alternative values.”

    Soros has also given $197,478 to grant-recipient Atlatszo.hu Kozhasznu Nonprofit Kft. Two out of the four Soros grants were earmarked for “independent media,” while another donation aided collaboration with a different State Department beneficiary Magyar Hang. Soros gave $15,000 to grant-recipient Debreciner in 2019, again for “independent” media.

    Media Research Center Vice President Dan Schneider ripped the State Department for funding the Hungarian opposition: “It is wrong for U.S. government employees to farm out how our tax dollars are spent. It is outrageous that a lazy diplomat in our embassy relied on the Soros crew to figure out how to spend our taxpayer dollars.”


    Gateway Pundit has extensively covered the Biden-Soros interference in Hungary in the name of “democracy”. Foreign election interference is illegal in Hungary.

    Now it seems the Biden Regime has gone the next step of bringing down the Hungarian President and Justice Minister.

    The aim of the Hungary’s Sovereignty Protection Act is “to prevent foreign attempts to interfere in Hungary’s democratic processes”, Judit Varga wrote on X. “The adoption of the law was necessary: at the 2022 elections, the Hungarian left risked Hungary’s sovereignty by accepting foreign campaign contributions. This proves a serious attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign EU member state. Brussels has refused to comment or investigate the case ever since. The initiation of the infringement procedure is a clear proof that bureaucrats in Brussels don’t acknowledge: foreign NGO networks want to gain influence in member states. A main stake of the EP elections is whether it will be possible to elect a Parliament strong enough to free the Brussels bureaucracy from the grip of NGOs & mainstream media financed by international financiers.”



    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/biden-soros-regime-illegally-funds-hungarian-opposition-media/

    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/biden-soros-regime-illegally-funds.html
    Biden-Soros Regime Illegally Funds Hungarian Opposition Media with $320,000 to Bring Down President and Former Justice Minister by Richard Abelson Feb. 13, 2024 10:00 am “Don’t let him get the last laugh!” – Hungarian ad campaign against Soros 2017 The Biden regime is once again trying to overthrow the conservative Christian government of Hungary with US taypaxer money, paying over $320,000 via Soros-funded NGOs to 15 opposition media outlets ahead of the European Parliament elections June 6 to 9. A campaign by Soros-tied media forced the resignation of Hungarian President Katalin Novák and former Justice Minister Judit Varga. A campaign by Biden-Soros financed 444.hu media has forced the resignantion of popular Hungarian President Katalin Novák and charismatic Justice Minister Judit Varga of Victor Orbán’s Fidesz party. They were accused of pardoning a man convicted of covering sexual abuse of orphans. In 2019, the director of the orphanage in Bicske, János V., was sentenced to eight years in prison for the sexual abuse of underage male wards in ten cases between 2004 and 2016. His deputy, Endre Kónya, was sentenced to three years and four months in prison for allegedly assisting the orphanage director to coerce one of the victims into retracting their statement. Endre Kónya began serving his prison sentence in November 2021 and transitioned to a halfyway house beginning of 2023. Ahead of the visit by Pope Francis in April 2023, Endre Kónya’s wife appealed to Novak to pardon her husband, who only had a few months left to serve. Novák pardoned the man 27 April 2023 with the signature of then-Justice Minister Judit Varga. For a Limited Time: Deals At The Gateway Pundit Discounts Page At MyPillow Now Come With Free Shipping On Your Entire Order This pardon was then revealed by 444.hu media and turned into a campaign by EU- and Soros-backed socialist Momentum party, which organized protests outside the President’s office February 9th and 10th. Novak resigned as President Feb. 10th, and Varga stepped down as MP and European Parliament candidate. Varga had stepped down as Justice Minister in June 2023 to run for the European Parliament. Fidesz spokesman János Halász called Momentum part of the “Soros plan” in 2020. On Jan. 27, Hungarian political analyst András László and American conservative expat in Hungary Rod Dreher had posted receipts on X showing that 444 and other media involved were funded by the Biden regime. László wrote that “left-wing NGOs announce which Hungarian media outlets will receive direct financing from the US Embassy. More than a DOZEN, a total of 15 media will receive US taxpayer money.” “US taxpayers are funding anti government media in Hungary, a NATO ally,” Rod Dreher wrote. Foreign-funded Soros opposition radio station Klubradio published an opinion piece calling the parting President and Justice Minister “whores”: Today Gateway Pundit can reveal the Biden regime funded the outlet that conspired with the Hungarian socialist opposition and Soros media to bring down the popular Hungarian President and Justice Minister – strong conservative Christian women fighting to protect the family and the civilization. Hungarian Rock Star Justice Minister Judith Varga in Texas: “Weak America” Leads to War – Hungary Doesn’t Want US Wokeness According to the documents posted by László, parent company Magyar Jeti received 10,025,048 Hungarian Forint ($27,939.23) from the US State Dept. via Ökotars Foundation for 444 media and 6452024 Hungarian Forint ($17981,42) for the Qubit publication. Klubradio, which László called “filth”, recieved 5,135,146 Hungarian Forint ($14311,35) from the US State Dept. Magyar Jeti was directly funded by the EU with €460,000 in 2022 and €130,000 in 2021, according to the EU Financial Transparency System. Ökotars Foundation received €3.86 M from the EU 2018-2022, and Mérték Media Monitor received €260,000 from the EU 2017-2022. “The U.S. Department of State entrusted Soros-funded Ökotárs Foundation and media watchdog Mérték Media Monitor to hand over $320,000 in taxpayer dollars to 15 media outlets critical of the pro-freedom Hungarian government, according to NGO and government documents”, Media Research Center wrote: Soros has funded Both Ökotárs and Mérték. Between 2017 and 2022, Soros gave $306,147 to the Ökotárs Foundation and $88,113 to Mérték Media Monitor. According to descriptions provided by the Open Society Foundation, all three donations to Mérték Media Monitor aligned with the current goals of the State Department. At least five of the media outlets that were awarded grant funding were funded by Soros. Soros has funded Nyugat Media for years, giving them $259,142 in five donations from 2017-2020. “Let’s make democracy together,” a $25,000 donation claimed in its description. ” A second donation referred to Nyugat Media as “the largest, independent media site in the Hungarian countryside.” Trending: Mitch McConnell and Senate RINOs Help Pass Ukraine Funding Package that Includes Language for Automatic Impeachment if Trump Terminates Funding for Ukraine War! Soros gave $129,962 to the Tilos Cultural Foundation from 2016 to 2022, four grants in total. Two of the grants reference support for “independent community media in Hungary” and “alternative values.” Soros has also given $197,478 to grant-recipient Atlatszo.hu Kozhasznu Nonprofit Kft. Two out of the four Soros grants were earmarked for “independent media,” while another donation aided collaboration with a different State Department beneficiary Magyar Hang. Soros gave $15,000 to grant-recipient Debreciner in 2019, again for “independent” media. Media Research Center Vice President Dan Schneider ripped the State Department for funding the Hungarian opposition: “It is wrong for U.S. government employees to farm out how our tax dollars are spent. It is outrageous that a lazy diplomat in our embassy relied on the Soros crew to figure out how to spend our taxpayer dollars.” Gateway Pundit has extensively covered the Biden-Soros interference in Hungary in the name of “democracy”. Foreign election interference is illegal in Hungary. Now it seems the Biden Regime has gone the next step of bringing down the Hungarian President and Justice Minister. The aim of the Hungary’s Sovereignty Protection Act is “to prevent foreign attempts to interfere in Hungary’s democratic processes”, Judit Varga wrote on X. “The adoption of the law was necessary: at the 2022 elections, the Hungarian left risked Hungary’s sovereignty by accepting foreign campaign contributions. This proves a serious attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign EU member state. Brussels has refused to comment or investigate the case ever since. The initiation of the infringement procedure is a clear proof that bureaucrats in Brussels don’t acknowledge: foreign NGO networks want to gain influence in member states. A main stake of the EP elections is whether it will be possible to elect a Parliament strong enough to free the Brussels bureaucracy from the grip of NGOs & mainstream media financed by international financiers.” https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/biden-soros-regime-illegally-funds-hungarian-opposition-media/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/biden-soros-regime-illegally-funds.html
    WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM
    Biden-Soros Regime Illegally Funds Hungarian Opposition Media with $320,000 to Bring Down President and Former Justice Minister | The Gateway Pundit | by Richard Abelson
    The Biden regime is once again trying to overthrow the conservative Christian government of Hungary with US taypaxer money, paying over $320,000 via Soros-funded NGOs to 15 opposition media outlets ahead of the European Parliament elections June 6 to 9.
    Angry
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 13157 Views


  • To Save Gaza, Invoke the Genocide Convention
    The ICC is a "puppet institution". What's needed is a country to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Here's how, with argument, phone numbers, addresses and emails.

    Sam Husseini

    [Addendum: RootsAction and World Beyond War have put out the action alert “It’s Time to Invoke the Genocide Convention”. This full piece has been posted on X/Twitter with thread containing handles for various national leaders who can be petitioned.]

    Some of the greatest successes in recent human history have combined protest movements with strong diplomatic moves.

    In February 1998, the Clinton administration seemed poised to inflict a massive attack on Iraq, but vocal opposition from the US public, especially at a CNN town hall meeting in Ohio, combined by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan going to Iraq, repelled the US government attack.

    The following year, in the Battle of Seattle, combined protests in the streets and delegations from the global south finding their backbone resulted in the World Trade Organization’s plans collapsing. This was a major setback for global corporate interests.

    There is now effectively a global movement, largely based around mass protests, to stop Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

    Several countries, including South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, Djibouti as well as Colombia and Algeria and Turkey have moved for the International Criminal Court to prosecute Israeli officials.

    The problem is that ICC has been dragging its heels for years on prosecuting Israelis. It has been called a “white man’s court” after only going after Africans, and, after letting Israel off the hook during an earlier assault on Gaza, “a hoax”. Some of these nations have called Israel’s war crimes “genocide”. They should act on their words and invoke the relevant treaty. Other nations that have been especially critical of Israel are Pakistan, Brazil, Chile, Belize, Jordan, Chad, Honduras, Bahrain, Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba.

    The International Court of Justice, also called the World Court, in contrast has ruled against Israel. But so far these rulings have been advisory opinions. It ruled against Israel in a case regarding its wall in 2004. In another case before it, is expected to rule against Israel’s long term policies.

    But what can be done now, Prof. Francis Boyle, who successfully represented the Bosnians before the World Court, argues is to use emergency processes to give more teeth to the World Court. This can be done by invoking the Genocide Convention. This is outlined by Boyle, noted by UN whistleblower Craig Mokhiber, backed by Nobel Peace Prize winner Mairead Maguire, and written about by myself. And most recently by Craig Murray, now a human rights activist who was the British ambassador to Uzbekistan and Rector of the University of Dundee.

    Murray just wrote the piece “Activating the Genocide Convention” which states: “There are 149 states party to the Genocide Convention. Every one of them has the right to call out the genocide in progress in Gaza and report it to the United Nations. In the event that another state party disputes the claim of genocide — and Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom are all states party — then the International Court of Justice [also called the World Court] is required to adjudicate on ‘the responsibility of a State for genocide.'”

    Murray quotes from the Genocide Convention and cites evidence that Israel is conducting genocide and that the US and British governments are at minimum complicit in that. He then states: “The International Court of Justice is the most respected of international institutions; while the United States has repudiated its compulsory jurisdiction, the United Kingdom has not and the EU positively accepts it.

    “If the International Court of Justice makes a determination of genocide, then the International Criminal Court does not have to determine that genocide has happened. This is important because unlike the august and independent ICJ, the ICC is very much a western government puppet institution which will wiggle out of action if it can. But a determination of the ICJ of genocide and of complicity in genocide would reduce the ICC’s task to determining which individuals bear the responsibility. That is a prospect which can indeed alter the calculations of politicians.

    “It is also the fact that a reference for genocide would force the western media to address the issue and use the term, rather than just pump out propaganda about Hamas fighting bases in hospitals. …

    “I am afraid the question of why Palestine has not invoked the Genocide Convention takes us somewhere very dark. … It is Fatah who occupy the Palestinian seat at the United Nations, and the decision for Palestine to call into play the Genocide Convention lies with Mahmoud Abbas. It is more and more difficult daily to support Abbas. He seems extraordinarily passive, and the suspicion that he is more concerned with refighting the Palestinian civil war than with resisting the genocide is impossible to shake. By invoking the Genocide Convention he could put himself and Fatah back at the centre of the narrative. But he does nothing. I do not want to believe that corruption and a Blinken promise of inheriting Gaza are Mahmoud’s motivators. But at the moment, I cannot grab on to any other explanation to believe in.”

    Thus speeches from Abbas and allied Palestinians figures should be viewed extremely skeptically. It is also very odd, to say the very least, that Francesca Albanese, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, and other officials put out a statement “Gaza: UN experts call on international community to prevent genocide against the Palestinian people” — but make no mention whatever of the Genocide Convention.

    As Murray writes: “Any one of the 139 states party could invoke the Genocide Convention against Israel and its co-conspirators. Those states include Iran, Russia, Libya, Malaysia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Afghanistan, Cuba, Ireland, Iceland, Jordan, South Africa, Turkey and Qatar. But not one of these states has called out the genocide [by invoking the Convention]. Why?

    “It is not because the Genocide Convention is a dead letter. It is not. It was invoked against Serbia by Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ICJ ruled against Serbia with regard to the massacre at Srebrenica.” Murray notes that this helped lead to prosecutions.

    He adds: “Some states may simply not have thought of it. For Arab states in particular, the fact that Palestine itself has not invoked the Genocide Convention may provide an excuse. EU states can hide behind bloc unanimity.

    “But I am afraid that the truth is that no state cares sufficiently about the thousands of Palestinian children already killed and thousands more who will shortly be killed, to introduce another factor of hostility in their relationship with the United States. Just as at [the recent] summit in Saudi Arabia, where Islamic countries could not agree [on] an oil and gas boycott of Israel, the truth is that those in power really do not care about a genocide in Gaza. They care about their own interests.

    “It just needs one state to invoke the Genocide Convention and change the narrative and the international dynamic. That will only happen through the power of the people in pressing the idea on their governments. This is where everybody can do a little something to add to the pressure. Please do what you can.”

    What can you do? Urge countries which have been critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Get groups and influential people to make this a primary ask.

    Protests in NYC should include visits and vigils to the missions of those countries. Activists who have been arrested for protesting against Israel’s slaughter can ask UN officials from countries critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention.

    Palestinians in Ramallah may be able to directly contact the representatives of various countries to Palestine.

    This can be done anywhere. Protests in London can respectfully appeal to the embassies of various countries critical of Israel.

    We need to keep pressing directly against the US and Israeli governments, but their hearts are like stone. If we reach other states to invoke the Genocide Convention, it may be a key stop in curtailing the slaughter.

    Moreover, it could be a turning point in global relations. Should a positive emergency ruling by the International Court of Justice be forthcoming, it would dramatically isolate the US and Israel at the UN. The US would of course try to block anything at the UN Security Council. But with a World Court ruling, Boyle argues, the stage would be set for the General Assembly to assert itself using the Uniting for Peace procedure. Combined with sustained protests, like the WTO and other critical confrontations, the costs of continuing the slaughter could become unsustainable. Moreover, a World Court ruling could facilitate other legal efforts, like universal jurisdiction.

    For all that to happen, a country needs to step forward and invoke the Genocide Convention.

    Make no mistake; any nation that does this may well be targeted in insidious ways by the US and by Israel. Any such nation should be afforded every bit of support people of goodwill can muster.

    Here's a website that seems to list all the embassies and other diplomatic missions around the world. People from anywhere can be emailing, calling and going to these embassies and missions, urging these countries to use every legal mechanism to pressure Israel to stop, including invoking the Genocide Convention: embassy-worldwide.com.

    A friend extracted emails of missions to the UN:

    info@afghanistan-un.org
    mission.newyork@mfa.gov.al
    officeofthepr.albania@mfa.gov.al
    algeriamission.ny@gmail.com
    contact@andorraun.org
    theangolamission@angolaun.org
    unmission@ab.gov.ag
    jackley.peters@ab.gov.ag
    enaun@mrecic.gov.ar
    armenia@missionun.org
    australiaun@dfat.gov.au
    new-york-ov@bmeia.gv.at
    mission@azerbaijanun.org
    mission@bahamasny.com
    newyork.mission@mofa.gov.bh
    bangladeshatun@gmail.com
    bdpmny@gmail.com
    prun@foreign.gov.bb
    barbados@un.int
    usaun@mfa.gov.by
    newyorkun@diplobel.fed.be
    blzun@belizemission.com
    blzun@aol.com
    onu.newyork@gouv.bj
    beninewyork@gmail.com
    bhutanmission@pmbny.bt
    missionboliviaun@gmail.com
    bihun@mvp.gov.ba
    botswana@un.int
    distri.delbrasonu@itamaraty.gov.br
    bruneiunmission@protonmail.com
    mission.newyork@mfa.bg
    miperfaso.ny@burkina-onu.org
    ambabunewyork@yahoo.fr
    cvpm.unny@mnec.gov.cv
    cambodia@un.int
    cameroon.mission@yahoo.com
    canada.un@international.gc.ca
    repercaf.ny@gmail.com
    chadmission.un@gmail.com
    chile.un@minrel.gob.cl
    chinesemission@yahoo.com
    colombia@colombiaun.org
    comores.nu@gmail.com
    cgbrazzadel60@gmail.com
    miscr-onu@rree.go.cr
    cotedivoiremission@yahoo.com
    cromiss.un@mvep.hr
    cuba_onu@cubanmission.com
    unmission@mfa.gov.cy
    un.newyork@embassy.mzv.cz
    dprk.un@verizon.net
    missiondrc@gmail.com
    nycmis@um.dk
    djibouti@nyct.net
    dominicaun@gmail.com
    drmun1114@gmail.com
    onunewyork@cancilleria.gob.ec
    mission@egyptmissionny.com
    elsalvador@un.int
    info@equatorialguineaun.org
    general@eritreaun.org
    mission.newyork@mfa.ee
    eswatini@un.int
    eswatinimissionunny@yahoo.com
    ethiopia@un.int
    mission@fijiprun.org
    sanomat.yke@gov.fi
    france@franceonu.org
    info@gabonunmission.com
    gambia_un@hotmail.com
    geomission.un@mfa.gov.ge
    info@new-york-un.diplo.de
    ghanaperm@aol.com
    grdel.un@mfa.gr
    gmun@mofa.gov.gd
    onunewyork@minex.gob.gt
    missionofguinea.un@gmail.com
    guinebissauonu@gmail.com
    pmny@mission.gov.gy
    mphonu.newyork@diplomatie.ht
    ny.honduras@hnun.org
    hungaryun.ny@mfa.gov.hu
    unmission@mfa.is
    india.newyorkpmi@mea.gov.in
    ptri@indonesiaun.org
    iranunny@mfa.gov.ir
    iraq.mission@iraqmission-un.com
    newyorkpmun@dfa.ie
    uninfo@newyork.mfa.gov.il
    info.italyun@esteri.it
    info.unmissionny@mfaft.gov.jm
    p-m-j@dn.mofa.go.jp
    missionun@jordanmissionun.com
    unkazmission@gmail.com
    info@kenyaun.org
    kimission.newyork@mfa.gov.ki
    kuwait@kuwaitmissionun.org
    kyrgyzstan.un.ny@mfa.gov.kg
    lao.pr.ny@gmail.com
    mission.un-ny@mfa.gov.lv
    contact@lebanonun.org
    lesothonewyork@gmail.com
    liberiamission@pmun.gov.lr
    mission@libya-un.gov.ly
    newyork@llv.li
    lithuaniaun@gmail.com
    newyork.rp@mae.etat.lu
    repermad.ny@gmail.com
    malawinewyork@aol.com
    malawiu@aol.com
    mwnewyorkun@kln.gov.my
    info@maldivesmission.com
    miperma@malionu.com
    malta-un.newyork@gov.mt
    marshallislands@rmiunmission.org
    mauritaniamission@gmail.com
    mauritiusmissionnyc@gmail.com
    onuusr1@sre.gob.mx
    fsmun@fsmgov.org
    monaco.un@gmail.com
    mongolianmission@twcmetrobiz.com
    unnewyork.montenegro@gmail.com
    morocco.un@maec.gov.ma
    mozambique.unmission@gmail.com
    myanmarmission@verizon.net
    info@namibiaunmission.org
    nauru@un.int
    nepalmissionusa@gmail.com
    nyv@minbuza.nl
    nzpmun@gmail.com
    nicaraguaunny@yahoo.com
    nigermission@ymail.com
    permny@nigeriaunmission.org
    newyork@mfa.gov.mk
    delun@mfa.no
    oman@un.int
    pakistan@pakun.org
    mission@palauun.org
    emb@panama-un.org
    pngun@pngmission.org
    paraguay.un@mre.gov.py
    onuper@unperu.org
    newyork.pm@nypm.org
    newyork.pm@dfa.gov.ph
    poland.un@msz.gov.pl
    portugal.nu@mne.pt
    pmun@mofa.gov.qa
    korea.un@mofa.go.kr
    unmoldova@mfa.gov.md
    newyork-onu@mae.ro
    press@russiaun.ru
    ambanewyork@minaffet.gov.rw
    ambanewyork@gmail.com
    sknmission@aol.com
    info@stluciamission.org
    svgmission@gmail.com
    ambassadorassistantsvg@gmail.com
    samoa@samoanymission.ws
    sanmarinoun@gmail.com
    rdstppmun@gmail.com
    correspondence@ksamission-gov.net
    senegal.mission@yahoo.fr
    info@serbiamissionun.org
    pr.office@serbiamissionun.org
    seychellesmissionun@gmail.com
    seychellesmission@sycun.org
    sierraleone@pmun.net
    singaporeun@outlook.com
    un.newyork@mzv.sk
    slomission.newyork@gov.si
    simun@solomons.com
    somalia@unmission.gov.so
    pmun.newyork@dirco.gov.za
    info@rssun-nyc.org
    rep.nuevayorkonu@maec.es
    prun.newyork@mfa.gov.lk
    mail@slmission.com
    sudan@sudanmission.org
    suriname_un@proton.me
    representationen.new-york@gov.se
    newyork.un@eda.admin.ch
    syrianmission-ny@sar-un.org
    tajikistanunmission@gmail.com
    thaimission.ny@gmail.com
    timorleste.unmission@gmail.com
    togo.mission@togounmission.org
    tongaunmission@gmail.com
    pmun-ny@trinbago.org
    tunisia@un.int
    tunisiamission@usa.com
    tr-delegation.newyork@mfa.gov.tr
    turkmenistan.un@mfa.gov.tm
    tuvalu.unmission@gov.tv
    admin@ugandaunny.com
    uno_us@mfa.gov.ua
    nyunprm@mofaic.gov.ae
    nyunprm@uaeun.org
    ukmissionny@gmail.com
    tanzania.un@nje.go.tz
    usun.newyork@state.gov
    urudeleg@mrree.gub.uy
    uzbekistan.un@gmail.com
    vanunmis@aol.com
    misionvenezuelaonu@gmail.com
    info@vietnam-un.org
    yemenmissionny@gmail.com
    un@grz.gov.zm
    info@zambiamissionun.com
    zimnewyork@gmail.com
    office@holyseemission.org
    admin@palestinemissionun.org
    aumission_ny@yahoo.com
    ny.un@las.int
    aalco@un.int
    cari.per.obs.un@gmail.com
    ccampos@sgsica-ny.org
    newyork@commonwealth.int
    gccny@gccsg.org
    ceeaceccasom@gmail.com
    kjawara-njai@ecowas.int
    ecowasmission.ny@gmail.com
    bfaedda@eplo.int
    delegation-new-york@eeas.europa.eu
    amparo.morales@filac.org
    jonathan.granoff@iaca.int
    dijana.duric@iaca.int
    un@iccwbo.org
    nyoffice@interpol.int
    newyork@idlo.int
    unobserver@idea.int
    reper.new-york@francophonie.org
    nyoffice@irena.org
    iucn@un.int
    internationalyouthorganization@un.int
    uncontact@oecd.org
    oic.un.ny@gmail.com
    pam.unny@pam.int
    srao@ppdsec.org
    rgarvey@ppdsec.org
    south@southcentre.int
    nyinfo@upeace.org
    ny-office@ipu.org
    newyork@icrc.org
    newyork.delegation@ifrc.org
    ioc-unobserver@olympic.org
    un.mission.ny@orderofmalta.int
    faolon-director@fao.org
    iaeany@un.org
    liaisonofficeny@icc-cpi.int
    ifad.ny@ifad.org
    newyork@ilo.org
    rpowell@imf.org
    jlammens@imf.org
    unofficeny@iom.int
    seaun@un.org
    itlos@itlos.org
    newyork@unesco.org
    office.newyork@unido.org
    whonewyork@who.int
    newyork.office@wipo.int
    ola.zahran@wipo.int
    lpaterson@wmo.int
    laura.paterson@un.org

    Emails of embassies to and from Palestine via this page.

    aeoalg@caramail.org
    alembac@ucomgh.com
    alestine@intnet.dj
    aliman@icon.co.zw
    ambpal@eunet.rs
    ambpal@eunet.yu
    auemb@mofa-gov.ps
    austrep@palnet.com
    bremb@mofa-gov.ps
    chinaemb_ps@mfa.gov.cn
    clemb@mofa-gov.ps
    cyprusoffice@palnet.com
    del.palestine@wanadoo.fr
    deleg.palestinienne@beon.be
    elian@freemail.hu
    em.alasad_asad@hotmail.com
    embagoda.palestine@mad.servicom.es
    embassy@palestineindia.com
    embassyofpalestine.portugal@gmail.com
    embassyofpalestine@gmail.com
    embpalnic@turbonett.com.in
    empaltr@gmail.com
    eosopmet@omantel.net.com
    falastin@hellasnet.gr
    fiemb@mofa-gov.ps
    gdpalestine@swissonline.ch
    info@gdp.ie
    info@plo.swieden.org
    iqemb@mofa-gov.ps
    jerusalem@mianet.com.ar
    jerusalem@telesat.com.co
    jorrep@palnet.com
    kwemb@mofa-gov.ps
    lbemb@mofa-gov.ps
    maemb@mofa-gov.ps
    ngemb@mofa-gov.ps
    pal.damas@gmail.com
    pal_embassy@yahoo.com
    palango@netangola.com
    palastinelo@hotmail.com
    palemb.no@outlook.com
    palemb1@yemen.net
    palembassy_ukraine@hotmail.com
    palembs@qatar.net.qa
    palembtn@yahoo.com
    palestcz@mbox.vol.cz
    palestin@spidernet.com
    palestine@dsi.net.pk
    palestine@paltsts-jp.com
    palestine_bel_emb@hotmail.com
    palestine_emb_abuja@yahoo.com
    palestine_emb_mozambique@yahoo.com
    palestinead@hotmail.com
    palestinebg@yahoo.com
    palestinegd@gmail.com
    palestinekorea@hotmail.com
    pgd@planet.nl
    plemb@mofa-gov.ps
    plo@neda.net
    plomission1@aol.com
    plosrilanka@hotmail.com
    ramallah@embassy.mzv.cz
    repkon@ramdk.org
    roem@mofa.ps
    roi_gaza@mtcgaza.com
    saemb@mofa-gov.ps
    sanomat.ram@formin.fi
    sdemb@mofa-gov.ps
    sifmagaz@palnet.com
    skemb@mofa-gov.ps
    snemb@mofa-gov.ps
    vnemb@mofa.pna.ps
    zaemb@mofa-gov.ps
    zmemb@mofa-gov.ps

    https://open.substack.com/pub/husseini/p/to-save-gaza-invoke-the-genocide?r=29hg4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
    To Save Gaza, Invoke the Genocide Convention The ICC is a "puppet institution". What's needed is a country to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Here's how, with argument, phone numbers, addresses and emails. Sam Husseini [Addendum: RootsAction and World Beyond War have put out the action alert “It’s Time to Invoke the Genocide Convention”. This full piece has been posted on X/Twitter with thread containing handles for various national leaders who can be petitioned.] Some of the greatest successes in recent human history have combined protest movements with strong diplomatic moves. In February 1998, the Clinton administration seemed poised to inflict a massive attack on Iraq, but vocal opposition from the US public, especially at a CNN town hall meeting in Ohio, combined by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan going to Iraq, repelled the US government attack. The following year, in the Battle of Seattle, combined protests in the streets and delegations from the global south finding their backbone resulted in the World Trade Organization’s plans collapsing. This was a major setback for global corporate interests. There is now effectively a global movement, largely based around mass protests, to stop Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. Several countries, including South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, Djibouti as well as Colombia and Algeria and Turkey have moved for the International Criminal Court to prosecute Israeli officials. The problem is that ICC has been dragging its heels for years on prosecuting Israelis. It has been called a “white man’s court” after only going after Africans, and, after letting Israel off the hook during an earlier assault on Gaza, “a hoax”. Some of these nations have called Israel’s war crimes “genocide”. They should act on their words and invoke the relevant treaty. Other nations that have been especially critical of Israel are Pakistan, Brazil, Chile, Belize, Jordan, Chad, Honduras, Bahrain, Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba. The International Court of Justice, also called the World Court, in contrast has ruled against Israel. But so far these rulings have been advisory opinions. It ruled against Israel in a case regarding its wall in 2004. In another case before it, is expected to rule against Israel’s long term policies. But what can be done now, Prof. Francis Boyle, who successfully represented the Bosnians before the World Court, argues is to use emergency processes to give more teeth to the World Court. This can be done by invoking the Genocide Convention. This is outlined by Boyle, noted by UN whistleblower Craig Mokhiber, backed by Nobel Peace Prize winner Mairead Maguire, and written about by myself. And most recently by Craig Murray, now a human rights activist who was the British ambassador to Uzbekistan and Rector of the University of Dundee. Murray just wrote the piece “Activating the Genocide Convention” which states: “There are 149 states party to the Genocide Convention. Every one of them has the right to call out the genocide in progress in Gaza and report it to the United Nations. In the event that another state party disputes the claim of genocide — and Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom are all states party — then the International Court of Justice [also called the World Court] is required to adjudicate on ‘the responsibility of a State for genocide.'” Murray quotes from the Genocide Convention and cites evidence that Israel is conducting genocide and that the US and British governments are at minimum complicit in that. He then states: “The International Court of Justice is the most respected of international institutions; while the United States has repudiated its compulsory jurisdiction, the United Kingdom has not and the EU positively accepts it. “If the International Court of Justice makes a determination of genocide, then the International Criminal Court does not have to determine that genocide has happened. This is important because unlike the august and independent ICJ, the ICC is very much a western government puppet institution which will wiggle out of action if it can. But a determination of the ICJ of genocide and of complicity in genocide would reduce the ICC’s task to determining which individuals bear the responsibility. That is a prospect which can indeed alter the calculations of politicians. “It is also the fact that a reference for genocide would force the western media to address the issue and use the term, rather than just pump out propaganda about Hamas fighting bases in hospitals. … “I am afraid the question of why Palestine has not invoked the Genocide Convention takes us somewhere very dark. … It is Fatah who occupy the Palestinian seat at the United Nations, and the decision for Palestine to call into play the Genocide Convention lies with Mahmoud Abbas. It is more and more difficult daily to support Abbas. He seems extraordinarily passive, and the suspicion that he is more concerned with refighting the Palestinian civil war than with resisting the genocide is impossible to shake. By invoking the Genocide Convention he could put himself and Fatah back at the centre of the narrative. But he does nothing. I do not want to believe that corruption and a Blinken promise of inheriting Gaza are Mahmoud’s motivators. But at the moment, I cannot grab on to any other explanation to believe in.” Thus speeches from Abbas and allied Palestinians figures should be viewed extremely skeptically. It is also very odd, to say the very least, that Francesca Albanese, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, and other officials put out a statement “Gaza: UN experts call on international community to prevent genocide against the Palestinian people” — but make no mention whatever of the Genocide Convention. As Murray writes: “Any one of the 139 states party could invoke the Genocide Convention against Israel and its co-conspirators. Those states include Iran, Russia, Libya, Malaysia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Afghanistan, Cuba, Ireland, Iceland, Jordan, South Africa, Turkey and Qatar. But not one of these states has called out the genocide [by invoking the Convention]. Why? “It is not because the Genocide Convention is a dead letter. It is not. It was invoked against Serbia by Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ICJ ruled against Serbia with regard to the massacre at Srebrenica.” Murray notes that this helped lead to prosecutions. He adds: “Some states may simply not have thought of it. For Arab states in particular, the fact that Palestine itself has not invoked the Genocide Convention may provide an excuse. EU states can hide behind bloc unanimity. “But I am afraid that the truth is that no state cares sufficiently about the thousands of Palestinian children already killed and thousands more who will shortly be killed, to introduce another factor of hostility in their relationship with the United States. Just as at [the recent] summit in Saudi Arabia, where Islamic countries could not agree [on] an oil and gas boycott of Israel, the truth is that those in power really do not care about a genocide in Gaza. They care about their own interests. “It just needs one state to invoke the Genocide Convention and change the narrative and the international dynamic. That will only happen through the power of the people in pressing the idea on their governments. This is where everybody can do a little something to add to the pressure. Please do what you can.” What can you do? Urge countries which have been critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Get groups and influential people to make this a primary ask. Protests in NYC should include visits and vigils to the missions of those countries. Activists who have been arrested for protesting against Israel’s slaughter can ask UN officials from countries critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention. Palestinians in Ramallah may be able to directly contact the representatives of various countries to Palestine. This can be done anywhere. Protests in London can respectfully appeal to the embassies of various countries critical of Israel. We need to keep pressing directly against the US and Israeli governments, but their hearts are like stone. If we reach other states to invoke the Genocide Convention, it may be a key stop in curtailing the slaughter. Moreover, it could be a turning point in global relations. Should a positive emergency ruling by the International Court of Justice be forthcoming, it would dramatically isolate the US and Israel at the UN. The US would of course try to block anything at the UN Security Council. But with a World Court ruling, Boyle argues, the stage would be set for the General Assembly to assert itself using the Uniting for Peace procedure. Combined with sustained protests, like the WTO and other critical confrontations, the costs of continuing the slaughter could become unsustainable. Moreover, a World Court ruling could facilitate other legal efforts, like universal jurisdiction. For all that to happen, a country needs to step forward and invoke the Genocide Convention. Make no mistake; any nation that does this may well be targeted in insidious ways by the US and by Israel. Any such nation should be afforded every bit of support people of goodwill can muster. Here's a website that seems to list all the embassies and other diplomatic missions around the world. People from anywhere can be emailing, calling and going to these embassies and missions, urging these countries to use every legal mechanism to pressure Israel to stop, including invoking the Genocide Convention: embassy-worldwide.com. A friend extracted emails of missions to the UN: info@afghanistan-un.org mission.newyork@mfa.gov.al officeofthepr.albania@mfa.gov.al algeriamission.ny@gmail.com contact@andorraun.org theangolamission@angolaun.org unmission@ab.gov.ag jackley.peters@ab.gov.ag enaun@mrecic.gov.ar armenia@missionun.org australiaun@dfat.gov.au new-york-ov@bmeia.gv.at mission@azerbaijanun.org mission@bahamasny.com newyork.mission@mofa.gov.bh bangladeshatun@gmail.com bdpmny@gmail.com prun@foreign.gov.bb barbados@un.int usaun@mfa.gov.by newyorkun@diplobel.fed.be blzun@belizemission.com blzun@aol.com onu.newyork@gouv.bj beninewyork@gmail.com bhutanmission@pmbny.bt missionboliviaun@gmail.com bihun@mvp.gov.ba botswana@un.int distri.delbrasonu@itamaraty.gov.br bruneiunmission@protonmail.com mission.newyork@mfa.bg miperfaso.ny@burkina-onu.org ambabunewyork@yahoo.fr cvpm.unny@mnec.gov.cv cambodia@un.int cameroon.mission@yahoo.com canada.un@international.gc.ca repercaf.ny@gmail.com chadmission.un@gmail.com chile.un@minrel.gob.cl chinesemission@yahoo.com colombia@colombiaun.org comores.nu@gmail.com cgbrazzadel60@gmail.com miscr-onu@rree.go.cr cotedivoiremission@yahoo.com cromiss.un@mvep.hr cuba_onu@cubanmission.com unmission@mfa.gov.cy un.newyork@embassy.mzv.cz dprk.un@verizon.net missiondrc@gmail.com nycmis@um.dk djibouti@nyct.net dominicaun@gmail.com drmun1114@gmail.com onunewyork@cancilleria.gob.ec mission@egyptmissionny.com elsalvador@un.int info@equatorialguineaun.org general@eritreaun.org mission.newyork@mfa.ee eswatini@un.int eswatinimissionunny@yahoo.com ethiopia@un.int mission@fijiprun.org sanomat.yke@gov.fi france@franceonu.org info@gabonunmission.com gambia_un@hotmail.com geomission.un@mfa.gov.ge info@new-york-un.diplo.de ghanaperm@aol.com grdel.un@mfa.gr gmun@mofa.gov.gd onunewyork@minex.gob.gt missionofguinea.un@gmail.com guinebissauonu@gmail.com pmny@mission.gov.gy mphonu.newyork@diplomatie.ht ny.honduras@hnun.org hungaryun.ny@mfa.gov.hu unmission@mfa.is india.newyorkpmi@mea.gov.in ptri@indonesiaun.org iranunny@mfa.gov.ir iraq.mission@iraqmission-un.com newyorkpmun@dfa.ie uninfo@newyork.mfa.gov.il info.italyun@esteri.it info.unmissionny@mfaft.gov.jm p-m-j@dn.mofa.go.jp missionun@jordanmissionun.com unkazmission@gmail.com info@kenyaun.org kimission.newyork@mfa.gov.ki kuwait@kuwaitmissionun.org kyrgyzstan.un.ny@mfa.gov.kg lao.pr.ny@gmail.com mission.un-ny@mfa.gov.lv contact@lebanonun.org lesothonewyork@gmail.com liberiamission@pmun.gov.lr mission@libya-un.gov.ly newyork@llv.li lithuaniaun@gmail.com newyork.rp@mae.etat.lu repermad.ny@gmail.com malawinewyork@aol.com malawiu@aol.com mwnewyorkun@kln.gov.my info@maldivesmission.com miperma@malionu.com malta-un.newyork@gov.mt marshallislands@rmiunmission.org mauritaniamission@gmail.com mauritiusmissionnyc@gmail.com onuusr1@sre.gob.mx fsmun@fsmgov.org monaco.un@gmail.com mongolianmission@twcmetrobiz.com unnewyork.montenegro@gmail.com morocco.un@maec.gov.ma mozambique.unmission@gmail.com myanmarmission@verizon.net info@namibiaunmission.org nauru@un.int nepalmissionusa@gmail.com nyv@minbuza.nl nzpmun@gmail.com nicaraguaunny@yahoo.com nigermission@ymail.com permny@nigeriaunmission.org newyork@mfa.gov.mk delun@mfa.no oman@un.int pakistan@pakun.org mission@palauun.org emb@panama-un.org pngun@pngmission.org paraguay.un@mre.gov.py onuper@unperu.org newyork.pm@nypm.org newyork.pm@dfa.gov.ph poland.un@msz.gov.pl portugal.nu@mne.pt pmun@mofa.gov.qa korea.un@mofa.go.kr unmoldova@mfa.gov.md newyork-onu@mae.ro press@russiaun.ru ambanewyork@minaffet.gov.rw ambanewyork@gmail.com sknmission@aol.com info@stluciamission.org svgmission@gmail.com ambassadorassistantsvg@gmail.com samoa@samoanymission.ws sanmarinoun@gmail.com rdstppmun@gmail.com correspondence@ksamission-gov.net senegal.mission@yahoo.fr info@serbiamissionun.org pr.office@serbiamissionun.org seychellesmissionun@gmail.com seychellesmission@sycun.org sierraleone@pmun.net singaporeun@outlook.com un.newyork@mzv.sk slomission.newyork@gov.si simun@solomons.com somalia@unmission.gov.so pmun.newyork@dirco.gov.za info@rssun-nyc.org rep.nuevayorkonu@maec.es prun.newyork@mfa.gov.lk mail@slmission.com sudan@sudanmission.org suriname_un@proton.me representationen.new-york@gov.se newyork.un@eda.admin.ch syrianmission-ny@sar-un.org tajikistanunmission@gmail.com thaimission.ny@gmail.com timorleste.unmission@gmail.com togo.mission@togounmission.org tongaunmission@gmail.com pmun-ny@trinbago.org tunisia@un.int tunisiamission@usa.com tr-delegation.newyork@mfa.gov.tr turkmenistan.un@mfa.gov.tm tuvalu.unmission@gov.tv admin@ugandaunny.com uno_us@mfa.gov.ua nyunprm@mofaic.gov.ae nyunprm@uaeun.org ukmissionny@gmail.com tanzania.un@nje.go.tz usun.newyork@state.gov urudeleg@mrree.gub.uy uzbekistan.un@gmail.com vanunmis@aol.com misionvenezuelaonu@gmail.com info@vietnam-un.org yemenmissionny@gmail.com un@grz.gov.zm info@zambiamissionun.com zimnewyork@gmail.com office@holyseemission.org admin@palestinemissionun.org aumission_ny@yahoo.com ny.un@las.int aalco@un.int cari.per.obs.un@gmail.com ccampos@sgsica-ny.org newyork@commonwealth.int gccny@gccsg.org ceeaceccasom@gmail.com kjawara-njai@ecowas.int ecowasmission.ny@gmail.com bfaedda@eplo.int delegation-new-york@eeas.europa.eu amparo.morales@filac.org jonathan.granoff@iaca.int dijana.duric@iaca.int un@iccwbo.org nyoffice@interpol.int newyork@idlo.int unobserver@idea.int reper.new-york@francophonie.org nyoffice@irena.org iucn@un.int internationalyouthorganization@un.int uncontact@oecd.org oic.un.ny@gmail.com pam.unny@pam.int srao@ppdsec.org rgarvey@ppdsec.org south@southcentre.int nyinfo@upeace.org ny-office@ipu.org newyork@icrc.org newyork.delegation@ifrc.org ioc-unobserver@olympic.org un.mission.ny@orderofmalta.int faolon-director@fao.org iaeany@un.org liaisonofficeny@icc-cpi.int ifad.ny@ifad.org newyork@ilo.org rpowell@imf.org jlammens@imf.org unofficeny@iom.int seaun@un.org itlos@itlos.org newyork@unesco.org office.newyork@unido.org whonewyork@who.int newyork.office@wipo.int ola.zahran@wipo.int lpaterson@wmo.int laura.paterson@un.org Emails of embassies to and from Palestine via this page. aeoalg@caramail.org alembac@ucomgh.com alestine@intnet.dj aliman@icon.co.zw ambpal@eunet.rs ambpal@eunet.yu auemb@mofa-gov.ps austrep@palnet.com bremb@mofa-gov.ps chinaemb_ps@mfa.gov.cn clemb@mofa-gov.ps cyprusoffice@palnet.com del.palestine@wanadoo.fr deleg.palestinienne@beon.be elian@freemail.hu em.alasad_asad@hotmail.com embagoda.palestine@mad.servicom.es embassy@palestineindia.com embassyofpalestine.portugal@gmail.com embassyofpalestine@gmail.com embpalnic@turbonett.com.in empaltr@gmail.com eosopmet@omantel.net.com falastin@hellasnet.gr fiemb@mofa-gov.ps gdpalestine@swissonline.ch info@gdp.ie info@plo.swieden.org iqemb@mofa-gov.ps jerusalem@mianet.com.ar jerusalem@telesat.com.co jorrep@palnet.com kwemb@mofa-gov.ps lbemb@mofa-gov.ps maemb@mofa-gov.ps ngemb@mofa-gov.ps pal.damas@gmail.com pal_embassy@yahoo.com palango@netangola.com palastinelo@hotmail.com palemb.no@outlook.com palemb1@yemen.net palembassy_ukraine@hotmail.com palembs@qatar.net.qa palembtn@yahoo.com palestcz@mbox.vol.cz palestin@spidernet.com palestine@dsi.net.pk palestine@paltsts-jp.com palestine_bel_emb@hotmail.com palestine_emb_abuja@yahoo.com palestine_emb_mozambique@yahoo.com palestinead@hotmail.com palestinebg@yahoo.com palestinegd@gmail.com palestinekorea@hotmail.com pgd@planet.nl plemb@mofa-gov.ps plo@neda.net plomission1@aol.com plosrilanka@hotmail.com ramallah@embassy.mzv.cz repkon@ramdk.org roem@mofa.ps roi_gaza@mtcgaza.com saemb@mofa-gov.ps sanomat.ram@formin.fi sdemb@mofa-gov.ps sifmagaz@palnet.com skemb@mofa-gov.ps snemb@mofa-gov.ps vnemb@mofa.pna.ps zaemb@mofa-gov.ps zmemb@mofa-gov.ps https://open.substack.com/pub/husseini/p/to-save-gaza-invoke-the-genocide?r=29hg4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
    OPEN.SUBSTACK.COM
    To Save Gaza, Invoke the Genocide Convention
    The ICC is a "puppet institution". What's needed is a country to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Here's how, with argument, phone numbers, addresses and emails.
    1 Comments 0 Shares 31638 Views

  • To Save Gaza, Invoke the Genocide Convention

    The ICC is a "puppet institution". What's needed is a country to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Here's how, with argument, phone numbers, addresses and emails.
    Sam Husseini





    [Addendum: RootsAction and World Beyond War have put out the action alert “It’s Time to Invoke the Genocide Convention”. This full piece has been posted on X/Twitter with threadcontaining handles for various national leaders who can be petitioned.]

    Some of the greatest successes in recent human history have combined protest movements with strong diplomatic moves.

    In February 1998, the Clinton administration seemed poised to inflict a massive attack on Iraq, but vocal opposition from the US public, especially at a CNN town hall meeting in Ohio, combined by UN Secretary General Kofi Annangoing to Iraq, repelled the US government attack.

    The following year, in the Battle of Seattle, combined protests in the streets and delegations from the global south finding their backbone resulted in the World Trade Organization’s plans collapsing. This was a major setback for global corporate interests.

    There is now effectively a global movement, largely based around mass protests, to stop Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

    Several countries, including South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, Djibouti as well as Colombia and Algeria and Turkey have moved for the International Criminal Court to prosecute Israeli officials.

    The problem is that ICC has been dragging its heels for years on prosecuting Israelis. It has been called a “white man’s court” after only going after Africans, and, after letting Israel off the hook during an earlier assault on Gaza, “a hoax”. Some of these nations have called Israel’s war crimes “genocide”. They should act on their words and invoke the relevant treaty. Other nations that have been especially critical of Israel are Pakistan, Brazil, Chile, Belize, Jordan, Chad, Honduras, Bahrain, Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba.

    The International Court of Justice, also called the World Court, in contrast has ruled against Israel. But so far these rulings have been advisory opinions. It ruled against Israel in a case regarding its wall in 2004. In another case before it, is expected to rule against Israel’s long term policies.

    But what can be done now, Prof. Francis Boyle, who successfully represented the Bosnians before the World Court, argues is to use emergency processes to give more teeth to the World Court. This can be done by invoking the Genocide Convention. This is outlined by Boyle, noted by UN whistleblower Craig Mokhiber, backed by Nobel Peace Prize winner Mairead Maguire, and written about by myself. And most recently by Craig Murray, now a human rights activist who was the British ambassador to Uzbekistan and Rector of the University of Dundee.

    Murray just wrote the piece “Activating the Genocide Convention” which states: “There are 149 states party to the Genocide Convention. Every one of them has the right to call out the genocide in progress in Gaza and report it to the United Nations. In the event that another state party disputes the claim of genocide — and Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom are all states party — then the International Court of Justice [also called the World Court] is required to adjudicate on ‘the responsibility of a State for genocide.'”

    Murray quotes from the Genocide Convention and cites evidence that Israel is conducting genocide and that the US and British governments are at minimum complicit in that. He then states: “The International Court of Justice is the most respected of international institutions; while the United States has repudiated its compulsory jurisdiction, the United Kingdom has not and the EU positively accepts it.



    “If the International Court of Justice makes a determination of genocide, then the International Criminal Court does not have to determine that genocide has happened. This is important because unlike the august and independent ICJ, the ICC is very much a western government puppet institution which will wiggle out of action if it can. But a determination of the ICJ of genocide and of complicity in genocide would reduce the ICC’s task to determining which individuals bear the responsibility. That is a prospect which can indeed alter the calculations of politicians.



    “It is also the fact that a reference for genocide would force the western media to address the issue and use the term, rather than just pump out propaganda about Hamas fighting bases in hospitals. …

    “I am afraid the question of why Palestine has not invoked the Genocide Convention takes us somewhere very dark. … It is Fatah who occupy the Palestinian seat at the United Nations, and the decision for Palestine to call into play the Genocide Convention lies with Mahmoud Abbas. It is more and more difficult daily to support Abbas. He seems extraordinarily passive, and the suspicion that he is more concerned with refighting the Palestinian civil war than with resisting the genocide is impossible to shake. By invoking the Genocide Convention he could put himself and Fatah back at the centre of the narrative. But he does nothing. I do not want to believe that corruption and a Blinken promise of inheriting Gaza are Mahmoud’s motivators. But at the moment, I cannot grab on to any other explanation to believe in.”

    Thus speeches from Abbas and allied Palestinians figures should be viewed extremely skeptically. It is also very odd, to say the very least, that Francesca Albanese, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, and other officials put out a statement “Gaza: UN experts call on international community to prevent genocide against the Palestinian people” — but make no mention whatever of the Genocide Convention.



    As Murray writes: “Any one of the 139 states party could invoke the Genocide Convention against Israel and its co-conspirators. Those states include Iran, Russia, Libya, Malaysia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Afghanistan, Cuba, Ireland, Iceland, Jordan, South Africa, Turkey and Qatar. But not one of these states has called out the genocide [by invoking the Convention]. Why?

    “It is not because the Genocide Convention is a dead letter. It is not. It was invoked against Serbia by Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ICJ ruled against Serbia with regard to the massacre at Srebrenica.” Murray notes that this helped lead to prosecutions.



    He adds: “Some states may simply not have thought of it. For Arab states in particular, the fact that Palestine itself has not invoked the Genocide Convention may provide an excuse. EU states can hide behind bloc unanimity.



    “But I am afraid that the truth is that no state cares sufficiently about the thousands of Palestinian children already killed and thousands more who will shortly be killed, to introduce another factor of hostility in their relationship with the United States. Just as at [the recent] summit in Saudi Arabia, where Islamic countries could not agree [on] an oil and gas boycott of Israel, the truth is that those in power really do not care about a genocide in Gaza. They care about their own interests.



    “It just needs one state to invoke the Genocide Convention and change the narrative and the international dynamic. That will only happen through the power of the people in pressing the idea on their governments. This is where everybody can do a little something to add to the pressure. Please do what you can.”

    What can you do? Urge countries which have been critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Get groups and influential people to make this a primary ask.

    Protests in NYC should include visits and vigils to the missions of those countries. Activists who have been arrested for protesting against Israel’s slaughter can ask UN officials from countries critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention.

    Palestinians in Ramallah may be able to directly contact the representatives of various countries to Palestine.

    This can be done anywhere. Protests in London can respectfully appeal to the embassies of various countries critical of Israel.

    We need to keep pressing directly against the US and Israeli governments, but their hearts are like stone. If we reach other states to invoke the Genocide Convention, it may be a key stop in curtailing the slaughter.

    Moreover, it could be a turning point in global relations. Should a positive emergency ruling by the International Court of Justice be forthcoming, it would dramatically isolate the US and Israel at the UN. The US would of course try to block anything at the UN Security Council. But with a World Court ruling, Boyle argues, the stage would be set for the General Assembly to assert itself using the Uniting for Peace procedure. Combined with sustained protests, like the WTO and other critical confrontations, the costs of continuing the slaughter could become unsustainable. Moreover, a World Court ruling could facilitate other legal efforts, like universal jurisdiction.

    For all that to happen, a country needs to step forward and invoke the Genocide Convention.

    Make no mistake; any nation that does this may well be targeted in insidious ways by the US and by Israel. Any such nation should be afforded every bit of support people of goodwill can muster.

    Here's a website that seems to list all the embassies and other diplomatic missions around the world. People from anywhere can be emailing, calling and going to these embassies and missions, urging these countries to use every legal mechanism to pressure Israel to stop, including invoking the Genocide Convention: embassy-worldwide.com.

    A friend extracted emails of missions to the UN:

    info@afghanistan-un.org

    mission.newyork@mfa.gov.al

    officeofthepr.albania@mfa.gov.al

    algeriamission.ny@gmail.com

    contact@andorraun.org

    theangolamission@angolaun.org

    unmission@ab.gov.ag

    jackley.peters@ab.gov.ag

    enaun@mrecic.gov.ar

    armenia@missionun.org

    australiaun@dfat.gov.au

    new-york-ov@bmeia.gv.at

    mission@azerbaijanun.org

    mission@bahamasny.com

    newyork.mission@mofa.gov.bh

    bangladeshatun@gmail.com

    bdpmny@gmail.com

    prun@foreign.gov.bb

    barbados@un.int

    usaun@mfa.gov.by

    newyorkun@diplobel.fed.be

    blzun@belizemission.com

    blzun@aol.com

    onu.newyork@gouv.bj

    beninewyork@gmail.com

    bhutanmission@pmbny.bt

    missionboliviaun@gmail.com

    bihun@mvp.gov.ba

    botswana@un.int

    distri.delbrasonu@itamaraty.gov.br

    bruneiunmission@protonmail.com

    mission.newyork@mfa.bg

    miperfaso.ny@burkina-onu.org

    ambabunewyork@yahoo.fr

    cvpm.unny@mnec.gov.cv

    cambodia@un.int

    cameroon.mission@yahoo.com

    canada.un@international.gc.ca

    repercaf.ny@gmail.com

    chadmission.un@gmail.com

    chile.un@minrel.gob.cl

    chinesemission@yahoo.com

    colombia@colombiaun.org

    comores.nu@gmail.com

    cgbrazzadel60@gmail.com

    miscr-onu@rree.go.cr

    cotedivoiremission@yahoo.com

    cromiss.un@mvep.hr

    cuba_onu@cubanmission.com

    unmission@mfa.gov.cy

    un.newyork@embassy.mzv.cz

    dprk.un@verizon.net

    missiondrc@gmail.com

    nycmis@um.dk

    djibouti@nyct.net

    dominicaun@gmail.com

    drmun1114@gmail.com

    onunewyork@cancilleria.gob.ec

    mission@egyptmissionny.com

    elsalvador@un.int

    info@equatorialguineaun.org

    general@eritreaun.org

    mission.newyork@mfa.ee

    eswatini@un.int

    eswatinimissionunny@yahoo.com

    ethiopia@un.int

    mission@fijiprun.org

    sanomat.yke@gov.fi

    france@franceonu.org

    info@gabonunmission.com

    gambia_un@hotmail.com

    geomission.un@mfa.gov.ge

    info@new-york-un.diplo.de

    ghanaperm@aol.com

    grdel.un@mfa.gr

    gmun@mofa.gov.gd

    onunewyork@minex.gob.gt

    missionofguinea.un@gmail.com

    guinebissauonu@gmail.com

    pmny@mission.gov.gy

    mphonu.newyork@diplomatie.ht

    ny.honduras@hnun.org

    hungaryun.ny@mfa.gov.hu

    unmission@mfa.is

    india.newyorkpmi@mea.gov.in

    ptri@indonesiaun.org

    iranunny@mfa.gov.ir

    iraq.mission@iraqmission-un.com

    newyorkpmun@dfa.ie

    uninfo@newyork.mfa.gov.il

    info.italyun@esteri.it

    info.unmissionny@mfaft.gov.jm

    p-m-j@dn.mofa.go.jp

    missionun@jordanmissionun.com

    unkazmission@gmail.com

    info@kenyaun.org

    kimission.newyork@mfa.gov.ki

    kuwait@kuwaitmissionun.org

    kyrgyzstan.un.ny@mfa.gov.kg

    lao.pr.ny@gmail.com

    mission.un-ny@mfa.gov.lv

    contact@lebanonun.org

    lesothonewyork@gmail.com

    liberiamission@pmun.gov.lr

    mission@libya-un.gov.ly

    newyork@llv.li

    lithuaniaun@gmail.com

    newyork.rp@mae.etat.lu

    repermad.ny@gmail.com

    malawinewyork@aol.com

    malawiu@aol.com

    mwnewyorkun@kln.gov.my

    info@maldivesmission.com

    miperma@malionu.com

    malta-un.newyork@gov.mt

    marshallislands@rmiunmission.org

    mauritaniamission@gmail.com

    mauritiusmissionnyc@gmail.com

    onuusr1@sre.gob.mx

    fsmun@fsmgov.org

    monaco.un@gmail.com

    mongolianmission@twcmetrobiz.com

    unnewyork.montenegro@gmail.com

    morocco.un@maec.gov.ma

    mozambique.unmission@gmail.com

    myanmarmission@verizon.net

    info@namibiaunmission.org

    nauru@un.int

    nepalmissionusa@gmail.com

    nyv@minbuza.nl

    nzpmun@gmail.com

    nicaraguaunny@yahoo.com

    nigermission@ymail.com

    permny@nigeriaunmission.org

    newyork@mfa.gov.mk

    delun@mfa.no

    oman@un.int

    pakistan@pakun.org

    mission@palauun.org

    emb@panama-un.org

    pngun@pngmission.org

    paraguay.un@mre.gov.py

    onuper@unperu.org

    newyork.pm@nypm.org

    newyork.pm@dfa.gov.ph

    poland.un@msz.gov.pl

    portugal.nu@mne.pt

    pmun@mofa.gov.qa

    korea.un@mofa.go.kr

    unmoldova@mfa.gov.md

    newyork-onu@mae.ro

    press@russiaun.ru

    ambanewyork@minaffet.gov.rw

    ambanewyork@gmail.com

    sknmission@aol.com

    info@stluciamission.org

    svgmission@gmail.com

    ambassadorassistantsvg@gmail.com

    samoa@samoanymission.ws

    sanmarinoun@gmail.com

    rdstppmun@gmail.com

    correspondence@ksamission-gov.net

    senegal.mission@yahoo.fr

    info@serbiamissionun.org

    pr.office@serbiamissionun.org

    seychellesmissionun@gmail.com

    seychellesmission@sycun.org

    sierraleone@pmun.net

    singaporeun@outlook.com

    un.newyork@mzv.sk

    slomission.newyork@gov.si

    simun@solomons.com

    somalia@unmission.gov.so

    pmun.newyork@dirco.gov.za

    info@rssun-nyc.org

    rep.nuevayorkonu@maec.es

    prun.newyork@mfa.gov.lk

    mail@slmission.com

    sudan@sudanmission.org

    suriname_un@proton.me

    representationen.new-york@gov.se

    newyork.un@eda.admin.ch

    syrianmission-ny@sar-un.org

    tajikistanunmission@gmail.com

    thaimission.ny@gmail.com

    timorleste.unmission@gmail.com

    togo.mission@togounmission.org

    tongaunmission@gmail.com

    pmun-ny@trinbago.org

    tunisia@un.int

    tunisiamission@usa.com

    tr-delegation.newyork@mfa.gov.tr

    turkmenistan.un@mfa.gov.tm

    tuvalu.unmission@gov.tv

    admin@ugandaunny.com

    uno_us@mfa.gov.ua

    nyunprm@mofaic.gov.ae

    nyunprm@uaeun.org

    ukmissionny@gmail.com

    tanzania.un@nje.go.tz

    usun.newyork@state.gov

    urudeleg@mrree.gub.uy

    uzbekistan.un@gmail.com

    vanunmis@aol.com

    misionvenezuelaonu@gmail.com

    info@vietnam-un.org

    yemenmissionny@gmail.com

    un@grz.gov.zm

    info@zambiamissionun.com

    zimnewyork@gmail.com

    office@holyseemission.org

    admin@palestinemissionun.org

    aumission_ny@yahoo.com

    ny.un@las.int

    aalco@un.int

    cari.per.obs.un@gmail.com

    ccampos@sgsica-ny.org

    newyork@commonwealth.int

    gccny@gccsg.org

    ceeaceccasom@gmail.com

    kjawara-njai@ecowas.int

    ecowasmission.ny@gmail.com

    bfaedda@eplo.int

    delegation-new-york@eeas.europa.eu

    amparo.morales@filac.org

    jonathan.granoff@iaca.int

    dijana.duric@iaca.int

    un@iccwbo.org

    nyoffice@interpol.int

    newyork@idlo.int

    unobserver@idea.int

    reper.new-york@francophonie.org

    nyoffice@irena.org

    iucn@un.int

    internationalyouthorganization@un.int

    uncontact@oecd.org

    oic.un.ny@gmail.com

    pam.unny@pam.int

    srao@ppdsec.org

    rgarvey@ppdsec.org

    south@southcentre.int

    nyinfo@upeace.org

    ny-office@ipu.org

    newyork@icrc.org

    newyork.delegation@ifrc.org

    ioc-unobserver@olympic.org

    un.mission.ny@orderofmalta.int

    faolon-director@fao.org

    iaeany@un.org

    liaisonofficeny@icc-cpi.int

    ifad.ny@ifad.org

    newyork@ilo.org

    rpowell@imf.org

    jlammens@imf.org

    unofficeny@iom.int

    seaun@un.org

    itlos@itlos.org

    newyork@unesco.org

    office.newyork@unido.org

    whonewyork@who.int

    newyork.office@wipo.int

    ola.zahran@wipo.int

    lpaterson@wmo.int

    laura.paterson@un.org

    Emails of embassies to and from Palestine via this page.

    aeoalg@caramail.org

    alembac@ucomgh.com

    alestine@intnet.dj

    aliman@icon.co.zw

    ambpal@eunet.rs

    ambpal@eunet.yu

    auemb@mofa-gov.ps

    austrep@palnet.com

    bremb@mofa-gov.ps

    chinaemb_ps@mfa.gov.cn

    clemb@mofa-gov.ps

    cyprusoffice@palnet.com

    del.palestine@wanadoo.fr

    deleg.palestinienne@beon.be

    elian@freemail.hu

    em.alasad_asad@hotmail.com

    embagoda.palestine@mad.servicom.es

    embassy@palestineindia.com

    embassyofpalestine.portugal@gmail.com

    embassyofpalestine@gmail.com

    embpalnic@turbonett.com.in

    empaltr@gmail.com

    eosopmet@omantel.net.com

    falastin@hellasnet.gr

    fiemb@mofa-gov.ps

    gdpalestine@swissonline.ch

    info@gdp.ie

    info@plo.swieden.org

    iqemb@mofa-gov.ps

    jerusalem@mianet.com.ar

    jerusalem@telesat.com.co

    jorrep@palnet.com

    kwemb@mofa-gov.ps

    lbemb@mofa-gov.ps

    maemb@mofa-gov.ps

    ngemb@mofa-gov.ps

    pal.damas@gmail.com

    pal_embassy@yahoo.com

    palango@netangola.com

    palastinelo@hotmail.com

    palemb.no@outlook.com

    palemb1@yemen.net

    palembassy_ukraine@hotmail.com

    palembs@qatar.net.qa

    palembtn@yahoo.com

    palestcz@mbox.vol.cz

    palestin@spidernet.com

    palestine@dsi.net.pk

    palestine@paltsts-jp.com

    palestine_bel_emb@hotmail.com

    palestine_emb_abuja@yahoo.com

    palestine_emb_mozambique@yahoo.com

    palestinead@hotmail.com

    palestinebg@yahoo.com

    palestinegd@gmail.com

    palestinekorea@hotmail.com

    pgd@planet.nl

    plemb@mofa-gov.ps

    plo@neda.net

    plomission1@aol.com

    plosrilanka@hotmail.com

    ramallah@embassy.mzv.cz

    repkon@ramdk.org

    roem@mofa.ps

    roi_gaza@mtcgaza.com

    saemb@mofa-gov.ps

    sanomat.ram@formin.fi

    sdemb@mofa-gov.ps

    sifmagaz@palnet.com

    skemb@mofa-gov.ps

    snemb@mofa-gov.ps

    vnemb@mofa.pna.ps

    zaemb@mofa-gov.ps

    zmemb@mofa-gov.ps






    Urge Governments to Invoke the Genocide Convention to Stop the War on Gaza

    https://worldbeyondwar.org/gaza-genocide/
    To Save Gaza, Invoke the Genocide Convention The ICC is a "puppet institution". What's needed is a country to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Here's how, with argument, phone numbers, addresses and emails. Sam Husseini [Addendum: RootsAction and World Beyond War have put out the action alert “It’s Time to Invoke the Genocide Convention”. This full piece has been posted on X/Twitter with threadcontaining handles for various national leaders who can be petitioned.] Some of the greatest successes in recent human history have combined protest movements with strong diplomatic moves. In February 1998, the Clinton administration seemed poised to inflict a massive attack on Iraq, but vocal opposition from the US public, especially at a CNN town hall meeting in Ohio, combined by UN Secretary General Kofi Annangoing to Iraq, repelled the US government attack. The following year, in the Battle of Seattle, combined protests in the streets and delegations from the global south finding their backbone resulted in the World Trade Organization’s plans collapsing. This was a major setback for global corporate interests. There is now effectively a global movement, largely based around mass protests, to stop Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. Several countries, including South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, Djibouti as well as Colombia and Algeria and Turkey have moved for the International Criminal Court to prosecute Israeli officials. The problem is that ICC has been dragging its heels for years on prosecuting Israelis. It has been called a “white man’s court” after only going after Africans, and, after letting Israel off the hook during an earlier assault on Gaza, “a hoax”. Some of these nations have called Israel’s war crimes “genocide”. They should act on their words and invoke the relevant treaty. Other nations that have been especially critical of Israel are Pakistan, Brazil, Chile, Belize, Jordan, Chad, Honduras, Bahrain, Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba. The International Court of Justice, also called the World Court, in contrast has ruled against Israel. But so far these rulings have been advisory opinions. It ruled against Israel in a case regarding its wall in 2004. In another case before it, is expected to rule against Israel’s long term policies. But what can be done now, Prof. Francis Boyle, who successfully represented the Bosnians before the World Court, argues is to use emergency processes to give more teeth to the World Court. This can be done by invoking the Genocide Convention. This is outlined by Boyle, noted by UN whistleblower Craig Mokhiber, backed by Nobel Peace Prize winner Mairead Maguire, and written about by myself. And most recently by Craig Murray, now a human rights activist who was the British ambassador to Uzbekistan and Rector of the University of Dundee. Murray just wrote the piece “Activating the Genocide Convention” which states: “There are 149 states party to the Genocide Convention. Every one of them has the right to call out the genocide in progress in Gaza and report it to the United Nations. In the event that another state party disputes the claim of genocide — and Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom are all states party — then the International Court of Justice [also called the World Court] is required to adjudicate on ‘the responsibility of a State for genocide.'” Murray quotes from the Genocide Convention and cites evidence that Israel is conducting genocide and that the US and British governments are at minimum complicit in that. He then states: “The International Court of Justice is the most respected of international institutions; while the United States has repudiated its compulsory jurisdiction, the United Kingdom has not and the EU positively accepts it. “If the International Court of Justice makes a determination of genocide, then the International Criminal Court does not have to determine that genocide has happened. This is important because unlike the august and independent ICJ, the ICC is very much a western government puppet institution which will wiggle out of action if it can. But a determination of the ICJ of genocide and of complicity in genocide would reduce the ICC’s task to determining which individuals bear the responsibility. That is a prospect which can indeed alter the calculations of politicians. “It is also the fact that a reference for genocide would force the western media to address the issue and use the term, rather than just pump out propaganda about Hamas fighting bases in hospitals. … “I am afraid the question of why Palestine has not invoked the Genocide Convention takes us somewhere very dark. … It is Fatah who occupy the Palestinian seat at the United Nations, and the decision for Palestine to call into play the Genocide Convention lies with Mahmoud Abbas. It is more and more difficult daily to support Abbas. He seems extraordinarily passive, and the suspicion that he is more concerned with refighting the Palestinian civil war than with resisting the genocide is impossible to shake. By invoking the Genocide Convention he could put himself and Fatah back at the centre of the narrative. But he does nothing. I do not want to believe that corruption and a Blinken promise of inheriting Gaza are Mahmoud’s motivators. But at the moment, I cannot grab on to any other explanation to believe in.” Thus speeches from Abbas and allied Palestinians figures should be viewed extremely skeptically. It is also very odd, to say the very least, that Francesca Albanese, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, and other officials put out a statement “Gaza: UN experts call on international community to prevent genocide against the Palestinian people” — but make no mention whatever of the Genocide Convention. As Murray writes: “Any one of the 139 states party could invoke the Genocide Convention against Israel and its co-conspirators. Those states include Iran, Russia, Libya, Malaysia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Afghanistan, Cuba, Ireland, Iceland, Jordan, South Africa, Turkey and Qatar. But not one of these states has called out the genocide [by invoking the Convention]. Why? “It is not because the Genocide Convention is a dead letter. It is not. It was invoked against Serbia by Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ICJ ruled against Serbia with regard to the massacre at Srebrenica.” Murray notes that this helped lead to prosecutions. He adds: “Some states may simply not have thought of it. For Arab states in particular, the fact that Palestine itself has not invoked the Genocide Convention may provide an excuse. EU states can hide behind bloc unanimity. “But I am afraid that the truth is that no state cares sufficiently about the thousands of Palestinian children already killed and thousands more who will shortly be killed, to introduce another factor of hostility in their relationship with the United States. Just as at [the recent] summit in Saudi Arabia, where Islamic countries could not agree [on] an oil and gas boycott of Israel, the truth is that those in power really do not care about a genocide in Gaza. They care about their own interests. “It just needs one state to invoke the Genocide Convention and change the narrative and the international dynamic. That will only happen through the power of the people in pressing the idea on their governments. This is where everybody can do a little something to add to the pressure. Please do what you can.” What can you do? Urge countries which have been critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice. Get groups and influential people to make this a primary ask. Protests in NYC should include visits and vigils to the missions of those countries. Activists who have been arrested for protesting against Israel’s slaughter can ask UN officials from countries critical of Israel to invoke the Genocide Convention. Palestinians in Ramallah may be able to directly contact the representatives of various countries to Palestine. This can be done anywhere. Protests in London can respectfully appeal to the embassies of various countries critical of Israel. We need to keep pressing directly against the US and Israeli governments, but their hearts are like stone. If we reach other states to invoke the Genocide Convention, it may be a key stop in curtailing the slaughter. Moreover, it could be a turning point in global relations. Should a positive emergency ruling by the International Court of Justice be forthcoming, it would dramatically isolate the US and Israel at the UN. The US would of course try to block anything at the UN Security Council. But with a World Court ruling, Boyle argues, the stage would be set for the General Assembly to assert itself using the Uniting for Peace procedure. Combined with sustained protests, like the WTO and other critical confrontations, the costs of continuing the slaughter could become unsustainable. Moreover, a World Court ruling could facilitate other legal efforts, like universal jurisdiction. For all that to happen, a country needs to step forward and invoke the Genocide Convention. Make no mistake; any nation that does this may well be targeted in insidious ways by the US and by Israel. Any such nation should be afforded every bit of support people of goodwill can muster. Here's a website that seems to list all the embassies and other diplomatic missions around the world. People from anywhere can be emailing, calling and going to these embassies and missions, urging these countries to use every legal mechanism to pressure Israel to stop, including invoking the Genocide Convention: embassy-worldwide.com. A friend extracted emails of missions to the UN: info@afghanistan-un.org mission.newyork@mfa.gov.al officeofthepr.albania@mfa.gov.al algeriamission.ny@gmail.com contact@andorraun.org theangolamission@angolaun.org unmission@ab.gov.ag jackley.peters@ab.gov.ag enaun@mrecic.gov.ar armenia@missionun.org australiaun@dfat.gov.au new-york-ov@bmeia.gv.at mission@azerbaijanun.org mission@bahamasny.com newyork.mission@mofa.gov.bh bangladeshatun@gmail.com bdpmny@gmail.com prun@foreign.gov.bb barbados@un.int usaun@mfa.gov.by newyorkun@diplobel.fed.be blzun@belizemission.com blzun@aol.com onu.newyork@gouv.bj beninewyork@gmail.com bhutanmission@pmbny.bt missionboliviaun@gmail.com bihun@mvp.gov.ba botswana@un.int distri.delbrasonu@itamaraty.gov.br bruneiunmission@protonmail.com mission.newyork@mfa.bg miperfaso.ny@burkina-onu.org ambabunewyork@yahoo.fr cvpm.unny@mnec.gov.cv cambodia@un.int cameroon.mission@yahoo.com canada.un@international.gc.ca repercaf.ny@gmail.com chadmission.un@gmail.com chile.un@minrel.gob.cl chinesemission@yahoo.com colombia@colombiaun.org comores.nu@gmail.com cgbrazzadel60@gmail.com miscr-onu@rree.go.cr cotedivoiremission@yahoo.com cromiss.un@mvep.hr cuba_onu@cubanmission.com unmission@mfa.gov.cy un.newyork@embassy.mzv.cz dprk.un@verizon.net missiondrc@gmail.com nycmis@um.dk djibouti@nyct.net dominicaun@gmail.com drmun1114@gmail.com onunewyork@cancilleria.gob.ec mission@egyptmissionny.com elsalvador@un.int info@equatorialguineaun.org general@eritreaun.org mission.newyork@mfa.ee eswatini@un.int eswatinimissionunny@yahoo.com ethiopia@un.int mission@fijiprun.org sanomat.yke@gov.fi france@franceonu.org info@gabonunmission.com gambia_un@hotmail.com geomission.un@mfa.gov.ge info@new-york-un.diplo.de ghanaperm@aol.com grdel.un@mfa.gr gmun@mofa.gov.gd onunewyork@minex.gob.gt missionofguinea.un@gmail.com guinebissauonu@gmail.com pmny@mission.gov.gy mphonu.newyork@diplomatie.ht ny.honduras@hnun.org hungaryun.ny@mfa.gov.hu unmission@mfa.is india.newyorkpmi@mea.gov.in ptri@indonesiaun.org iranunny@mfa.gov.ir iraq.mission@iraqmission-un.com newyorkpmun@dfa.ie uninfo@newyork.mfa.gov.il info.italyun@esteri.it info.unmissionny@mfaft.gov.jm p-m-j@dn.mofa.go.jp missionun@jordanmissionun.com unkazmission@gmail.com info@kenyaun.org kimission.newyork@mfa.gov.ki kuwait@kuwaitmissionun.org kyrgyzstan.un.ny@mfa.gov.kg lao.pr.ny@gmail.com mission.un-ny@mfa.gov.lv contact@lebanonun.org lesothonewyork@gmail.com liberiamission@pmun.gov.lr mission@libya-un.gov.ly newyork@llv.li lithuaniaun@gmail.com newyork.rp@mae.etat.lu repermad.ny@gmail.com malawinewyork@aol.com malawiu@aol.com mwnewyorkun@kln.gov.my info@maldivesmission.com miperma@malionu.com malta-un.newyork@gov.mt marshallislands@rmiunmission.org mauritaniamission@gmail.com mauritiusmissionnyc@gmail.com onuusr1@sre.gob.mx fsmun@fsmgov.org monaco.un@gmail.com mongolianmission@twcmetrobiz.com unnewyork.montenegro@gmail.com morocco.un@maec.gov.ma mozambique.unmission@gmail.com myanmarmission@verizon.net info@namibiaunmission.org nauru@un.int nepalmissionusa@gmail.com nyv@minbuza.nl nzpmun@gmail.com nicaraguaunny@yahoo.com nigermission@ymail.com permny@nigeriaunmission.org newyork@mfa.gov.mk delun@mfa.no oman@un.int pakistan@pakun.org mission@palauun.org emb@panama-un.org pngun@pngmission.org paraguay.un@mre.gov.py onuper@unperu.org newyork.pm@nypm.org newyork.pm@dfa.gov.ph poland.un@msz.gov.pl portugal.nu@mne.pt pmun@mofa.gov.qa korea.un@mofa.go.kr unmoldova@mfa.gov.md newyork-onu@mae.ro press@russiaun.ru ambanewyork@minaffet.gov.rw ambanewyork@gmail.com sknmission@aol.com info@stluciamission.org svgmission@gmail.com ambassadorassistantsvg@gmail.com samoa@samoanymission.ws sanmarinoun@gmail.com rdstppmun@gmail.com correspondence@ksamission-gov.net senegal.mission@yahoo.fr info@serbiamissionun.org pr.office@serbiamissionun.org seychellesmissionun@gmail.com seychellesmission@sycun.org sierraleone@pmun.net singaporeun@outlook.com un.newyork@mzv.sk slomission.newyork@gov.si simun@solomons.com somalia@unmission.gov.so pmun.newyork@dirco.gov.za info@rssun-nyc.org rep.nuevayorkonu@maec.es prun.newyork@mfa.gov.lk mail@slmission.com sudan@sudanmission.org suriname_un@proton.me representationen.new-york@gov.se newyork.un@eda.admin.ch syrianmission-ny@sar-un.org tajikistanunmission@gmail.com thaimission.ny@gmail.com timorleste.unmission@gmail.com togo.mission@togounmission.org tongaunmission@gmail.com pmun-ny@trinbago.org tunisia@un.int tunisiamission@usa.com tr-delegation.newyork@mfa.gov.tr turkmenistan.un@mfa.gov.tm tuvalu.unmission@gov.tv admin@ugandaunny.com uno_us@mfa.gov.ua nyunprm@mofaic.gov.ae nyunprm@uaeun.org ukmissionny@gmail.com tanzania.un@nje.go.tz usun.newyork@state.gov urudeleg@mrree.gub.uy uzbekistan.un@gmail.com vanunmis@aol.com misionvenezuelaonu@gmail.com info@vietnam-un.org yemenmissionny@gmail.com un@grz.gov.zm info@zambiamissionun.com zimnewyork@gmail.com office@holyseemission.org admin@palestinemissionun.org aumission_ny@yahoo.com ny.un@las.int aalco@un.int cari.per.obs.un@gmail.com ccampos@sgsica-ny.org newyork@commonwealth.int gccny@gccsg.org ceeaceccasom@gmail.com kjawara-njai@ecowas.int ecowasmission.ny@gmail.com bfaedda@eplo.int delegation-new-york@eeas.europa.eu amparo.morales@filac.org jonathan.granoff@iaca.int dijana.duric@iaca.int un@iccwbo.org nyoffice@interpol.int newyork@idlo.int unobserver@idea.int reper.new-york@francophonie.org nyoffice@irena.org iucn@un.int internationalyouthorganization@un.int uncontact@oecd.org oic.un.ny@gmail.com pam.unny@pam.int srao@ppdsec.org rgarvey@ppdsec.org south@southcentre.int nyinfo@upeace.org ny-office@ipu.org newyork@icrc.org newyork.delegation@ifrc.org ioc-unobserver@olympic.org un.mission.ny@orderofmalta.int faolon-director@fao.org iaeany@un.org liaisonofficeny@icc-cpi.int ifad.ny@ifad.org newyork@ilo.org rpowell@imf.org jlammens@imf.org unofficeny@iom.int seaun@un.org itlos@itlos.org newyork@unesco.org office.newyork@unido.org whonewyork@who.int newyork.office@wipo.int ola.zahran@wipo.int lpaterson@wmo.int laura.paterson@un.org Emails of embassies to and from Palestine via this page. aeoalg@caramail.org alembac@ucomgh.com alestine@intnet.dj aliman@icon.co.zw ambpal@eunet.rs ambpal@eunet.yu auemb@mofa-gov.ps austrep@palnet.com bremb@mofa-gov.ps chinaemb_ps@mfa.gov.cn clemb@mofa-gov.ps cyprusoffice@palnet.com del.palestine@wanadoo.fr deleg.palestinienne@beon.be elian@freemail.hu em.alasad_asad@hotmail.com embagoda.palestine@mad.servicom.es embassy@palestineindia.com embassyofpalestine.portugal@gmail.com embassyofpalestine@gmail.com embpalnic@turbonett.com.in empaltr@gmail.com eosopmet@omantel.net.com falastin@hellasnet.gr fiemb@mofa-gov.ps gdpalestine@swissonline.ch info@gdp.ie info@plo.swieden.org iqemb@mofa-gov.ps jerusalem@mianet.com.ar jerusalem@telesat.com.co jorrep@palnet.com kwemb@mofa-gov.ps lbemb@mofa-gov.ps maemb@mofa-gov.ps ngemb@mofa-gov.ps pal.damas@gmail.com pal_embassy@yahoo.com palango@netangola.com palastinelo@hotmail.com palemb.no@outlook.com palemb1@yemen.net palembassy_ukraine@hotmail.com palembs@qatar.net.qa palembtn@yahoo.com palestcz@mbox.vol.cz palestin@spidernet.com palestine@dsi.net.pk palestine@paltsts-jp.com palestine_bel_emb@hotmail.com palestine_emb_abuja@yahoo.com palestine_emb_mozambique@yahoo.com palestinead@hotmail.com palestinebg@yahoo.com palestinegd@gmail.com palestinekorea@hotmail.com pgd@planet.nl plemb@mofa-gov.ps plo@neda.net plomission1@aol.com plosrilanka@hotmail.com ramallah@embassy.mzv.cz repkon@ramdk.org roem@mofa.ps roi_gaza@mtcgaza.com saemb@mofa-gov.ps sanomat.ram@formin.fi sdemb@mofa-gov.ps sifmagaz@palnet.com skemb@mofa-gov.ps snemb@mofa-gov.ps vnemb@mofa.pna.ps zaemb@mofa-gov.ps zmemb@mofa-gov.ps Urge Governments to Invoke the Genocide Convention to Stop the War on Gaza https://worldbeyondwar.org/gaza-genocide/
    WORLDBEYONDWAR.ORG
    GENOCIDE - World BEYOND War
    Let's use the law to stop the killing in Gaza. #WorldBEYONDWar
    2 Comments 0 Shares 30651 Views
  • Slovakia will not be entering into any international pandemic agreements with WHO, Prime Minister says
    Rhoda WilsonNovember 25, 2023
    During a SMER party conference, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico declared that his government will not sign the World Health Organisation’s Pandemic Treaty and SMER Members of Parliament will not ratify in parliament the Pandemic Treaty with the WHO because it is a project of greedy pharmaceutical companies.

    Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

    Robert Fico was appointed as Slovakia’s Prime Minister for the fourth time on 25 October 2023 after his SMER – Slovenská Sociálna Demokracia (“SMER”) party won the election on 30 September and formed a coalition with the centre-left HLAS – Sociálna Demokracia (“HLAS”) and nationalist Slovenská Národná Strana (“SNS”) parties.

    A week ago, during an hour-long speech at the SMER party conference, of which he is chairman, Prime Minister Fico stated that he will not support strengthening the powers of the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) at the expense of sovereign states in the fight against pandemics. “Only insane pharmaceutical companies could come up with such nonsense,” he told the more than 400 guests, ambassadors, delegates and party members present.

    His speech is on YouTube in Slovak. There is no autogenerated translation available so we turn to alternative sources for translations into English. Door to Freedom has published the clip below from Fico’s speech with English subtitles.

    Door to Freedom: Slovakia – Will not sign the WHO amendments,
    23 November 2023 (3 mins)
    Writing about his speech alternative media outlet InfoVojna wrote (Czech to English translation using Google Translate):

    [The Pandemic Treaty] would transfer health powers in times of a pandemic from the national ministries of health of the signatory countries to the World Health Organisation. The WHO would then acquire draconian decision-making powers, which the signatory countries would have to follow, not only in the area of ​​the obligation to purchase vaccines and medicines ordered by the WHO, but it could also happen with compulsory vaccinations ordered by this multinational organisation. And it was Robert Fico who unequivocally rejected this and declared that SMER MPs would not raise their hands for such a proposal.

    Fico called the entire agreement with the WHO a plan of greedy pharmaceutical companies, which began to worry about their business, when it now appears that many countries of the world are ceasing to purchase vaccines, cancelling vaccination mandates and the entire business of the pharmaceutical companies is going down the drain. The Pandemic Treaty is supposed to change this and ensure that, through the WHO, the collection of vaccines will be mandated and authoritatively prescribed to all member countries that sign the Pandemic Treaty and then ratify in the parliaments.

    Robert Fico declared at the ceremonial assembly at Bratislava Castle that Slovakia under his government will not sign the Pandemic Agreement with the WHO, because it is a project of greedy pharmaceutical companies, InfoVojna, 20 November 2023none
    Martin Demirov who describes himself as someone who likes to “post translations of censored press articles and search for various interesting facts” has written about Fico’s speech in a post on Twitter. His post is in Polish, which we’ve reproduced below in English using the translation generated by Twitter.

    Fico Delivered a Speech at the Party Congress “The Previous Government Killed 20,000 People During Covid!”

    By Martin Demirov

    Fico outlined his priorities: If they arrested me, change would not be possible.

    One of the longest-existing parties, which will celebrate its 25th anniversary next year, held its annual congress.

    SMER won the elections in September, and party chairman Robert Fico immediately reminded more than 400 guests, ambassadors, delegates and party members not to be so serious. “For God’s sake, we won.” In his introductory speech, he presented a vision of change for the coming year. Remembering the “covid madness” and the need to change the law protecting criminal groups associated with the previous government, he did not hide his joy at reuniting with the HLAS party.

    In the first half of his speech, Fico criticised the former government and its leadership (for covid madness, for warmongering), in the second half he talked about the party’s goals, and less than two hours later he ended the speech with the words: “we are here, we move on, they did not break us.”

    According to party vice president Juraj Blanar, Fico’s leadership is important for SMER. Long live the Slovak Republic,” he concluded his speech. What was the direction of change?

    The guests included representatives of Bulgaria, ambassadors of Great Britain, China, the United States of America, as well as Cuba, the Czech Republic and Hungary.

    The Polish ambassador also confirmed his presence. The guests also included the president of the Pensioners’ Union, MichaÅ‚ Kocjan, the president of the Association of Slovak Towns and Villages, Józef Bożek, and the president of the Association of Anti-fascist Fighters, Viliam Longauer. Representatives of employers were also present.

    Among the Ministers present were Defence Minister Robert Kalinak, Finance Minister Ladislav Kamenicki and Agriculture Minister Ryszard Takacz. Zuzana Plewikova, deputy chairman of the party and member of the youth organisation, also attended the meeting.

    Thanks to over 20 years of experience, Fico knows how to energise his people and focus on proven electoral topics, thanks to which, although he won electoral votes, he was among politicians leaning towards the alternative scene. “It’s a party convention, it’s not a cabinet meeting, so stop being so serious, we won the election, for God’s sake.”

    Blanard welcomed Fico, the national anthem was played and a minute of silence honoured the memory of the dead

    In his speech, he wanted to present a vision for the next year, but he didn’t get there until the second half of the speech. “We won the parliamentary elections for the fifth time,” he said.

    “We are absolutely the best, and I emphasise this a thousand times, political party in the history of modern Slovakia and we want to remain that way,” he said.

    We naturally reconnected with HLAS.

    At the beginning of his speech, he also touched on the illegal actions of the former government during the Covid-19 pandemic, praised the media alternative to the mainstream and attacked the previous government for repression and compulsory vaccinations. Four Media – Denník N, denník Sme, Markízu and Aktuality – did not receive accreditation. Since last week, they have also been unwanted guests in the government building.

    “Slovakia is talking more and more openly about the 20,000 victims of mismanagement in the country and the government’s senseless decisions,” continued the four-time Prime Minister. He wants to support the efforts of politicians who want to hold the previous government to account and has no plans to support the work of the World Health Organisation to the detriment of sovereign states when it comes to managing the fight against the pandemic. “Such nonsense could only have been invented by greedy pharmaceutical companies,” he said.

    He called SMER a “write-off” party after the 2020 elections, whose opponents were delighted that social democracy split into two groups when Peter Pellegrini left the party to gain the right to vote. “But it is natural that we met again to co-operate in the government. It is no coincidence that we kept emphasising before the early elections that the basis for forming a new government should be the merger of SMER and HLAS,” he said.

    “The shock of our opponents after SMER’s election victory and subsequent decisive steps to quickly form a government was so great that they created an atmosphere as if we had stolen the electoral victory and had to hand it over to the opposition liberal “progressive Slovakia,” he said. In addition to PS, he again criticised President Zuzana Caputova.

    In response to the suspension of membership in the European Socialist Party, Fico said he did not know why they intervened, because it was the same party as in the past. “SMER is not a pennant that turns wherever the wind blows,” he said, adding that Portugal was behind the suspension. Party membership has never served them well, and Fico only remembers a lot of criticism. “When did the party of European Socialists help us over the last 20 years? When? I don’t remember,” he added.

    Andrei Danko’s party, coalition partner SNS, was criticised abroad mainly for choosing a more radical path. Before the elections, SNS merged with three smaller far-right organisations, and several of its members were candidates for the Our Slovakia People’s Party, whose leader, Marian Kotleba, was convicted of extremism and also lost his seat.

    Robert Fico blamed the politicians who led Slovakia in the last parliamentary term for the state of the country it is in. “We were not destroyed because we had a different opinion about covid, we were not destroyed because we had a different opinion about Ukraine and we were not destroyed because of an attempt to arrest us for political activities,” he said.

    “I don’t know if there is an opposition politician in the EU who has been accused four times in three years for his political views. Not because of corruption, but because of his political views,” he told foreign guests. Fico, along with Tibor Gashpar and Robert Kalinak, were accused by the previous authorities of many “crimes.”

    “I was lucky that I didn’t go to prison, because if they had put me in jail for my political views after two press conferences where we told the truth, neither you nor I would be sitting here today because the party would have been destroyed,” he said.

    Fico also touched on the presidential and European elections. “The party’s vice-chairman Lubosz Blaha also expressed interest in the elections, the European Parliament is certainly waiting for you, Lubosz,” Fico said. Recently, the opposition wanted to fire him for hanging a portrait of revolutionary Che Guevara instead of a portrait of President Zuzana Caputova after taking over as deputy speaker of Parliament, but the coalition blocked the session. A few days ago, he also published his book “CHE”

    In addition, he also talked about the need for changes in the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the need for changes in the special prosecutor’s office. He called, among other things, for an urgent change to the whistle-blower law, which currently protects investigators around Jan Churilla and Lubomir Danek.

    The party’s goal is to stabilise the country and finances and win again. Later, Fico also reached the main political goals of the SMER party. In particular, the most important of them is a successful government that will end in 2027 with victory in the parliamentary elections. In his speech, he outlined what the government should focus on in the coming months. “I don’t see a successful government as a set of numbers, indicators or charts. We will only be successful in 2027 when people realise that it is better, more peaceful and safer,” he said.

    Fico stressed the need for political stability and efforts to minimise conflicts within the coalition. He also called for quick policy solutions to show interest in “stabilising disrupted public finances at a reasonable and sustainable pace.” Sufficient financial reserves must also be created to compensate for high energy prices, especially for households.

    He also wants to reduce the impact of high interest rates on mortgages and subsequent refinancing in 2023, while announcing direct mortgage assistance in 2024. He also confirmed the aim of creating the financial conditions for the payment of the full 13th pension. He also stressed the need to have all the necessary regulatory tools and resources to intervene in the event of significant fluctuations in food prices.

    According to Fico, the government should also immediately decide how to transfer as many European Funds as possible to regions, cities and municipalities and simplify the administrative burden of obtaining them as much as possible. He also called for changes to regulations governing licensing procedures and procurement conditions to be approved “in record time.” According to the Prime Minister, the best proposal for the Education System for practical purposes should also be agreed upon so that the changes come into force at the beginning of the 2024/2025 school year.

    He also confirmed that the government had started negotiations on new foreign investments. “We have something to consider, we are currently reviewing projects. It is always a question of the scale of state aid,” he said. He also considers it his duty to support every Slovak company that wants to operate in foreign markets.

    Within two to three months, the coalition will have to develop a mechanism and regulations to shorten the period during which legal migrants with the qualifications necessary to run a business in Slovakia will be able to obtain all permits. He said the proposed measures are the minimum the government must take. He emphasised that all actions should be undertaken within the framework of broad social dialogue. He also confirmed that talks on the government’s withdrawal will take place in Trenčín in December and in Prešov at the end of January. In addition to Fico, the party’s vice presidents, Lubosz Blaha, Ladislav Kamienicki and Ryszard Takacz, also appeared.


    The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help..

    Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

    .

    Can you please help power The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful journalism for the years to come…

    Your Government & Big Tech organisations
    such as Google, Facebook, Twitter & PayPal
    are trying to silence & shut down The Expose.

    So we need your help to ensure
    we can continue to bring you the
    facts the mainstream refuse to…

    We’re not funded by the Government
    to publish lies & propaganda on their
    behalf like the mainstream media.

    Instead, we rely solely on our support. So
    please support us in our efforts to bring you
    honest, reliable, investigative journalism
    today. It’s secure, quick and easy…

    Just choose your preferred method
    to show your support belowV support

    James Rickards: When the next financial crisis hits the elites are planning to freeze the financial system, worldwide
    US, China, Israel and others are developing AI killer drones; this poses significant risks
    The latest trends in healthcare and other observations
    DEADLY SECRETS: Unvaccinated account for just 5% of COVID-19 Deaths since beginning of 2023 but 3 & 4x Vaccinated account for Shocking 95%


    Slovakia will not be entering into any international pandemic agreements with WHO, Prime Minister says
    During a SMER party conference, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico declared that his government will not sign the World Health Organisation’s Pandemic Treaty and SMER Members of Parliament will not ratify in parliament the Pandemic Treaty with the WHO because it is a project of greedy pharmaceutical companies...
    https://expose-news.com/2023/11/25/slovakia-will-not-be-entering-into/
    Slovakia will not be entering into any international pandemic agreements with WHO, Prime Minister says Rhoda WilsonNovember 25, 2023 During a SMER party conference, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico declared that his government will not sign the World Health Organisation’s Pandemic Treaty and SMER Members of Parliament will not ratify in parliament the Pandemic Treaty with the WHO because it is a project of greedy pharmaceutical companies. Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox… Robert Fico was appointed as Slovakia’s Prime Minister for the fourth time on 25 October 2023 after his SMER – Slovenská Sociálna Demokracia (“SMER”) party won the election on 30 September and formed a coalition with the centre-left HLAS – Sociálna Demokracia (“HLAS”) and nationalist Slovenská Národná Strana (“SNS”) parties. A week ago, during an hour-long speech at the SMER party conference, of which he is chairman, Prime Minister Fico stated that he will not support strengthening the powers of the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) at the expense of sovereign states in the fight against pandemics. “Only insane pharmaceutical companies could come up with such nonsense,” he told the more than 400 guests, ambassadors, delegates and party members present. His speech is on YouTube in Slovak. There is no autogenerated translation available so we turn to alternative sources for translations into English. Door to Freedom has published the clip below from Fico’s speech with English subtitles. Door to Freedom: Slovakia – Will not sign the WHO amendments, 23 November 2023 (3 mins) Writing about his speech alternative media outlet InfoVojna wrote (Czech to English translation using Google Translate): [The Pandemic Treaty] would transfer health powers in times of a pandemic from the national ministries of health of the signatory countries to the World Health Organisation. The WHO would then acquire draconian decision-making powers, which the signatory countries would have to follow, not only in the area of ​​the obligation to purchase vaccines and medicines ordered by the WHO, but it could also happen with compulsory vaccinations ordered by this multinational organisation. And it was Robert Fico who unequivocally rejected this and declared that SMER MPs would not raise their hands for such a proposal. Fico called the entire agreement with the WHO a plan of greedy pharmaceutical companies, which began to worry about their business, when it now appears that many countries of the world are ceasing to purchase vaccines, cancelling vaccination mandates and the entire business of the pharmaceutical companies is going down the drain. The Pandemic Treaty is supposed to change this and ensure that, through the WHO, the collection of vaccines will be mandated and authoritatively prescribed to all member countries that sign the Pandemic Treaty and then ratify in the parliaments. Robert Fico declared at the ceremonial assembly at Bratislava Castle that Slovakia under his government will not sign the Pandemic Agreement with the WHO, because it is a project of greedy pharmaceutical companies, InfoVojna, 20 November 2023none Martin Demirov who describes himself as someone who likes to “post translations of censored press articles and search for various interesting facts” has written about Fico’s speech in a post on Twitter. His post is in Polish, which we’ve reproduced below in English using the translation generated by Twitter. Fico Delivered a Speech at the Party Congress “The Previous Government Killed 20,000 People During Covid!” By Martin Demirov Fico outlined his priorities: If they arrested me, change would not be possible. One of the longest-existing parties, which will celebrate its 25th anniversary next year, held its annual congress. SMER won the elections in September, and party chairman Robert Fico immediately reminded more than 400 guests, ambassadors, delegates and party members not to be so serious. “For God’s sake, we won.” In his introductory speech, he presented a vision of change for the coming year. Remembering the “covid madness” and the need to change the law protecting criminal groups associated with the previous government, he did not hide his joy at reuniting with the HLAS party. In the first half of his speech, Fico criticised the former government and its leadership (for covid madness, for warmongering), in the second half he talked about the party’s goals, and less than two hours later he ended the speech with the words: “we are here, we move on, they did not break us.” According to party vice president Juraj Blanar, Fico’s leadership is important for SMER. Long live the Slovak Republic,” he concluded his speech. What was the direction of change? The guests included representatives of Bulgaria, ambassadors of Great Britain, China, the United States of America, as well as Cuba, the Czech Republic and Hungary. The Polish ambassador also confirmed his presence. The guests also included the president of the Pensioners’ Union, MichaÅ‚ Kocjan, the president of the Association of Slovak Towns and Villages, Józef Bożek, and the president of the Association of Anti-fascist Fighters, Viliam Longauer. Representatives of employers were also present. Among the Ministers present were Defence Minister Robert Kalinak, Finance Minister Ladislav Kamenicki and Agriculture Minister Ryszard Takacz. Zuzana Plewikova, deputy chairman of the party and member of the youth organisation, also attended the meeting. Thanks to over 20 years of experience, Fico knows how to energise his people and focus on proven electoral topics, thanks to which, although he won electoral votes, he was among politicians leaning towards the alternative scene. “It’s a party convention, it’s not a cabinet meeting, so stop being so serious, we won the election, for God’s sake.” Blanard welcomed Fico, the national anthem was played and a minute of silence honoured the memory of the dead In his speech, he wanted to present a vision for the next year, but he didn’t get there until the second half of the speech. “We won the parliamentary elections for the fifth time,” he said. “We are absolutely the best, and I emphasise this a thousand times, political party in the history of modern Slovakia and we want to remain that way,” he said. We naturally reconnected with HLAS. At the beginning of his speech, he also touched on the illegal actions of the former government during the Covid-19 pandemic, praised the media alternative to the mainstream and attacked the previous government for repression and compulsory vaccinations. Four Media – Denník N, denník Sme, Markízu and Aktuality – did not receive accreditation. Since last week, they have also been unwanted guests in the government building. “Slovakia is talking more and more openly about the 20,000 victims of mismanagement in the country and the government’s senseless decisions,” continued the four-time Prime Minister. He wants to support the efforts of politicians who want to hold the previous government to account and has no plans to support the work of the World Health Organisation to the detriment of sovereign states when it comes to managing the fight against the pandemic. “Such nonsense could only have been invented by greedy pharmaceutical companies,” he said. He called SMER a “write-off” party after the 2020 elections, whose opponents were delighted that social democracy split into two groups when Peter Pellegrini left the party to gain the right to vote. “But it is natural that we met again to co-operate in the government. It is no coincidence that we kept emphasising before the early elections that the basis for forming a new government should be the merger of SMER and HLAS,” he said. “The shock of our opponents after SMER’s election victory and subsequent decisive steps to quickly form a government was so great that they created an atmosphere as if we had stolen the electoral victory and had to hand it over to the opposition liberal “progressive Slovakia,” he said. In addition to PS, he again criticised President Zuzana Caputova. In response to the suspension of membership in the European Socialist Party, Fico said he did not know why they intervened, because it was the same party as in the past. “SMER is not a pennant that turns wherever the wind blows,” he said, adding that Portugal was behind the suspension. Party membership has never served them well, and Fico only remembers a lot of criticism. “When did the party of European Socialists help us over the last 20 years? When? I don’t remember,” he added. Andrei Danko’s party, coalition partner SNS, was criticised abroad mainly for choosing a more radical path. Before the elections, SNS merged with three smaller far-right organisations, and several of its members were candidates for the Our Slovakia People’s Party, whose leader, Marian Kotleba, was convicted of extremism and also lost his seat. Robert Fico blamed the politicians who led Slovakia in the last parliamentary term for the state of the country it is in. “We were not destroyed because we had a different opinion about covid, we were not destroyed because we had a different opinion about Ukraine and we were not destroyed because of an attempt to arrest us for political activities,” he said. “I don’t know if there is an opposition politician in the EU who has been accused four times in three years for his political views. Not because of corruption, but because of his political views,” he told foreign guests. Fico, along with Tibor Gashpar and Robert Kalinak, were accused by the previous authorities of many “crimes.” “I was lucky that I didn’t go to prison, because if they had put me in jail for my political views after two press conferences where we told the truth, neither you nor I would be sitting here today because the party would have been destroyed,” he said. Fico also touched on the presidential and European elections. “The party’s vice-chairman Lubosz Blaha also expressed interest in the elections, the European Parliament is certainly waiting for you, Lubosz,” Fico said. Recently, the opposition wanted to fire him for hanging a portrait of revolutionary Che Guevara instead of a portrait of President Zuzana Caputova after taking over as deputy speaker of Parliament, but the coalition blocked the session. A few days ago, he also published his book “CHE” In addition, he also talked about the need for changes in the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the need for changes in the special prosecutor’s office. He called, among other things, for an urgent change to the whistle-blower law, which currently protects investigators around Jan Churilla and Lubomir Danek. The party’s goal is to stabilise the country and finances and win again. Later, Fico also reached the main political goals of the SMER party. In particular, the most important of them is a successful government that will end in 2027 with victory in the parliamentary elections. In his speech, he outlined what the government should focus on in the coming months. “I don’t see a successful government as a set of numbers, indicators or charts. We will only be successful in 2027 when people realise that it is better, more peaceful and safer,” he said. Fico stressed the need for political stability and efforts to minimise conflicts within the coalition. He also called for quick policy solutions to show interest in “stabilising disrupted public finances at a reasonable and sustainable pace.” Sufficient financial reserves must also be created to compensate for high energy prices, especially for households. He also wants to reduce the impact of high interest rates on mortgages and subsequent refinancing in 2023, while announcing direct mortgage assistance in 2024. He also confirmed the aim of creating the financial conditions for the payment of the full 13th pension. He also stressed the need to have all the necessary regulatory tools and resources to intervene in the event of significant fluctuations in food prices. According to Fico, the government should also immediately decide how to transfer as many European Funds as possible to regions, cities and municipalities and simplify the administrative burden of obtaining them as much as possible. He also called for changes to regulations governing licensing procedures and procurement conditions to be approved “in record time.” According to the Prime Minister, the best proposal for the Education System for practical purposes should also be agreed upon so that the changes come into force at the beginning of the 2024/2025 school year. He also confirmed that the government had started negotiations on new foreign investments. “We have something to consider, we are currently reviewing projects. It is always a question of the scale of state aid,” he said. He also considers it his duty to support every Slovak company that wants to operate in foreign markets. Within two to three months, the coalition will have to develop a mechanism and regulations to shorten the period during which legal migrants with the qualifications necessary to run a business in Slovakia will be able to obtain all permits. He said the proposed measures are the minimum the government must take. He emphasised that all actions should be undertaken within the framework of broad social dialogue. He also confirmed that talks on the government’s withdrawal will take place in Trenčín in December and in Prešov at the end of January. In addition to Fico, the party’s vice presidents, Lubosz Blaha, Ladislav Kamienicki and Ryszard Takacz, also appeared. The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help.. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox… . Can you please help power The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful journalism for the years to come… Your Government & Big Tech organisations such as Google, Facebook, Twitter & PayPal are trying to silence & shut down The Expose. So we need your help to ensure we can continue to bring you the facts the mainstream refuse to… We’re not funded by the Government to publish lies & propaganda on their behalf like the mainstream media. Instead, we rely solely on our support. So please support us in our efforts to bring you honest, reliable, investigative journalism today. It’s secure, quick and easy… Just choose your preferred method to show your support belowV support James Rickards: When the next financial crisis hits the elites are planning to freeze the financial system, worldwide US, China, Israel and others are developing AI killer drones; this poses significant risks The latest trends in healthcare and other observations DEADLY SECRETS: Unvaccinated account for just 5% of COVID-19 Deaths since beginning of 2023 but 3 & 4x Vaccinated account for Shocking 95% Slovakia will not be entering into any international pandemic agreements with WHO, Prime Minister says During a SMER party conference, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico declared that his government will not sign the World Health Organisation’s Pandemic Treaty and SMER Members of Parliament will not ratify in parliament the Pandemic Treaty with the WHO because it is a project of greedy pharmaceutical companies... https://expose-news.com/2023/11/25/slovakia-will-not-be-entering-into/
    EXPOSE-NEWS.COM
    Slovakia will not be entering into any international pandemic agreements with WHO, Prime Minister says
    During a SMER party conference, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico declared that his government will not sign the World Health Organisation’s Pandemic Treaty and SMER Members of Parliament will n…
    1 Comments 0 Shares 19775 Views
  • Biden’s Legacy Should Be Forever Haunted by the Names of Gaza’s Dead Children
    Biden’s support for the terror bombing of Gaza continues his long history as a steadfast supporter of Israel’s greatest crimes.

    Jeremy Scahill November 14 2023, 12:24 p.m.
    KHAN YUNIS, GAZA - NOVEMBER 13: Palestinians including children are brought to Nasser Hospital for treatment aftermath of Israeli attack in Khan Yunis, Gaza on November 13, 2023. (Photo by Mustafa Hassona/Anadolu via Getty Images)
    As Israel intensified its attacks on Gaza last week, including strikes against multiple hospitals, and presided over a forced exodus of hundreds of thousands of civilians from their homes, President Joe Biden was asked about the chances of a Gaza ceasefire. “None,” Biden shot back. “No possibility.”

    With a death toll that has now surpassed 11,000 Palestinians, including nearly 5,000 children, the extent of Biden’s public divergence from his “great, great friend” Benjamin Netanyahu’s scorched-earth war of annihilation amounts to meekly worded suggestions of “humanitarian pauses.”

    On Friday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken remarked, “far too many Palestinians have been killed; far too many have suffered these past weeks, and we want to do everything possible to prevent harm to them and to maximize the assistance that gets to them.” These disingenuous platitudes melt into a puddle of blood when juxtaposed with the administration’s actions.

    The Biden administration has funneled weapons, intelligence support, and unwavering political backing for Israel’s public campaign to erase from the earth Gaza’s existence as a Palestinian territory. As Israeli settlers wage campaigns of terror against the Palestinians in the West Bank, the U.S. remained entrenched in its global isolation, voting last week against a U.N. resolution demanding an end to the illegal settlements. The resolution condemned illegal Israeli settlements, calling them “illegal and an obstacle to peace.” The resolution, which passed 145-7, called for “the immediate and complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.” Only five countries joined the U.S. and Israel in voting “no”: Canada, Hungary, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Nauru.

    As the capitals of major world cities have seen massive protests on a scale not registered since the 2003 Iraq invasion, Netanyahu has been on a U.S. media blitz, appearing on Sunday talk shows to cast the stakes of his war “to destroy Hamas” as akin to World War II. “Without it none of us have a future. And it’s not only our war, it’s your war too. It’s the battle of civilization against barbarism,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “And if we don’t win here, this scourge will pass. The Middle East will pass to other places. The Middle East will fall. Europe is next. You will be next.”

    Netanyahu has brazenly exploited the grief of Israeli citizens whose lives were torn apart on October 7 when Hamas launched a series of coordinated attacks inside Israel. Those raids resulted in the deaths of 846 civilians, 278 Israeli soldiers, and 44 police officers, according to the latest figures provided by Israel. Some family members of the victims, as well as relatives of the 240 hostages taken by Hamas and other militant groups — among them infants and the elderly — have emerged as some of the most vocal critics of Netanyahu’s government. A small number have spoken out against his attacks on Gaza, though their voices are largely drowned out by pro-war voices in Western media coverage.

    “I beg you, I beg also my government, and the pilots and soldiers, who may be called to go into Gaza. Don’t agree. Protect the area around the Gaza Strip, but don’t agree to go in and kill innocent people,” said Noy Katsman, whose older brother Hayim was killed on October 7 at the kibbutz he had lived on for a decade. Maoz Inon’s parents were also killed that day. “Today, Israel is repeating an old mistake it made many times in the last century. We must stop it,” Inon wrote. “Revenge is not going to bring my parents back to life. It is not going to bring back other Israelis and Palestinians killed either. It is going to do the opposite. It is going to cause more casualties. It is going to bring more death.”

    Over the past month, Biden has cast doubt on the extent of Palestinian civilian deaths, defended Netanyahu’s violent extremist agendas, and made clear that the U.S. position amounts to this: collectively punishing Palestinians for the actions of Hamas falls under the doctrine of “self-defense.” Biden has stood by Israel as government officials have openly described an agenda of ethnically cleansing Palestinians, proclaiming a “Gaza Nakba,” threatening to do to Beirut what Israel has done to Gaza, labeling hospitals and ambulances “legitimate military targets,” and accusing U.N. workers of being Hamas and journalists of being “accomplices in crimes against humanity.” More than 100 U.N. workers and at least 40 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza since October 7. Approximately one in 200 Palestinians have died in Gaza since the start of Israel’s attacks.

    National security adviser Jake Sullivan, when asked Sunday on CNN if Israel is abiding by the rules of war, replied, “I’m not going to sit here and play judge or jury on that question. What I’m going to do is state the principle of the United States on this issue, which is straight forward: Israel has a right, indeed a responsibility, to defend itself against a terrorist group.” The U.S. is simultaneously increasing the flow of weapons to Israel — and Biden proposed $14.5 billion in additional military assistance — while its senior national security official cannot state whether Israel is conducting operations in contravention of international law.

    Keenly aware of the growing opposition to Israel’s war at home and abroad, and even within his own administration, Biden and his advisers have sought to push a narrative that they are seeking to moderate Israel’s tactics. They make sure the U.S. press know that Biden had urged against a full-scale ground invasion, proposed limited pauses to the bombing, and expressed concerns about the humanitarian crisis for Palestinian civilians. On Monday, after days of relentless Israeli attacks on Gazan hospitals and desperate pleas from international doctors and health and aid organizations, Biden finally addressed the issue, but only after being directly asked. “Hospitals must be protected,” he said in response to a question from the press. “My hope and expectation is that there will be less intrusive action relative to hospitals.”

    The White House’s mounting effort to spin itself as being concerned about civilian deaths and doing all it can to urge Israel to avoid massacring civilians on an industrial scale is an effort to obfuscate the U.S. role as Israel’s central ally enabling this slaughter. It is a grotesque parlor game that only works if facts and history don’t matter. And in Biden’s case, that history is extensive.

    NEW YORK, UNITED STATES - 2023/11/09: Students, teachers, and pro-Palestinian allies march through Midtown Manhattan during a Student Walkout protest calling for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Since October 7, the Israeli army's bombardment of the Palestinian enclave, in retaliation for the Hamas attack on Israel that killed over 1,400 people, has seen thousands of buildings razed to the ground, more than 10,000 people killed and 1.4 million displaced whilst Gaza remains besieged. (Photo by Michael Nigro/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)
    Students, teachers, and Palestine solidarity allies call for a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel during a student walkout in Manhattan on Nov. 9, 2023.
    Photo: Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
    Support for Israel’s Wars

    For 50 years, Biden has been consistent in his support for Israel’s wars against the Palestinians. Time and again he has backed and facilitated campaigns of terror waged by a nuclear power against a people who have no state, no army, no air force, no navy, and an almost nonexistent civilian infrastructure. As Gaza burns in a smoldering pyre of death and destruction, 80-year-old Biden may be overseeing the final act in his devotion to Israel’s most extreme agenda. His legacy should be forever haunted by the names of the dead children of Gaza, thousands of whom have died in a matter of weeks under the hellfire of U.S.-manufactured weapons and support.

    Biden has been in public office longer than almost any U.S. politician in history. His career in the U.S. Senate began on the eve of the 1973 Arab–Israeli war when he traveled to meet Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir. “I sat across the desk for an hour as she flipped those maps up and down, chain smoking, telling me about the [1967] Six Day War,” Biden said. He called it “one of the most consequential meetings I’ve ever had in my life.” But, as has been in the case with more than a few of Biden’s vignettes about his central role in historical events, in his numerous and varied retelling of that story, he seems to have exaggerated how important that meeting was to Meir and the Israelis.


    Related

    Joe Biden: Career Defender of Israel’s Crimes and Impunity

    Over the ensuing decades and up to the current horrors being inflicted on the people of Gaza, Biden has operated as one of the staunchest promoters of Israel’s colonialist agenda, often defending Israel’s disproportionate use of force, collective punishment, and at times outright massacres. “Were there not an Israel, the United States would have to invent an Israel to protect her interests in the region,” Biden said on the Senate floor in 1986. He repeated that same line earlier this year during a July visit by Israeli President Isaac Herzog to Washington. During Biden’s trip to Israel last month, as Israel intensified its attacks on Gaza and the civilian death toll skyrocketed, he told Netanyahu and his war cabinet, “I don’t believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist.”

    Building support for Israel’s military might and funneling money and political support to Israel has been a central component of Biden’s career-long foreign policy agenda. He is fond of calling himself “Israel’s best Catholic friend.” In 2016, during a visit to Israel, Netanyahu heaped praise on Biden, then vice president. “The people of Israel consider the Biden family part of our family,” he said. “I want to thank you personally for your, for our personal friendship of over 30 years. We’ve known each other a long time. We’ve gone through many trials and tribulations. And we have an enduring bond that represents the enduring bond between our people.”

    Most Read

    There is one story from these decades of Biden’s dedication to Israel that seems eerily prescient given the bloodbath playing out in Gaza right now. It took place early in the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. In public, Biden was neither a cheerleader for the invasion nor an opponent. But in a private meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with Prime Minister Menachem Begin in June 1982, Biden’s support for the brutality of the invasion appeared to outstrip even that of the Israeli government.

    As the Israeli prime minister was grilled in the Senate over Israel’s disproportionate use of force, including the targeting of civilians with cluster bomb munitions, Biden, in Begin’s words, “rose and delivered a very impassioned speech” defending the invasion. Upon his return to Israel, Begin told Israeli reporters he was shocked when Biden “said he would go even further than Israel, adding that he’d forcefully fend off anyone who sought to invade his country, even if that meant killing women or children.” Begin said, “I disassociated myself from these remarks,” adding, “I said to him: No, sir; attention must be paid. According to our values, it is forbidden to hurt women and children, even in war. Sometimes there are casualties among the civilian population as well. But it is forbidden to aspire to this. This is a yardstick of human civilization, not to hurt civilians.”

    Coming from Begin, the comments were striking, because he had been notorious as a leader of the Irgun, a militant group that carried out some of the worst acts of ethnic cleansing accompanying the creation of the state of Israel, including the 1948 Deir Yassin massacre. The details of his exchange with Biden about Lebanon did not receive attention in the U.S. press. Instead, the New York Times focused on what it termed the “bitterest exchange” between Biden and Begin over the issue of Israeli settlements, which Biden opposed because, he said, it was hurting Israel’s reputation in the U.S. “He hinted — more than hinted — that if we continue with this policy, it is possible that he will propose cutting our financial aid,” Begin alleged.

    Over the years, Biden has referenced this confrontation when explaining his opposition to the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank as a disagreement among very good friends. Biden has long argued that these expansions undermine prospects for a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, though his rhetoric has often been contradicted by his actions, as was the case with his opposition to last week’s U.N. vote labeling the settlements illegal.

    US Vice President Joe Biden speaks at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee?s (AIPAC) annual policy conference at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, DC, May 5, 2009. AFP PHOTO / Saul LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)
    U.S. Vice President Joe Biden speaks at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s annual policy conference in Washington, D.C., on May 5, 2009.
    Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images
    “Innocents Got Killed”

    In the 1990s, as Biden solidified his reputation as a top foreign policy senator, he often helped shepherd legislation and funding packages to Israel that human rights groups and international aid organizations said would hinder efforts at brokering lasting peace and further entrench the state of apartheid imposed on millions of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

    Biden was an early proponent of moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, a move that finally took place in 2018 under the Trump administration. In 1995, Biden helped pass a Senate resolution demanding that the embassy be moved by May of that year. Despite objections that it would harm ongoing Israeli–Palestinian peace talks by deciding a key issue by fiat, Biden said the move would send a positive signal to the region. “To do less would play into the hands of those who would do their hardest to deny Israel the full attributes of statehood,” Biden said.

    In 2001, following rare public criticism from the Bush administration directed at Israel’s policy of assassinating suspected Palestinian militants, Biden defended Israel’s right to carry out such killings and even rebuked President George W. Bush for criticizing them. “My view has always been that disagreements between Israel and the United States, those differences should be aired privately, not publicly,” Biden said. He also defended the legality of targeted killings, which at the time were considered highly questionable by legal experts for occurring outside a declared conflict. “I don’t believe this is a policy of assassinations,” Biden said, referring to the targeting of suspected Hamas members. “There is in effect a declared war, a declaration by an organization that has said its goal is to do as much as it can to kill Israeli civilians.”

    In July 2006, Israel was bombing both Gaza and southern Lebanon, with Biden cheering it on. The Israelis, Biden said on MSNBC, “have in both cases, both in Gaza and in southern Lebanon, done the right thing.” In the face of international condemnations of Israel’s brutality in its attacks, Biden defended Israel. “I find it fascinating — people talk about, ‘Has Israel gone too far?’ No one talks about whether Israel’s justified in the first place,” he said on “Meet the Press.” Unless critics of Israel recognize that it was a victim of terrorism, he said, “I think it’s awful — I think it’s a secondary question whether Israel’s gone too far.”

    Biden said his “only criticism of the Israelis is they’re not that great at public relations.” He compared Israel’s attacks on Gaza and Lebanon to the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks. “It’s a little bit like the same thing we had when we went into Afghanistan,” Biden said at a press conference in July 2006. “We went into Afghanistan, remember, we took out a wedding party by accident? Remember, we took out — with these very sophisticated missiles we had, we accidentally killed some citizens? Was ever a war more justified than us going into Afghanistan? I can’t think of any war since World War II more justified. Yet innocents got killed in us trying to protect America’s interests.” By August 2006, more than 1,000 people were killed in Israel’s war against Lebanon, and UNICEF estimated that 30 percent of the casualties were children.

    During his time as vice president, Biden often played the role of placating his friend Netanyahu who famously loathed President Barack Obama. During those eight years, Obama largely maintained long-standing U.S. posture of showering Israel with weapons and other aid despite repeated political spats with Netanyahu, most prominently over Iran and Israeli settlements. During numerous episodes when Israel unleashed gratuitous violence, drawing international condemnation, Biden served as Israel’s most prominent American defender.

    In the early summer of 2010, a group of mostly Turkish activists attempted to deliver a flotilla of humanitarian aid to the besieged Gaza Strip. The attempt was interdicted by the Israeli military, which launched a raid on one ship that resulted in the deaths of nine people, including one American citizen. The raid triggered an international outcry and led to a diplomatic crisis between Israel and Turkey, while drawing further attention to the civilian impact of the ongoing Israeli siege of Gaza.

    Biden took the lead in defending the raid to the U.S. public. In an interview with PBS, he described the raid as “legitimate” and argued that the flotilla organizers could have disembarked elsewhere before transferring the aid to Gaza. “So what’s the big deal here? What’s the big deal of insisting it go straight to Gaza?” Biden asked about the humanitarian mission. “Well, it’s legitimate for Israel to say, ‘I don’t know what’s on that ship. These guys are dropping eight — 3,000 rockets on my people.’” No weapons were ever found on the ship, only humanitarian supplies. Amid the fury that the raid generated and the muted response from Obama, Biden’s remarks were welcomed by AIPAC spokesperson Josh Block, who said at the time, “We appreciate the many strong statements of support for Israel from members of Congress and the vice president today.”

    After the 2014 Gaza war — a seven-week Israeli ground invasion that killed more than 2,000 Palestinians (two-thirds of them civilians) and caused widespread displacement and destruction of civilian infrastructure — Biden boasted of how the Obama administration had “steadfastly stood before the world and defended Israel’s right to defend itself,” declaring, “We have an obligation to match the steel and the spine of the people of Israel with an ironclad, nonnegotiable commitment to Israel’s physical security.”

    In May 2021, a few months into Biden’s presidency, Israel intensified its ethnic-cleansing campaign against Palestinians in East Jerusalem, forcibly evicting people from their homes to hand them over to Israeli settlers. The incendiary situation was then exacerbated during a Ramadan siege by Israeli forces at one of the holiest sites in Islam, Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. In response, Hamas began launching rockets into Israel. Netanyahu retaliated by ordering a massive 11-day bombing campaign against Gaza, striking residential buildings, media outlets, hospitals, and a refugee camp.

    As the civilian death toll among Palestinians began to rise, Ned Price, the State Department spokesperson, characterized the operation as Israel exercising its right to self-defense. When he was then asked whether the principle of self-defense also applied to Palestinians, he struggled to answer before saying, “Broadly speaking, we believe in the concept of self-defense. We believe it applies to any state.” When Matt Lee of The Associated Press pointed out that Palestinians do not have a state, Price said, “I’m not in a position to debate the legalities from up here.”

    More than 250 Palestinians died during Israel’s siege, including dozens of children. More than 70,000 Palestinians were displaced. Throughout the bombing, the U.S. staunchly defended Israel’s disproportionate attacks, with Biden declaring on May 16, “there has not been a significant overreaction” from Israel before pivoting to condemn Hamas’s firing of rockets into civilian areas of Israel.

    GAZA CITY, GAZA - NOVEMBER 8: Palestinians who left their houses and live at the Nassr hospital, are trying to feed their children during food shortages as the Israeli attacks continue in Gaza City, Gaza on November 8, 2023. (Photo by Abed Zagout/Anadolu via Getty Images)
    Displaced Palestinians at Nassr hospital try to feed their children during food shortages on Nov. 8, 2023.
    Photo: Abed Zagout/Anadolu via Getty Images
    Evidence of Genocidal Intent

    Following Hamas’s horrifying attacks on October 7, Biden and his administration have defended Israel’s mass bombardment of Gaza, and U.S. weapons shipments have been accelerated. Biden called his proposal for additional military support an “unprecedented commitment to Israel’s security that will sharpen Israel’s qualitative military edge,” saying, “We’re going to make sure other hostile actors in the region know that Israel is stronger than ever.”

    This crisis has undoubtedly solidified Biden’s legacy as one of the premiere American defenders of Israel’s crimes, including disproportionate attacks against an overwhelmingly defenseless civilian population, in the history of U.S. politics.

    In an alternate reality — one where the rule of law is applied equally to all states — Israeli leaders would likely face war crimes charges for the razing of Gaza. Leading genocide scholars and international law experts have cited the statements of Israeli officials about the aims of their operations in Gaza as potential evidence of “genocidal intent.” A coalition of international lawyers representing Palestinian rights groups has already petitioned the International Criminal Court to open a criminal inquiry and issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and other officials.

    Such attempts at accountability should not focus solely on Israeli leaders, according to some U.S. constitutional law organizations. The U.S. is Israel’s premiere bankroller and arms dealer, not to mention its political defender. There are several U.S. laws and treaties that prohibit support for, and failure to prevent, genocidal activities. Among these is the Genocide Convention Implementation Act, signed into law in 1988. Its sponsor? A senator named Joe Biden.


    Related

    Palestinians Sue Biden for Failing to Prevent Genocide in Gaza

    On Monday, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Palestinians in Gaza seeking to block the Biden administration from providing further military aid to Israel. The suit names Biden, Blinken, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. “They have continued to provide both military and political support for Israel’s unfolding genocidal campaign while imposing no red lines,” said Katherine Gallagher, one of the lawyers who filed the case. “The United States has a clear and binding obligation to prevent, not further, genocide. They have failed in meeting their legal and moral duty to use their considerable power to end this horror. They must do so.”

    It is unfathomable, given the current world order, that any meaningful legal accountability will be served on U.S. or Israeli leaders. But on a moral level, it is important to remember these legal efforts to confront the slaughter and the complicity of Biden and other Western leaders. The U.S.-enabled horrors of the past five weeks should remain a bloody, permanent stain on the fabric of Biden’s political career and legacy. Among the U.S. political elite, it will simply be noted as Biden doing his job.


    https://theintercept.com/2023/11/14/gaza-israel-genocide-biden-legacy/
    Biden’s Legacy Should Be Forever Haunted by the Names of Gaza’s Dead Children Biden’s support for the terror bombing of Gaza continues his long history as a steadfast supporter of Israel’s greatest crimes. Jeremy Scahill November 14 2023, 12:24 p.m. KHAN YUNIS, GAZA - NOVEMBER 13: Palestinians including children are brought to Nasser Hospital for treatment aftermath of Israeli attack in Khan Yunis, Gaza on November 13, 2023. (Photo by Mustafa Hassona/Anadolu via Getty Images) As Israel intensified its attacks on Gaza last week, including strikes against multiple hospitals, and presided over a forced exodus of hundreds of thousands of civilians from their homes, President Joe Biden was asked about the chances of a Gaza ceasefire. “None,” Biden shot back. “No possibility.” With a death toll that has now surpassed 11,000 Palestinians, including nearly 5,000 children, the extent of Biden’s public divergence from his “great, great friend” Benjamin Netanyahu’s scorched-earth war of annihilation amounts to meekly worded suggestions of “humanitarian pauses.” On Friday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken remarked, “far too many Palestinians have been killed; far too many have suffered these past weeks, and we want to do everything possible to prevent harm to them and to maximize the assistance that gets to them.” These disingenuous platitudes melt into a puddle of blood when juxtaposed with the administration’s actions. The Biden administration has funneled weapons, intelligence support, and unwavering political backing for Israel’s public campaign to erase from the earth Gaza’s existence as a Palestinian territory. As Israeli settlers wage campaigns of terror against the Palestinians in the West Bank, the U.S. remained entrenched in its global isolation, voting last week against a U.N. resolution demanding an end to the illegal settlements. The resolution condemned illegal Israeli settlements, calling them “illegal and an obstacle to peace.” The resolution, which passed 145-7, called for “the immediate and complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.” Only five countries joined the U.S. and Israel in voting “no”: Canada, Hungary, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Nauru. As the capitals of major world cities have seen massive protests on a scale not registered since the 2003 Iraq invasion, Netanyahu has been on a U.S. media blitz, appearing on Sunday talk shows to cast the stakes of his war “to destroy Hamas” as akin to World War II. “Without it none of us have a future. And it’s not only our war, it’s your war too. It’s the battle of civilization against barbarism,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “And if we don’t win here, this scourge will pass. The Middle East will pass to other places. The Middle East will fall. Europe is next. You will be next.” Netanyahu has brazenly exploited the grief of Israeli citizens whose lives were torn apart on October 7 when Hamas launched a series of coordinated attacks inside Israel. Those raids resulted in the deaths of 846 civilians, 278 Israeli soldiers, and 44 police officers, according to the latest figures provided by Israel. Some family members of the victims, as well as relatives of the 240 hostages taken by Hamas and other militant groups — among them infants and the elderly — have emerged as some of the most vocal critics of Netanyahu’s government. A small number have spoken out against his attacks on Gaza, though their voices are largely drowned out by pro-war voices in Western media coverage. “I beg you, I beg also my government, and the pilots and soldiers, who may be called to go into Gaza. Don’t agree. Protect the area around the Gaza Strip, but don’t agree to go in and kill innocent people,” said Noy Katsman, whose older brother Hayim was killed on October 7 at the kibbutz he had lived on for a decade. Maoz Inon’s parents were also killed that day. “Today, Israel is repeating an old mistake it made many times in the last century. We must stop it,” Inon wrote. “Revenge is not going to bring my parents back to life. It is not going to bring back other Israelis and Palestinians killed either. It is going to do the opposite. It is going to cause more casualties. It is going to bring more death.” Over the past month, Biden has cast doubt on the extent of Palestinian civilian deaths, defended Netanyahu’s violent extremist agendas, and made clear that the U.S. position amounts to this: collectively punishing Palestinians for the actions of Hamas falls under the doctrine of “self-defense.” Biden has stood by Israel as government officials have openly described an agenda of ethnically cleansing Palestinians, proclaiming a “Gaza Nakba,” threatening to do to Beirut what Israel has done to Gaza, labeling hospitals and ambulances “legitimate military targets,” and accusing U.N. workers of being Hamas and journalists of being “accomplices in crimes against humanity.” More than 100 U.N. workers and at least 40 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza since October 7. Approximately one in 200 Palestinians have died in Gaza since the start of Israel’s attacks. National security adviser Jake Sullivan, when asked Sunday on CNN if Israel is abiding by the rules of war, replied, “I’m not going to sit here and play judge or jury on that question. What I’m going to do is state the principle of the United States on this issue, which is straight forward: Israel has a right, indeed a responsibility, to defend itself against a terrorist group.” The U.S. is simultaneously increasing the flow of weapons to Israel — and Biden proposed $14.5 billion in additional military assistance — while its senior national security official cannot state whether Israel is conducting operations in contravention of international law. Keenly aware of the growing opposition to Israel’s war at home and abroad, and even within his own administration, Biden and his advisers have sought to push a narrative that they are seeking to moderate Israel’s tactics. They make sure the U.S. press know that Biden had urged against a full-scale ground invasion, proposed limited pauses to the bombing, and expressed concerns about the humanitarian crisis for Palestinian civilians. On Monday, after days of relentless Israeli attacks on Gazan hospitals and desperate pleas from international doctors and health and aid organizations, Biden finally addressed the issue, but only after being directly asked. “Hospitals must be protected,” he said in response to a question from the press. “My hope and expectation is that there will be less intrusive action relative to hospitals.” The White House’s mounting effort to spin itself as being concerned about civilian deaths and doing all it can to urge Israel to avoid massacring civilians on an industrial scale is an effort to obfuscate the U.S. role as Israel’s central ally enabling this slaughter. It is a grotesque parlor game that only works if facts and history don’t matter. And in Biden’s case, that history is extensive. NEW YORK, UNITED STATES - 2023/11/09: Students, teachers, and pro-Palestinian allies march through Midtown Manhattan during a Student Walkout protest calling for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Since October 7, the Israeli army's bombardment of the Palestinian enclave, in retaliation for the Hamas attack on Israel that killed over 1,400 people, has seen thousands of buildings razed to the ground, more than 10,000 people killed and 1.4 million displaced whilst Gaza remains besieged. (Photo by Michael Nigro/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images) Students, teachers, and Palestine solidarity allies call for a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel during a student walkout in Manhattan on Nov. 9, 2023. Photo: Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images Support for Israel’s Wars For 50 years, Biden has been consistent in his support for Israel’s wars against the Palestinians. Time and again he has backed and facilitated campaigns of terror waged by a nuclear power against a people who have no state, no army, no air force, no navy, and an almost nonexistent civilian infrastructure. As Gaza burns in a smoldering pyre of death and destruction, 80-year-old Biden may be overseeing the final act in his devotion to Israel’s most extreme agenda. His legacy should be forever haunted by the names of the dead children of Gaza, thousands of whom have died in a matter of weeks under the hellfire of U.S.-manufactured weapons and support. Biden has been in public office longer than almost any U.S. politician in history. His career in the U.S. Senate began on the eve of the 1973 Arab–Israeli war when he traveled to meet Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir. “I sat across the desk for an hour as she flipped those maps up and down, chain smoking, telling me about the [1967] Six Day War,” Biden said. He called it “one of the most consequential meetings I’ve ever had in my life.” But, as has been in the case with more than a few of Biden’s vignettes about his central role in historical events, in his numerous and varied retelling of that story, he seems to have exaggerated how important that meeting was to Meir and the Israelis. Related Joe Biden: Career Defender of Israel’s Crimes and Impunity Over the ensuing decades and up to the current horrors being inflicted on the people of Gaza, Biden has operated as one of the staunchest promoters of Israel’s colonialist agenda, often defending Israel’s disproportionate use of force, collective punishment, and at times outright massacres. “Were there not an Israel, the United States would have to invent an Israel to protect her interests in the region,” Biden said on the Senate floor in 1986. He repeated that same line earlier this year during a July visit by Israeli President Isaac Herzog to Washington. During Biden’s trip to Israel last month, as Israel intensified its attacks on Gaza and the civilian death toll skyrocketed, he told Netanyahu and his war cabinet, “I don’t believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist.” Building support for Israel’s military might and funneling money and political support to Israel has been a central component of Biden’s career-long foreign policy agenda. He is fond of calling himself “Israel’s best Catholic friend.” In 2016, during a visit to Israel, Netanyahu heaped praise on Biden, then vice president. “The people of Israel consider the Biden family part of our family,” he said. “I want to thank you personally for your, for our personal friendship of over 30 years. We’ve known each other a long time. We’ve gone through many trials and tribulations. And we have an enduring bond that represents the enduring bond between our people.” Most Read There is one story from these decades of Biden’s dedication to Israel that seems eerily prescient given the bloodbath playing out in Gaza right now. It took place early in the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. In public, Biden was neither a cheerleader for the invasion nor an opponent. But in a private meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with Prime Minister Menachem Begin in June 1982, Biden’s support for the brutality of the invasion appeared to outstrip even that of the Israeli government. As the Israeli prime minister was grilled in the Senate over Israel’s disproportionate use of force, including the targeting of civilians with cluster bomb munitions, Biden, in Begin’s words, “rose and delivered a very impassioned speech” defending the invasion. Upon his return to Israel, Begin told Israeli reporters he was shocked when Biden “said he would go even further than Israel, adding that he’d forcefully fend off anyone who sought to invade his country, even if that meant killing women or children.” Begin said, “I disassociated myself from these remarks,” adding, “I said to him: No, sir; attention must be paid. According to our values, it is forbidden to hurt women and children, even in war. Sometimes there are casualties among the civilian population as well. But it is forbidden to aspire to this. This is a yardstick of human civilization, not to hurt civilians.” Coming from Begin, the comments were striking, because he had been notorious as a leader of the Irgun, a militant group that carried out some of the worst acts of ethnic cleansing accompanying the creation of the state of Israel, including the 1948 Deir Yassin massacre. The details of his exchange with Biden about Lebanon did not receive attention in the U.S. press. Instead, the New York Times focused on what it termed the “bitterest exchange” between Biden and Begin over the issue of Israeli settlements, which Biden opposed because, he said, it was hurting Israel’s reputation in the U.S. “He hinted — more than hinted — that if we continue with this policy, it is possible that he will propose cutting our financial aid,” Begin alleged. Over the years, Biden has referenced this confrontation when explaining his opposition to the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank as a disagreement among very good friends. Biden has long argued that these expansions undermine prospects for a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, though his rhetoric has often been contradicted by his actions, as was the case with his opposition to last week’s U.N. vote labeling the settlements illegal. US Vice President Joe Biden speaks at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee?s (AIPAC) annual policy conference at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, DC, May 5, 2009. AFP PHOTO / Saul LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images) U.S. Vice President Joe Biden speaks at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s annual policy conference in Washington, D.C., on May 5, 2009. Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images “Innocents Got Killed” In the 1990s, as Biden solidified his reputation as a top foreign policy senator, he often helped shepherd legislation and funding packages to Israel that human rights groups and international aid organizations said would hinder efforts at brokering lasting peace and further entrench the state of apartheid imposed on millions of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Biden was an early proponent of moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, a move that finally took place in 2018 under the Trump administration. In 1995, Biden helped pass a Senate resolution demanding that the embassy be moved by May of that year. Despite objections that it would harm ongoing Israeli–Palestinian peace talks by deciding a key issue by fiat, Biden said the move would send a positive signal to the region. “To do less would play into the hands of those who would do their hardest to deny Israel the full attributes of statehood,” Biden said. In 2001, following rare public criticism from the Bush administration directed at Israel’s policy of assassinating suspected Palestinian militants, Biden defended Israel’s right to carry out such killings and even rebuked President George W. Bush for criticizing them. “My view has always been that disagreements between Israel and the United States, those differences should be aired privately, not publicly,” Biden said. He also defended the legality of targeted killings, which at the time were considered highly questionable by legal experts for occurring outside a declared conflict. “I don’t believe this is a policy of assassinations,” Biden said, referring to the targeting of suspected Hamas members. “There is in effect a declared war, a declaration by an organization that has said its goal is to do as much as it can to kill Israeli civilians.” In July 2006, Israel was bombing both Gaza and southern Lebanon, with Biden cheering it on. The Israelis, Biden said on MSNBC, “have in both cases, both in Gaza and in southern Lebanon, done the right thing.” In the face of international condemnations of Israel’s brutality in its attacks, Biden defended Israel. “I find it fascinating — people talk about, ‘Has Israel gone too far?’ No one talks about whether Israel’s justified in the first place,” he said on “Meet the Press.” Unless critics of Israel recognize that it was a victim of terrorism, he said, “I think it’s awful — I think it’s a secondary question whether Israel’s gone too far.” Biden said his “only criticism of the Israelis is they’re not that great at public relations.” He compared Israel’s attacks on Gaza and Lebanon to the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks. “It’s a little bit like the same thing we had when we went into Afghanistan,” Biden said at a press conference in July 2006. “We went into Afghanistan, remember, we took out a wedding party by accident? Remember, we took out — with these very sophisticated missiles we had, we accidentally killed some citizens? Was ever a war more justified than us going into Afghanistan? I can’t think of any war since World War II more justified. Yet innocents got killed in us trying to protect America’s interests.” By August 2006, more than 1,000 people were killed in Israel’s war against Lebanon, and UNICEF estimated that 30 percent of the casualties were children. During his time as vice president, Biden often played the role of placating his friend Netanyahu who famously loathed President Barack Obama. During those eight years, Obama largely maintained long-standing U.S. posture of showering Israel with weapons and other aid despite repeated political spats with Netanyahu, most prominently over Iran and Israeli settlements. During numerous episodes when Israel unleashed gratuitous violence, drawing international condemnation, Biden served as Israel’s most prominent American defender. In the early summer of 2010, a group of mostly Turkish activists attempted to deliver a flotilla of humanitarian aid to the besieged Gaza Strip. The attempt was interdicted by the Israeli military, which launched a raid on one ship that resulted in the deaths of nine people, including one American citizen. The raid triggered an international outcry and led to a diplomatic crisis between Israel and Turkey, while drawing further attention to the civilian impact of the ongoing Israeli siege of Gaza. Biden took the lead in defending the raid to the U.S. public. In an interview with PBS, he described the raid as “legitimate” and argued that the flotilla organizers could have disembarked elsewhere before transferring the aid to Gaza. “So what’s the big deal here? What’s the big deal of insisting it go straight to Gaza?” Biden asked about the humanitarian mission. “Well, it’s legitimate for Israel to say, ‘I don’t know what’s on that ship. These guys are dropping eight — 3,000 rockets on my people.’” No weapons were ever found on the ship, only humanitarian supplies. Amid the fury that the raid generated and the muted response from Obama, Biden’s remarks were welcomed by AIPAC spokesperson Josh Block, who said at the time, “We appreciate the many strong statements of support for Israel from members of Congress and the vice president today.” After the 2014 Gaza war — a seven-week Israeli ground invasion that killed more than 2,000 Palestinians (two-thirds of them civilians) and caused widespread displacement and destruction of civilian infrastructure — Biden boasted of how the Obama administration had “steadfastly stood before the world and defended Israel’s right to defend itself,” declaring, “We have an obligation to match the steel and the spine of the people of Israel with an ironclad, nonnegotiable commitment to Israel’s physical security.” In May 2021, a few months into Biden’s presidency, Israel intensified its ethnic-cleansing campaign against Palestinians in East Jerusalem, forcibly evicting people from their homes to hand them over to Israeli settlers. The incendiary situation was then exacerbated during a Ramadan siege by Israeli forces at one of the holiest sites in Islam, Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. In response, Hamas began launching rockets into Israel. Netanyahu retaliated by ordering a massive 11-day bombing campaign against Gaza, striking residential buildings, media outlets, hospitals, and a refugee camp. As the civilian death toll among Palestinians began to rise, Ned Price, the State Department spokesperson, characterized the operation as Israel exercising its right to self-defense. When he was then asked whether the principle of self-defense also applied to Palestinians, he struggled to answer before saying, “Broadly speaking, we believe in the concept of self-defense. We believe it applies to any state.” When Matt Lee of The Associated Press pointed out that Palestinians do not have a state, Price said, “I’m not in a position to debate the legalities from up here.” More than 250 Palestinians died during Israel’s siege, including dozens of children. More than 70,000 Palestinians were displaced. Throughout the bombing, the U.S. staunchly defended Israel’s disproportionate attacks, with Biden declaring on May 16, “there has not been a significant overreaction” from Israel before pivoting to condemn Hamas’s firing of rockets into civilian areas of Israel. GAZA CITY, GAZA - NOVEMBER 8: Palestinians who left their houses and live at the Nassr hospital, are trying to feed their children during food shortages as the Israeli attacks continue in Gaza City, Gaza on November 8, 2023. (Photo by Abed Zagout/Anadolu via Getty Images) Displaced Palestinians at Nassr hospital try to feed their children during food shortages on Nov. 8, 2023. Photo: Abed Zagout/Anadolu via Getty Images Evidence of Genocidal Intent Following Hamas’s horrifying attacks on October 7, Biden and his administration have defended Israel’s mass bombardment of Gaza, and U.S. weapons shipments have been accelerated. Biden called his proposal for additional military support an “unprecedented commitment to Israel’s security that will sharpen Israel’s qualitative military edge,” saying, “We’re going to make sure other hostile actors in the region know that Israel is stronger than ever.” This crisis has undoubtedly solidified Biden’s legacy as one of the premiere American defenders of Israel’s crimes, including disproportionate attacks against an overwhelmingly defenseless civilian population, in the history of U.S. politics. In an alternate reality — one where the rule of law is applied equally to all states — Israeli leaders would likely face war crimes charges for the razing of Gaza. Leading genocide scholars and international law experts have cited the statements of Israeli officials about the aims of their operations in Gaza as potential evidence of “genocidal intent.” A coalition of international lawyers representing Palestinian rights groups has already petitioned the International Criminal Court to open a criminal inquiry and issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and other officials. Such attempts at accountability should not focus solely on Israeli leaders, according to some U.S. constitutional law organizations. The U.S. is Israel’s premiere bankroller and arms dealer, not to mention its political defender. There are several U.S. laws and treaties that prohibit support for, and failure to prevent, genocidal activities. Among these is the Genocide Convention Implementation Act, signed into law in 1988. Its sponsor? A senator named Joe Biden. Related Palestinians Sue Biden for Failing to Prevent Genocide in Gaza On Monday, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Palestinians in Gaza seeking to block the Biden administration from providing further military aid to Israel. The suit names Biden, Blinken, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. “They have continued to provide both military and political support for Israel’s unfolding genocidal campaign while imposing no red lines,” said Katherine Gallagher, one of the lawyers who filed the case. “The United States has a clear and binding obligation to prevent, not further, genocide. They have failed in meeting their legal and moral duty to use their considerable power to end this horror. They must do so.” It is unfathomable, given the current world order, that any meaningful legal accountability will be served on U.S. or Israeli leaders. But on a moral level, it is important to remember these legal efforts to confront the slaughter and the complicity of Biden and other Western leaders. The U.S.-enabled horrors of the past five weeks should remain a bloody, permanent stain on the fabric of Biden’s political career and legacy. Among the U.S. political elite, it will simply be noted as Biden doing his job. https://theintercept.com/2023/11/14/gaza-israel-genocide-biden-legacy/
    THEINTERCEPT.COM
    Biden’s Legacy Should Be Forever Haunted by the Names of Gaza’s Dead Children
    Biden’s support for the terror bombing of Gaza continues his long history as a steadfast supporter of Israel’s greatest crimes.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 17406 Views
  • The vote on the United Nations resolution on ending the illegal Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories:

    - 168 countries voted in favor of ending the occupation (Included all Arab and most African countries)

    - 9 countries abstained from voting (including 5 African countries)

    - 7 countries opposed the decision: (The Zionist entity, United State, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Canada, Hungary)

    Politically speaking, 91% of the world are frankly against the occupation
    The vote on the United Nations resolution on ending the illegal Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories: - 168 countries voted in favor of ending the occupation (Included all Arab and most African countries) - 9 countries abstained from voting (including 5 African countries) - 7 countries opposed the decision: (The Zionist entity, United State, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Canada, Hungary) Politically speaking, 91% of the world are frankly against the occupation
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2015 Views
  • The vote on the United Nations resolution on ending the illegal Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories:

    - 168 countries voted in favor of ending the occupation (Included all Arab and most African countries)

    - 9 countries abstained from voting (including 5 African countries)

    - 7 countries opposed the decision: (The Zionist entity, United State, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Canada, Hungary)

    Politically speaking, 91% of the world are frankly against the occupation
    The vote on the United Nations resolution on ending the illegal Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories: - 168 countries voted in favor of ending the occupation (Included all Arab and most African countries) - 9 countries abstained from voting (including 5 African countries) - 7 countries opposed the decision: (The Zionist entity, United State, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Canada, Hungary) Politically speaking, 91% of the world are frankly against the occupation
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2093 Views
  • The Age of Megathreats
    Nouriel RoubiniNov 4, 2022
    op_roubini3_Getty Images_worlddisaster Getty Images
    NEW YORK – Severe megathreats are imperiling our future – not just our jobs, incomes, wealth, and the global economy, but also the relative peace, prosperity, and progress achieved over the past 75 years. Many of these threats were not even on our radar during the prosperous post-World War II era. I grew up in the Middle East and Europe from the late 1950s to the early 1980s, and I never worried about climate change potentially destroying the planet. Most of us had barely even heard of the problem, and greenhouse-gas emissions were still relatively low, compared to where they would soon be.

    Moreover, after the US-Soviet détente and US President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in the early 1970s, I never really worried about another war among great powers, let alone a nuclear one. The term “pandemic” didn’t register in my consciousness, either, because the last major one had been in 1918. And I didn’t fathom that artificial intelligence might someday destroy most jobs and render Homo sapiens obsolete, because those were the years of the long “AI winter.”

    Similarly, terms like “deglobalization” and “trade war” had no purchase during this period. Trade liberalization had been in full swing since the Great Depression, and it would soon lead to the hyper-globalization that began in the 1990s. Debt crises posed no threat, because private and public debt-to-GDP ratios were low in advanced economies and emerging markets, and growth was robust. No one had to worry about the massive build-up of implicit debt, in the form of unfunded liabilities from pay-as-you-go social security and health-care systems. The supply of young workers was rising, the share of the elderly was still low, and robust, mostly unrestricted immigration from the Global South to the North would continue to prop up the labor market in advanced economies.

    Against this backdrop, economic cycles were contained, and recessions were short and shallow, except for during the stagflationary decade of the 1970s; but even then, there were no debt crises in advanced economies, because debt ratios were low. The kind of financial cycles that lead to crises were contained not just in advanced economies but even in emerging markets, owing to the low leverage, low risk-taking, solid financial regulation, capital controls, and various forms of financial repression that prevailed during this period. The advanced economies were strong liberal democracies that were free of extreme partisan polarization. Populism and authoritarianism were confined to a benighted cohort of poorer countries.

    Goodbye to All That

    Fast-forward from this relatively “golden” period between 1945 and 1985 to late 2022, and you will immediately notice that we are awash in new, extreme megathreats that were not previously on anyone’s mind. The world has entered what I call a geopolitical depression, with (at least) four dangerous revisionist powers – China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea – challenging the economic, financial, security, and geopolitical order that the United States and its allies created after WWII.

    There is a sharply rising risk not only of war among great powers but of a nuclear conflict. In the coming year, Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine could escalate into an unconventional conflict that directly involves NATO. And Israel – and perhaps the US – may decide to launch strikes against Iran, which is on its way to building a nuclear bomb.


    Subscribe to PS Digital now to read all the latest insights from Nouriel Roubini.

    Digital subscribers enjoy access to every PS commentary, including those by Nouriel Roubini, plus our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content, including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More.

    For a limited time, save $15 with the code ROUBINI15.

    Subscribe Now

    With Chinese President Xi Jinping further consolidating his authoritarian rule, and with the US tightening its trade restrictions against China, the new Sino-American cold war is getting colder by the day. Worse, it could all too easily turn hot over the status of Taiwan, which Xi is committed to reuniting with the mainland, and which US President Joe Biden is apparently committed to defending. Meanwhile, nuclear-armed North Korea has once again been seeking attention by firing rockets over Japan and South Korea.

    Cyberwarfare occurs daily between these revisionist powers and the West, and many other countries have adopted a non-aligned posture toward Western-led sanctions regimes. From our contingent vantage point in the middle of all these events, we don’t yet know if World War III has already begun in Ukraine. That determination will be left to future historians – if there are any.

    Even discounting the threat of nuclear Armageddon, the risk of an environmental Apocalypse is becoming increasingly serious, especially given that most of the talk about net-zero and ESG (environment, social, and governance) investing is just greenwashing – or greenwishing. The new greenflation is already in full swing, because it turns out that amassing the metals needed for the energy transition requires a lot of expensive energy.

    There is also a growing risk of new pandemics that would be worse than biblical plagues, owing to the link between environmental destruction and zoonotic diseases. Wildlife, carrying dangerous pathogens, are coming into closer and more frequent contact with humans and livestock. That is why we have experienced more frequent and virulent pandemics and epidemics (HIV, SARS, MERS, swine flu, bird flu, Zika, Ebola, COVID-19) since the early 1980s. All the evidence suggests that this problem will become even worse in the future. Indeed, owing to the melting of Siberian permafrost, we may soon be confronting dangerous viruses and bacteria that have been locked away for millennia.

    Moreover, geopolitical conflicts and national-security concerns are fueling trade, financial, and technology wars, and accelerating the deglobalization process. The return of protectionism and the Sino-American decoupling will leave the global economy, supply chains, and markets more balkanized and fragmented. The buzzwords “friend-shoring” and “secure and fair trade” have replaced “offshoring” and “free trade.”

    But on the domestic front, advances in AI, robotics, and automation will destroy more and more jobs, even if policymakers build higher protectionist walls in an effort to fight the last war. By both restricting immigration and demanding more domestic production, aging advanced economies will create a stronger incentive for companies to adopt labor-saving technologies. While routine jobs are obviously at risk, so, too, are any cognitive jobs that can be unbundled into discrete tasks, and even many creative jobs. AI language models like GPT-3 can already write better than most humans and will almost certainly displace many jobs and sources of income. In due course, some scientists believe that Homo sapiens will be rendered entirely obsolete by the rise of artificial general intelligence or machine super-intelligence – though this is a highly contentious subject of debate.

    Thus, over time, economic malaise will deepen, inequality will rise even further, and more white- and blue-collar workers will be left behind.

    Hard Choices, Hard Landings

    The macroeconomic situation is no better. For the first time since the 1970s, we are facing high inflation and the prospect of a recession – stagflation. The increased inflation in advanced economies wasn’t “transitory.” It is persistent, driven by a combination of bad policies – excessively loose monetary, fiscal, and credit policies that were kept in place for too long – and bad luck. No one could have anticipated how much the initial COVID-19 shock would curtail the supply of goods and labor and create bottlenecks in global supply chains. The same goes for Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, which caused a sharp spike in energy, food, fertilizers, industrial metals, and other commodities. Meanwhile, China has continued its “zero-COVID” policy, which is creating additional supply bottlenecks.

    While both demand and supply factors were in the mix, it is now widely recognized that the supply factors have played an increasingly decisive role. This matters for the economic outlook, because supply-driven inflation is stagflationary and thus increases the risk that monetary-policy tightening will produce a hard landing (increased unemployment and potentially a recession).

    What will follow from the US Federal Reserve and other major central banks’ current tightening? Until recently, most central banks and most of Wall Street belonged to “Team Soft Landing.” But the consensus has rapidly shifted, with even Fed Chair Jerome Powell recognizing that a recession is possible, that a soft landing will be “very challenging,” and that everyone should prepare for some “pain” ahead. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s model shows a high probability of a hard landing, and the Bank of England has expressed similar views about the United Kingdom. Several prominent Wall Street institutions have also now made a recession their baseline scenario (the most likely outcome if all other variables are held constant).

    History, too, points to deeper problems ahead. For the past 60 years in the US, whenever inflation has been above 5% (it is above 8% today), and unemployment has been below 5% (it is now 3.5%), any attempt by the Fed to bring inflation down toward its 2% target has caused a recession. Thus, a hard landing is much more likely than a soft landing, both in the US and across most other advanced economies.

    Sticky Stagflation

    In addition to the short-term factors, negative supply shocks and demand factors in the medium term will cause inflation to persist. On the supply side, I count eleven negative supply shocks that will reduce potential growth and increase the costs of production. Among these is the backlash against hyper-globalization, which has been gaining momentum and creating opportunities for populist, nativist, and protectionist politicians, and growing public anger over stark income and wealth inequalities, which is leading to more policies to support workers and the “left behind.” However well-intentioned, such measures will contribute to a dangerous wage-price spiral.

    Other sources of persistent inflation include rising protectionism (from both the left and the right), which has restricted trade, impeded the movement of capital, and heightened political resistance to immigration, which in turn has put additional upward pressure on wages. National-security and strategic considerations have further restricted flows of technology, data, and talent, and new labor and environmental standards, as important as they may be, are hampering both trade and new construction.

    This balkanization of the global economy is deeply stagflationary, and it is coinciding with demographic aging, not just in developed countries but also in large emerging economies such as China. Because young people tend to produce and save more, whereas older people spend down their savings and require many more expensive services in health care and other sectors, this trend, too, will lead to higher prices and slower growth.

    Today’s geopolitical turmoil further complicates matters. The disruptions to trade and the spike in commodity prices following Russia’s invasion were not just a one-off phenomenon. The same threats to harvests and food shipments that arose in 2022 may well persist in 2023. Moreover, if China does finally end its zero-COVID policy and begin to restart its economy, a surge in demand for many commodities will add to the global inflationary pressures. There is also no end in sight for Sino-Western decoupling, which is accelerating across all dimensions of trade (goods, services, capital, labor, technology, data, and information). And, of course, Iran, North Korea, and other strategic rivals to the West could soon contribute in their own ways to the global havoc.

    Now that the US dollar has been fully weaponized for strategic and national-security purposes, its position as the main global reserve currency could eventually begin to decline, and a weaker dollar would of course add to inflationary pressures in the US. More broadly, a frictionless world trading system requires a frictionless financial system. But sweeping primary and secondary sanctions have thrown sand in what was once a well-oiled machine, massively increasing the transaction costs of trade.

    On top of it all, climate change, too, will create persistent stagflationary pressures. Droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and other disasters are increasingly disrupting economic activity and threatening harvests (thus driving up food prices). At the same time, demands for decarbonization have led to underinvestment in fossil-fuel capacity before investment in renewables has reached the point where they can make up the difference. Today’s large energy-price spikes were inevitable.

    The increased likelihood of future pandemics also represents a persistent source of stagflation, especially considering how little has been done to prevent or prepare for the next one. The next contagious outbreak will lend further momentum to protectionist policies as countries rush to close borders and hoard critical supplies of food, medicines, and other essential goods.

    Finally, cyberwarfare remains an underappreciated threat to economic activity and even public safety. Firms and governments will either face more stagflationary disruptions to production, or they will have to spend a fortune on cybersecurity. Either way, costs will rise.

    The Worst of All Possible Economies

    When the recession comes, it will not be short and shallow but long and severe. Not only are we facing persistent short- and medium-term negative supply shocks, but we are also heading into the mother of all debt crises, owing to soaring private and public debt ratios over the last few decades. Low debt ratios spared us from that outcome in the 1970s. And though we certainly had debt crises following the 2008 crash – the result of excessive household, bank, and government debt – we also had deflation. It was a demand shock and a credit crunch that could be met with massive monetary, fiscal, and credit easing.

    Today, we are experiencing the worst elements of both the 1970s and 2008. Multiple, persistent negative supply shocks have coincided with debt ratios that are even higher than they were during the global financial crisis. These inflationary pressures are forcing central banks to tighten monetary policy even though we are heading into a recession. That makes the current situation fundamentally different from both the global financial crisis and the COVID-19 crisis. Everyone should be preparing for what may come to be remembered as the Great Stagflationary Debt Crisis.

    While central banks have been at pains to sound more hawkish, we should be skeptical of their professed willingness to fight inflation at any cost. Once they find themselves in a debt trap, they will have to blink. With debt ratios so high, fighting inflation will cause an economic and financial crash that will be deemed politically unacceptable. Major central banks will feel as though they have no choice but to backpedal, and inflation, the debasement of fiat currencies, boom-bust cycles, and financial crises will become even more severe and frequent.

    The inevitability of central banks wimping out was recently on display in the United Kingdom. Faced with the market reaction to the Truss government’s reckless fiscal stimulus, the BOE had to launch an emergency quantitative-easing (QE) program to buy up government bonds. That sad episode confirmed that in the UK, as in many other countries, monetary policy is increasingly subject to fiscal capture.

    Recall that a similar turnaround occurred in 2019, when the Fed, after previously signaling continued rate hikes and quantitative-tightening, stopped its QT program and started pursuing a mix of backdoor QE and policy-rate cuts at the first sign of mild financial pressures and a growth slowdown. Central banks will talk tough; but, in a world of excessive debt and risks of an economic and financial crash, there is good reason to doubt their willingness to do “whatever it takes” to return inflation to its target rate.

    With governments unable to reduce high debts and deficits by spending less or raising revenues, those that can borrow in their own currency will increasingly resort to the “inflation tax”: relying on unexpected price growth to wipe out long-term nominal liabilities at fixed interest rates.

    How will financial markets and prices of equities and bonds perform in the face of rising inflation and the return of stagflation? It is likely that, as in the stagflation of the 1970s, both components of any traditional asset portfolio will suffer, potentially incurring massive losses. Inflation is bad for bond portfolios, which will take losses as yields increase and prices fall, as well as for equities, whose valuations are hurt by rising interest rates.

    For the first time in decades, a 60/40 portfolio of equities and bonds suffered massive losses in 2022, because bond yields have surged while equities have gone into a bear market. By 1982, at the peak of the stagflation decade, the average S&P 500 firm’s price-to-earnings ratio was down to eight; today, it is closer to 20, which suggests that the bear market could end up being even more protracted and severe. Investors will need to find assets to hedge against inflation, political and geopolitical risks, and environmental damage: these include short-term government bonds and inflation-indexed bonds, gold and other precious metals, and real estate that is resilient to environmental damage.

    The Moment of Truth

    In any case, these megathreats will further contribute to rising income and wealth inequality, which has already been putting severe pressure on liberal democracies (as those left behind revolt against elites), and fueling the rise of radical and aggressive populist regimes. One can find right-wing manifestations of this trend in Russia, Turkey, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, the US (under Donald Trump), post-Brexit Britain, and many other countries; and left-wing manifestations in Argentina, Venezuela, Peru, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, and now Brazil (which has just replaced a right-wing populist with a left-wing one).

    And, of course, Xi’s authoritarian stranglehold has given the lie to the old idea that Western engagement with a fast-growing China would ineluctably lead that country to open itself up even more to markets and, eventually, to democratic processes. Under Xi, China shows every sign of becoming more closed off, and more aggressive on geopolitical, security, and economic matters.

    How did it come to this? Part of the problem is that we have long had our heads stuck in the sand. Now, we need to make up for lost time. Without decisive action, we will be heading into a period that is less like the four decades after WWII than like the three decades between 1914 and 1945. That period gave us World War I; the Spanish flu pandemic; the 1929 Wall Street crash; the Great Depression; massive trade and currency wars; inflation, hyperinflation, and deflation; financial and debt crises, leading to massive meltdowns and defaults; and the rise of authoritarian militarist regimes in Italy, Germany, Japan, Spain, and elsewhere, culminating in WWII and the Holocaust.

    In this new world, the relative peace, prosperity, and rising global welfare that we have taken for granted will be gone; most of it already is. If we don’t stop the multi-track slow-motion train wreck that is threatening the global economy and our planet at large, we will be lucky to have only a repeat of the stagflationary 1970s. Far more likely is an echo of the 1930s and the 1940s, only now with all the massive disruptions from climate change added to the mix.

    Avoiding a dystopian scenario will not be easy. While there are potential solutions to each megathreat, most are costly in the short run and will deliver benefits only over the long run. Many also require technological innovations that are not yet available or in place, starting with those needed to halt or reverse climate change. Complicating matters further, today’s megathreats are interconnected, and therefore best addressed in a systematic and coherent fashion. Domestic leadership, in both the private and public sector, and international cooperation among great powers is necessary to prevent the coming Apocalypse.

    Yet there are many domestic and international obstacles standing in the way of policies that would allow for a less dystopian (though still contested and conflictual) future. Thus, while a less bleak scenario is obviously desirable, a clear-headed analysis indicates that dystopia is much more likely than a happier outcome. The years and decades ahead will be marked by a stagflationary debt crisis and related megathreats – war, pandemics, climate change, disruptive AI, and deglobalization – all of which will be bad for jobs, economies, markets, peace, and prosperity.
    The Age of Megathreats Nouriel RoubiniNov 4, 2022 op_roubini3_Getty Images_worlddisaster Getty Images NEW YORK – Severe megathreats are imperiling our future – not just our jobs, incomes, wealth, and the global economy, but also the relative peace, prosperity, and progress achieved over the past 75 years. Many of these threats were not even on our radar during the prosperous post-World War II era. I grew up in the Middle East and Europe from the late 1950s to the early 1980s, and I never worried about climate change potentially destroying the planet. Most of us had barely even heard of the problem, and greenhouse-gas emissions were still relatively low, compared to where they would soon be. Moreover, after the US-Soviet détente and US President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in the early 1970s, I never really worried about another war among great powers, let alone a nuclear one. The term “pandemic” didn’t register in my consciousness, either, because the last major one had been in 1918. And I didn’t fathom that artificial intelligence might someday destroy most jobs and render Homo sapiens obsolete, because those were the years of the long “AI winter.” Similarly, terms like “deglobalization” and “trade war” had no purchase during this period. Trade liberalization had been in full swing since the Great Depression, and it would soon lead to the hyper-globalization that began in the 1990s. Debt crises posed no threat, because private and public debt-to-GDP ratios were low in advanced economies and emerging markets, and growth was robust. No one had to worry about the massive build-up of implicit debt, in the form of unfunded liabilities from pay-as-you-go social security and health-care systems. The supply of young workers was rising, the share of the elderly was still low, and robust, mostly unrestricted immigration from the Global South to the North would continue to prop up the labor market in advanced economies. Against this backdrop, economic cycles were contained, and recessions were short and shallow, except for during the stagflationary decade of the 1970s; but even then, there were no debt crises in advanced economies, because debt ratios were low. The kind of financial cycles that lead to crises were contained not just in advanced economies but even in emerging markets, owing to the low leverage, low risk-taking, solid financial regulation, capital controls, and various forms of financial repression that prevailed during this period. The advanced economies were strong liberal democracies that were free of extreme partisan polarization. Populism and authoritarianism were confined to a benighted cohort of poorer countries. Goodbye to All That Fast-forward from this relatively “golden” period between 1945 and 1985 to late 2022, and you will immediately notice that we are awash in new, extreme megathreats that were not previously on anyone’s mind. The world has entered what I call a geopolitical depression, with (at least) four dangerous revisionist powers – China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea – challenging the economic, financial, security, and geopolitical order that the United States and its allies created after WWII. There is a sharply rising risk not only of war among great powers but of a nuclear conflict. In the coming year, Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine could escalate into an unconventional conflict that directly involves NATO. And Israel – and perhaps the US – may decide to launch strikes against Iran, which is on its way to building a nuclear bomb. Subscribe to PS Digital now to read all the latest insights from Nouriel Roubini. Digital subscribers enjoy access to every PS commentary, including those by Nouriel Roubini, plus our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content, including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More. For a limited time, save $15 with the code ROUBINI15. Subscribe Now With Chinese President Xi Jinping further consolidating his authoritarian rule, and with the US tightening its trade restrictions against China, the new Sino-American cold war is getting colder by the day. Worse, it could all too easily turn hot over the status of Taiwan, which Xi is committed to reuniting with the mainland, and which US President Joe Biden is apparently committed to defending. Meanwhile, nuclear-armed North Korea has once again been seeking attention by firing rockets over Japan and South Korea. Cyberwarfare occurs daily between these revisionist powers and the West, and many other countries have adopted a non-aligned posture toward Western-led sanctions regimes. From our contingent vantage point in the middle of all these events, we don’t yet know if World War III has already begun in Ukraine. That determination will be left to future historians – if there are any. Even discounting the threat of nuclear Armageddon, the risk of an environmental Apocalypse is becoming increasingly serious, especially given that most of the talk about net-zero and ESG (environment, social, and governance) investing is just greenwashing – or greenwishing. The new greenflation is already in full swing, because it turns out that amassing the metals needed for the energy transition requires a lot of expensive energy. There is also a growing risk of new pandemics that would be worse than biblical plagues, owing to the link between environmental destruction and zoonotic diseases. Wildlife, carrying dangerous pathogens, are coming into closer and more frequent contact with humans and livestock. That is why we have experienced more frequent and virulent pandemics and epidemics (HIV, SARS, MERS, swine flu, bird flu, Zika, Ebola, COVID-19) since the early 1980s. All the evidence suggests that this problem will become even worse in the future. Indeed, owing to the melting of Siberian permafrost, we may soon be confronting dangerous viruses and bacteria that have been locked away for millennia. Moreover, geopolitical conflicts and national-security concerns are fueling trade, financial, and technology wars, and accelerating the deglobalization process. The return of protectionism and the Sino-American decoupling will leave the global economy, supply chains, and markets more balkanized and fragmented. The buzzwords “friend-shoring” and “secure and fair trade” have replaced “offshoring” and “free trade.” But on the domestic front, advances in AI, robotics, and automation will destroy more and more jobs, even if policymakers build higher protectionist walls in an effort to fight the last war. By both restricting immigration and demanding more domestic production, aging advanced economies will create a stronger incentive for companies to adopt labor-saving technologies. While routine jobs are obviously at risk, so, too, are any cognitive jobs that can be unbundled into discrete tasks, and even many creative jobs. AI language models like GPT-3 can already write better than most humans and will almost certainly displace many jobs and sources of income. In due course, some scientists believe that Homo sapiens will be rendered entirely obsolete by the rise of artificial general intelligence or machine super-intelligence – though this is a highly contentious subject of debate. Thus, over time, economic malaise will deepen, inequality will rise even further, and more white- and blue-collar workers will be left behind. Hard Choices, Hard Landings The macroeconomic situation is no better. For the first time since the 1970s, we are facing high inflation and the prospect of a recession – stagflation. The increased inflation in advanced economies wasn’t “transitory.” It is persistent, driven by a combination of bad policies – excessively loose monetary, fiscal, and credit policies that were kept in place for too long – and bad luck. No one could have anticipated how much the initial COVID-19 shock would curtail the supply of goods and labor and create bottlenecks in global supply chains. The same goes for Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, which caused a sharp spike in energy, food, fertilizers, industrial metals, and other commodities. Meanwhile, China has continued its “zero-COVID” policy, which is creating additional supply bottlenecks. While both demand and supply factors were in the mix, it is now widely recognized that the supply factors have played an increasingly decisive role. This matters for the economic outlook, because supply-driven inflation is stagflationary and thus increases the risk that monetary-policy tightening will produce a hard landing (increased unemployment and potentially a recession). What will follow from the US Federal Reserve and other major central banks’ current tightening? Until recently, most central banks and most of Wall Street belonged to “Team Soft Landing.” But the consensus has rapidly shifted, with even Fed Chair Jerome Powell recognizing that a recession is possible, that a soft landing will be “very challenging,” and that everyone should prepare for some “pain” ahead. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s model shows a high probability of a hard landing, and the Bank of England has expressed similar views about the United Kingdom. Several prominent Wall Street institutions have also now made a recession their baseline scenario (the most likely outcome if all other variables are held constant). History, too, points to deeper problems ahead. For the past 60 years in the US, whenever inflation has been above 5% (it is above 8% today), and unemployment has been below 5% (it is now 3.5%), any attempt by the Fed to bring inflation down toward its 2% target has caused a recession. Thus, a hard landing is much more likely than a soft landing, both in the US and across most other advanced economies. Sticky Stagflation In addition to the short-term factors, negative supply shocks and demand factors in the medium term will cause inflation to persist. On the supply side, I count eleven negative supply shocks that will reduce potential growth and increase the costs of production. Among these is the backlash against hyper-globalization, which has been gaining momentum and creating opportunities for populist, nativist, and protectionist politicians, and growing public anger over stark income and wealth inequalities, which is leading to more policies to support workers and the “left behind.” However well-intentioned, such measures will contribute to a dangerous wage-price spiral. Other sources of persistent inflation include rising protectionism (from both the left and the right), which has restricted trade, impeded the movement of capital, and heightened political resistance to immigration, which in turn has put additional upward pressure on wages. National-security and strategic considerations have further restricted flows of technology, data, and talent, and new labor and environmental standards, as important as they may be, are hampering both trade and new construction. This balkanization of the global economy is deeply stagflationary, and it is coinciding with demographic aging, not just in developed countries but also in large emerging economies such as China. Because young people tend to produce and save more, whereas older people spend down their savings and require many more expensive services in health care and other sectors, this trend, too, will lead to higher prices and slower growth. Today’s geopolitical turmoil further complicates matters. The disruptions to trade and the spike in commodity prices following Russia’s invasion were not just a one-off phenomenon. The same threats to harvests and food shipments that arose in 2022 may well persist in 2023. Moreover, if China does finally end its zero-COVID policy and begin to restart its economy, a surge in demand for many commodities will add to the global inflationary pressures. There is also no end in sight for Sino-Western decoupling, which is accelerating across all dimensions of trade (goods, services, capital, labor, technology, data, and information). And, of course, Iran, North Korea, and other strategic rivals to the West could soon contribute in their own ways to the global havoc. Now that the US dollar has been fully weaponized for strategic and national-security purposes, its position as the main global reserve currency could eventually begin to decline, and a weaker dollar would of course add to inflationary pressures in the US. More broadly, a frictionless world trading system requires a frictionless financial system. But sweeping primary and secondary sanctions have thrown sand in what was once a well-oiled machine, massively increasing the transaction costs of trade. On top of it all, climate change, too, will create persistent stagflationary pressures. Droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and other disasters are increasingly disrupting economic activity and threatening harvests (thus driving up food prices). At the same time, demands for decarbonization have led to underinvestment in fossil-fuel capacity before investment in renewables has reached the point where they can make up the difference. Today’s large energy-price spikes were inevitable. The increased likelihood of future pandemics also represents a persistent source of stagflation, especially considering how little has been done to prevent or prepare for the next one. The next contagious outbreak will lend further momentum to protectionist policies as countries rush to close borders and hoard critical supplies of food, medicines, and other essential goods. Finally, cyberwarfare remains an underappreciated threat to economic activity and even public safety. Firms and governments will either face more stagflationary disruptions to production, or they will have to spend a fortune on cybersecurity. Either way, costs will rise. The Worst of All Possible Economies When the recession comes, it will not be short and shallow but long and severe. Not only are we facing persistent short- and medium-term negative supply shocks, but we are also heading into the mother of all debt crises, owing to soaring private and public debt ratios over the last few decades. Low debt ratios spared us from that outcome in the 1970s. And though we certainly had debt crises following the 2008 crash – the result of excessive household, bank, and government debt – we also had deflation. It was a demand shock and a credit crunch that could be met with massive monetary, fiscal, and credit easing. Today, we are experiencing the worst elements of both the 1970s and 2008. Multiple, persistent negative supply shocks have coincided with debt ratios that are even higher than they were during the global financial crisis. These inflationary pressures are forcing central banks to tighten monetary policy even though we are heading into a recession. That makes the current situation fundamentally different from both the global financial crisis and the COVID-19 crisis. Everyone should be preparing for what may come to be remembered as the Great Stagflationary Debt Crisis. While central banks have been at pains to sound more hawkish, we should be skeptical of their professed willingness to fight inflation at any cost. Once they find themselves in a debt trap, they will have to blink. With debt ratios so high, fighting inflation will cause an economic and financial crash that will be deemed politically unacceptable. Major central banks will feel as though they have no choice but to backpedal, and inflation, the debasement of fiat currencies, boom-bust cycles, and financial crises will become even more severe and frequent. The inevitability of central banks wimping out was recently on display in the United Kingdom. Faced with the market reaction to the Truss government’s reckless fiscal stimulus, the BOE had to launch an emergency quantitative-easing (QE) program to buy up government bonds. That sad episode confirmed that in the UK, as in many other countries, monetary policy is increasingly subject to fiscal capture. Recall that a similar turnaround occurred in 2019, when the Fed, after previously signaling continued rate hikes and quantitative-tightening, stopped its QT program and started pursuing a mix of backdoor QE and policy-rate cuts at the first sign of mild financial pressures and a growth slowdown. Central banks will talk tough; but, in a world of excessive debt and risks of an economic and financial crash, there is good reason to doubt their willingness to do “whatever it takes” to return inflation to its target rate. With governments unable to reduce high debts and deficits by spending less or raising revenues, those that can borrow in their own currency will increasingly resort to the “inflation tax”: relying on unexpected price growth to wipe out long-term nominal liabilities at fixed interest rates. How will financial markets and prices of equities and bonds perform in the face of rising inflation and the return of stagflation? It is likely that, as in the stagflation of the 1970s, both components of any traditional asset portfolio will suffer, potentially incurring massive losses. Inflation is bad for bond portfolios, which will take losses as yields increase and prices fall, as well as for equities, whose valuations are hurt by rising interest rates. For the first time in decades, a 60/40 portfolio of equities and bonds suffered massive losses in 2022, because bond yields have surged while equities have gone into a bear market. By 1982, at the peak of the stagflation decade, the average S&P 500 firm’s price-to-earnings ratio was down to eight; today, it is closer to 20, which suggests that the bear market could end up being even more protracted and severe. Investors will need to find assets to hedge against inflation, political and geopolitical risks, and environmental damage: these include short-term government bonds and inflation-indexed bonds, gold and other precious metals, and real estate that is resilient to environmental damage. The Moment of Truth In any case, these megathreats will further contribute to rising income and wealth inequality, which has already been putting severe pressure on liberal democracies (as those left behind revolt against elites), and fueling the rise of radical and aggressive populist regimes. One can find right-wing manifestations of this trend in Russia, Turkey, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, the US (under Donald Trump), post-Brexit Britain, and many other countries; and left-wing manifestations in Argentina, Venezuela, Peru, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, and now Brazil (which has just replaced a right-wing populist with a left-wing one). And, of course, Xi’s authoritarian stranglehold has given the lie to the old idea that Western engagement with a fast-growing China would ineluctably lead that country to open itself up even more to markets and, eventually, to democratic processes. Under Xi, China shows every sign of becoming more closed off, and more aggressive on geopolitical, security, and economic matters. How did it come to this? Part of the problem is that we have long had our heads stuck in the sand. Now, we need to make up for lost time. Without decisive action, we will be heading into a period that is less like the four decades after WWII than like the three decades between 1914 and 1945. That period gave us World War I; the Spanish flu pandemic; the 1929 Wall Street crash; the Great Depression; massive trade and currency wars; inflation, hyperinflation, and deflation; financial and debt crises, leading to massive meltdowns and defaults; and the rise of authoritarian militarist regimes in Italy, Germany, Japan, Spain, and elsewhere, culminating in WWII and the Holocaust. In this new world, the relative peace, prosperity, and rising global welfare that we have taken for granted will be gone; most of it already is. If we don’t stop the multi-track slow-motion train wreck that is threatening the global economy and our planet at large, we will be lucky to have only a repeat of the stagflationary 1970s. Far more likely is an echo of the 1930s and the 1940s, only now with all the massive disruptions from climate change added to the mix. Avoiding a dystopian scenario will not be easy. While there are potential solutions to each megathreat, most are costly in the short run and will deliver benefits only over the long run. Many also require technological innovations that are not yet available or in place, starting with those needed to halt or reverse climate change. Complicating matters further, today’s megathreats are interconnected, and therefore best addressed in a systematic and coherent fashion. Domestic leadership, in both the private and public sector, and international cooperation among great powers is necessary to prevent the coming Apocalypse. Yet there are many domestic and international obstacles standing in the way of policies that would allow for a less dystopian (though still contested and conflictual) future. Thus, while a less bleak scenario is obviously desirable, a clear-headed analysis indicates that dystopia is much more likely than a happier outcome. The years and decades ahead will be marked by a stagflationary debt crisis and related megathreats – war, pandemics, climate change, disruptive AI, and deglobalization – all of which will be bad for jobs, economies, markets, peace, and prosperity.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 24471 Views
  • The Age of Megathreats
    Nouriel RoubiniNov 4, 2022
    op_roubini3_Getty Images_worlddisaster Getty Images
    NEW YORK – Severe megathreats are imperiling our future – not just our jobs, incomes, wealth, and the global economy, but also the relative peace, prosperity, and progress achieved over the past 75 years. Many of these threats were not even on our radar during the prosperous post-World War II era. I grew up in the Middle East and Europe from the late 1950s to the early 1980s, and I never worried about climate change potentially destroying the planet. Most of us had barely even heard of the problem, and greenhouse-gas emissions were still relatively low, compared to where they would soon be.

    Moreover, after the US-Soviet détente and US President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in the early 1970s, I never really worried about another war among great powers, let alone a nuclear one. The term “pandemic” didn’t register in my consciousness, either, because the last major one had been in 1918. And I didn’t fathom that artificial intelligence might someday destroy most jobs and render Homo sapiens obsolete, because those were the years of the long “AI winter.”

    Similarly, terms like “deglobalization” and “trade war” had no purchase during this period. Trade liberalization had been in full swing since the Great Depression, and it would soon lead to the hyper-globalization that began in the 1990s. Debt crises posed no threat, because private and public debt-to-GDP ratios were low in advanced economies and emerging markets, and growth was robust. No one had to worry about the massive build-up of implicit debt, in the form of unfunded liabilities from pay-as-you-go social security and health-care systems. The supply of young workers was rising, the share of the elderly was still low, and robust, mostly unrestricted immigration from the Global South to the North would continue to prop up the labor market in advanced economies.

    Against this backdrop, economic cycles were contained, and recessions were short and shallow, except for during the stagflationary decade of the 1970s; but even then, there were no debt crises in advanced economies, because debt ratios were low. The kind of financial cycles that lead to crises were contained not just in advanced economies but even in emerging markets, owing to the low leverage, low risk-taking, solid financial regulation, capital controls, and various forms of financial repression that prevailed during this period. The advanced economies were strong liberal democracies that were free of extreme partisan polarization. Populism and authoritarianism were confined to a benighted cohort of poorer countries.

    Goodbye to All That

    Fast-forward from this relatively “golden” period between 1945 and 1985 to late 2022, and you will immediately notice that we are awash in new, extreme megathreats that were not previously on anyone’s mind. The world has entered what I call a geopolitical depression, with (at least) four dangerous revisionist powers – China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea – challenging the economic, financial, security, and geopolitical order that the United States and its allies created after WWII.

    There is a sharply rising risk not only of war among great powers but of a nuclear conflict. In the coming year, Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine could escalate into an unconventional conflict that directly involves NATO. And Israel – and perhaps the US – may decide to launch strikes against Iran, which is on its way to building a nuclear bomb.


    Subscribe to PS Digital now to read all the latest insights from Nouriel Roubini.

    Digital subscribers enjoy access to every PS commentary, including those by Nouriel Roubini, plus our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content, including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More.

    For a limited time, save $15 with the code ROUBINI15.

    Subscribe Now

    With Chinese President Xi Jinping further consolidating his authoritarian rule, and with the US tightening its trade restrictions against China, the new Sino-American cold war is getting colder by the day. Worse, it could all too easily turn hot over the status of Taiwan, which Xi is committed to reuniting with the mainland, and which US President Joe Biden is apparently committed to defending. Meanwhile, nuclear-armed North Korea has once again been seeking attention by firing rockets over Japan and South Korea.

    Cyberwarfare occurs daily between these revisionist powers and the West, and many other countries have adopted a non-aligned posture toward Western-led sanctions regimes. From our contingent vantage point in the middle of all these events, we don’t yet know if World War III has already begun in Ukraine. That determination will be left to future historians – if there are any.

    Even discounting the threat of nuclear Armageddon, the risk of an environmental Apocalypse is becoming increasingly serious, especially given that most of the talk about net-zero and ESG (environment, social, and governance) investing is just greenwashing – or greenwishing. The new greenflation is already in full swing, because it turns out that amassing the metals needed for the energy transition requires a lot of expensive energy.

    There is also a growing risk of new pandemics that would be worse than biblical plagues, owing to the link between environmental destruction and zoonotic diseases. Wildlife, carrying dangerous pathogens, are coming into closer and more frequent contact with humans and livestock. That is why we have experienced more frequent and virulent pandemics and epidemics (HIV, SARS, MERS, swine flu, bird flu, Zika, Ebola, COVID-19) since the early 1980s. All the evidence suggests that this problem will become even worse in the future. Indeed, owing to the melting of Siberian permafrost, we may soon be confronting dangerous viruses and bacteria that have been locked away for millennia.

    Moreover, geopolitical conflicts and national-security concerns are fueling trade, financial, and technology wars, and accelerating the deglobalization process. The return of protectionism and the Sino-American decoupling will leave the global economy, supply chains, and markets more balkanized and fragmented. The buzzwords “friend-shoring” and “secure and fair trade” have replaced “offshoring” and “free trade.”

    But on the domestic front, advances in AI, robotics, and automation will destroy more and more jobs, even if policymakers build higher protectionist walls in an effort to fight the last war. By both restricting immigration and demanding more domestic production, aging advanced economies will create a stronger incentive for companies to adopt labor-saving technologies. While routine jobs are obviously at risk, so, too, are any cognitive jobs that can be unbundled into discrete tasks, and even many creative jobs. AI language models like GPT-3 can already write better than most humans and will almost certainly displace many jobs and sources of income. In due course, some scientists believe that Homo sapiens will be rendered entirely obsolete by the rise of artificial general intelligence or machine super-intelligence – though this is a highly contentious subject of debate.

    Thus, over time, economic malaise will deepen, inequality will rise even further, and more white- and blue-collar workers will be left behind.

    Hard Choices, Hard Landings

    The macroeconomic situation is no better. For the first time since the 1970s, we are facing high inflation and the prospect of a recession – stagflation. The increased inflation in advanced economies wasn’t “transitory.” It is persistent, driven by a combination of bad policies – excessively loose monetary, fiscal, and credit policies that were kept in place for too long – and bad luck. No one could have anticipated how much the initial COVID-19 shock would curtail the supply of goods and labor and create bottlenecks in global supply chains. The same goes for Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, which caused a sharp spike in energy, food, fertilizers, industrial metals, and other commodities. Meanwhile, China has continued its “zero-COVID” policy, which is creating additional supply bottlenecks.

    While both demand and supply factors were in the mix, it is now widely recognized that the supply factors have played an increasingly decisive role. This matters for the economic outlook, because supply-driven inflation is stagflationary and thus increases the risk that monetary-policy tightening will produce a hard landing (increased unemployment and potentially a recession).

    What will follow from the US Federal Reserve and other major central banks’ current tightening? Until recently, most central banks and most of Wall Street belonged to “Team Soft Landing.” But the consensus has rapidly shifted, with even Fed Chair Jerome Powell recognizing that a recession is possible, that a soft landing will be “very challenging,” and that everyone should prepare for some “pain” ahead. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s model shows a high probability of a hard landing, and the Bank of England has expressed similar views about the United Kingdom. Several prominent Wall Street institutions have also now made a recession their baseline scenario (the most likely outcome if all other variables are held constant).

    History, too, points to deeper problems ahead. For the past 60 years in the US, whenever inflation has been above 5% (it is above 8% today), and unemployment has been below 5% (it is now 3.5%), any attempt by the Fed to bring inflation down toward its 2% target has caused a recession. Thus, a hard landing is much more likely than a soft landing, both in the US and across most other advanced economies.

    Sticky Stagflation

    In addition to the short-term factors, negative supply shocks and demand factors in the medium term will cause inflation to persist. On the supply side, I count eleven negative supply shocks that will reduce potential growth and increase the costs of production. Among these is the backlash against hyper-globalization, which has been gaining momentum and creating opportunities for populist, nativist, and protectionist politicians, and growing public anger over stark income and wealth inequalities, which is leading to more policies to support workers and the “left behind.” However well-intentioned, such measures will contribute to a dangerous wage-price spiral.

    Other sources of persistent inflation include rising protectionism (from both the left and the right), which has restricted trade, impeded the movement of capital, and heightened political resistance to immigration, which in turn has put additional upward pressure on wages. National-security and strategic considerations have further restricted flows of technology, data, and talent, and new labor and environmental standards, as important as they may be, are hampering both trade and new construction.

    This balkanization of the global economy is deeply stagflationary, and it is coinciding with demographic aging, not just in developed countries but also in large emerging economies such as China. Because young people tend to produce and save more, whereas older people spend down their savings and require many more expensive services in health care and other sectors, this trend, too, will lead to higher prices and slower growth.

    Today’s geopolitical turmoil further complicates matters. The disruptions to trade and the spike in commodity prices following Russia’s invasion were not just a one-off phenomenon. The same threats to harvests and food shipments that arose in 2022 may well persist in 2023. Moreover, if China does finally end its zero-COVID policy and begin to restart its economy, a surge in demand for many commodities will add to the global inflationary pressures. There is also no end in sight for Sino-Western decoupling, which is accelerating across all dimensions of trade (goods, services, capital, labor, technology, data, and information). And, of course, Iran, North Korea, and other strategic rivals to the West could soon contribute in their own ways to the global havoc.

    Now that the US dollar has been fully weaponized for strategic and national-security purposes, its position as the main global reserve currency could eventually begin to decline, and a weaker dollar would of course add to inflationary pressures in the US. More broadly, a frictionless world trading system requires a frictionless financial system. But sweeping primary and secondary sanctions have thrown sand in what was once a well-oiled machine, massively increasing the transaction costs of trade.

    On top of it all, climate change, too, will create persistent stagflationary pressures. Droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and other disasters are increasingly disrupting economic activity and threatening harvests (thus driving up food prices). At the same time, demands for decarbonization have led to underinvestment in fossil-fuel capacity before investment in renewables has reached the point where they can make up the difference. Today’s large energy-price spikes were inevitable.

    The increased likelihood of future pandemics also represents a persistent source of stagflation, especially considering how little has been done to prevent or prepare for the next one. The next contagious outbreak will lend further momentum to protectionist policies as countries rush to close borders and hoard critical supplies of food, medicines, and other essential goods.

    Finally, cyberwarfare remains an underappreciated threat to economic activity and even public safety. Firms and governments will either face more stagflationary disruptions to production, or they will have to spend a fortune on cybersecurity. Either way, costs will rise.

    The Worst of All Possible Economies

    When the recession comes, it will not be short and shallow but long and severe. Not only are we facing persistent short- and medium-term negative supply shocks, but we are also heading into the mother of all debt crises, owing to soaring private and public debt ratios over the last few decades. Low debt ratios spared us from that outcome in the 1970s. And though we certainly had debt crises following the 2008 crash – the result of excessive household, bank, and government debt – we also had deflation. It was a demand shock and a credit crunch that could be met with massive monetary, fiscal, and credit easing.

    Today, we are experiencing the worst elements of both the 1970s and 2008. Multiple, persistent negative supply shocks have coincided with debt ratios that are even higher than they were during the global financial crisis. These inflationary pressures are forcing central banks to tighten monetary policy even though we are heading into a recession. That makes the current situation fundamentally different from both the global financial crisis and the COVID-19 crisis. Everyone should be preparing for what may come to be remembered as the Great Stagflationary Debt Crisis.

    While central banks have been at pains to sound more hawkish, we should be skeptical of their professed willingness to fight inflation at any cost. Once they find themselves in a debt trap, they will have to blink. With debt ratios so high, fighting inflation will cause an economic and financial crash that will be deemed politically unacceptable. Major central banks will feel as though they have no choice but to backpedal, and inflation, the debasement of fiat currencies, boom-bust cycles, and financial crises will become even more severe and frequent.

    The inevitability of central banks wimping out was recently on display in the United Kingdom. Faced with the market reaction to the Truss government’s reckless fiscal stimulus, the BOE had to launch an emergency quantitative-easing (QE) program to buy up government bonds. That sad episode confirmed that in the UK, as in many other countries, monetary policy is increasingly subject to fiscal capture.

    Recall that a similar turnaround occurred in 2019, when the Fed, after previously signaling continued rate hikes and quantitative-tightening, stopped its QT program and started pursuing a mix of backdoor QE and policy-rate cuts at the first sign of mild financial pressures and a growth slowdown. Central banks will talk tough; but, in a world of excessive debt and risks of an economic and financial crash, there is good reason to doubt their willingness to do “whatever it takes” to return inflation to its target rate.

    With governments unable to reduce high debts and deficits by spending less or raising revenues, those that can borrow in their own currency will increasingly resort to the “inflation tax”: relying on unexpected price growth to wipe out long-term nominal liabilities at fixed interest rates.

    How will financial markets and prices of equities and bonds perform in the face of rising inflation and the return of stagflation? It is likely that, as in the stagflation of the 1970s, both components of any traditional asset portfolio will suffer, potentially incurring massive losses. Inflation is bad for bond portfolios, which will take losses as yields increase and prices fall, as well as for equities, whose valuations are hurt by rising interest rates.

    For the first time in decades, a 60/40 portfolio of equities and bonds suffered massive losses in 2022, because bond yields have surged while equities have gone into a bear market. By 1982, at the peak of the stagflation decade, the average S&P 500 firm’s price-to-earnings ratio was down to eight; today, it is closer to 20, which suggests that the bear market could end up being even more protracted and severe. Investors will need to find assets to hedge against inflation, political and geopolitical risks, and environmental damage: these include short-term government bonds and inflation-indexed bonds, gold and other precious metals, and real estate that is resilient to environmental damage.

    The Moment of Truth

    In any case, these megathreats will further contribute to rising income and wealth inequality, which has already been putting severe pressure on liberal democracies (as those left behind revolt against elites), and fueling the rise of radical and aggressive populist regimes. One can find right-wing manifestations of this trend in Russia, Turkey, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, the US (under Donald Trump), post-Brexit Britain, and many other countries; and left-wing manifestations in Argentina, Venezuela, Peru, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, and now Brazil (which has just replaced a right-wing populist with a left-wing one).

    And, of course, Xi’s authoritarian stranglehold has given the lie to the old idea that Western engagement with a fast-growing China would ineluctably lead that country to open itself up even more to markets and, eventually, to democratic processes. Under Xi, China shows every sign of becoming more closed off, and more aggressive on geopolitical, security, and economic matters.

    How did it come to this? Part of the problem is that we have long had our heads stuck in the sand. Now, we need to make up for lost time. Without decisive action, we will be heading into a period that is less like the four decades after WWII than like the three decades between 1914 and 1945. That period gave us World War I; the Spanish flu pandemic; the 1929 Wall Street crash; the Great Depression; massive trade and currency wars; inflation, hyperinflation, and deflation; financial and debt crises, leading to massive meltdowns and defaults; and the rise of authoritarian militarist regimes in Italy, Germany, Japan, Spain, and elsewhere, culminating in WWII and the Holocaust.

    In this new world, the relative peace, prosperity, and rising global welfare that we have taken for granted will be gone; most of it already is. If we don’t stop the multi-track slow-motion train wreck that is threatening the global economy and our planet at large, we will be lucky to have only a repeat of the stagflationary 1970s. Far more likely is an echo of the 1930s and the 1940s, only now with all the massive disruptions from climate change added to the mix.

    Avoiding a dystopian scenario will not be easy. While there are potential solutions to each megathreat, most are costly in the short run and will deliver benefits only over the long run. Many also require technological innovations that are not yet available or in place, starting with those needed to halt or reverse climate change. Complicating matters further, today’s megathreats are interconnected, and therefore best addressed in a systematic and coherent fashion. Domestic leadership, in both the private and public sector, and international cooperation among great powers is necessary to prevent the coming Apocalypse.

    Yet there are many domestic and international obstacles standing in the way of policies that would allow for a less dystopian (though still contested and conflictual) future. Thus, while a less bleak scenario is obviously desirable, a clear-headed analysis indicates that dystopia is much more likely than a happier outcome. The years and decades ahead will be marked by a stagflationary debt crisis and related megathreats – war, pandemics, climate change, disruptive AI, and deglobalization – all of which will be bad for jobs, economies, markets, peace, and prosperity.
    The Age of Megathreats Nouriel RoubiniNov 4, 2022 op_roubini3_Getty Images_worlddisaster Getty Images NEW YORK – Severe megathreats are imperiling our future – not just our jobs, incomes, wealth, and the global economy, but also the relative peace, prosperity, and progress achieved over the past 75 years. Many of these threats were not even on our radar during the prosperous post-World War II era. I grew up in the Middle East and Europe from the late 1950s to the early 1980s, and I never worried about climate change potentially destroying the planet. Most of us had barely even heard of the problem, and greenhouse-gas emissions were still relatively low, compared to where they would soon be. Moreover, after the US-Soviet détente and US President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in the early 1970s, I never really worried about another war among great powers, let alone a nuclear one. The term “pandemic” didn’t register in my consciousness, either, because the last major one had been in 1918. And I didn’t fathom that artificial intelligence might someday destroy most jobs and render Homo sapiens obsolete, because those were the years of the long “AI winter.” Similarly, terms like “deglobalization” and “trade war” had no purchase during this period. Trade liberalization had been in full swing since the Great Depression, and it would soon lead to the hyper-globalization that began in the 1990s. Debt crises posed no threat, because private and public debt-to-GDP ratios were low in advanced economies and emerging markets, and growth was robust. No one had to worry about the massive build-up of implicit debt, in the form of unfunded liabilities from pay-as-you-go social security and health-care systems. The supply of young workers was rising, the share of the elderly was still low, and robust, mostly unrestricted immigration from the Global South to the North would continue to prop up the labor market in advanced economies. Against this backdrop, economic cycles were contained, and recessions were short and shallow, except for during the stagflationary decade of the 1970s; but even then, there were no debt crises in advanced economies, because debt ratios were low. The kind of financial cycles that lead to crises were contained not just in advanced economies but even in emerging markets, owing to the low leverage, low risk-taking, solid financial regulation, capital controls, and various forms of financial repression that prevailed during this period. The advanced economies were strong liberal democracies that were free of extreme partisan polarization. Populism and authoritarianism were confined to a benighted cohort of poorer countries. Goodbye to All That Fast-forward from this relatively “golden” period between 1945 and 1985 to late 2022, and you will immediately notice that we are awash in new, extreme megathreats that were not previously on anyone’s mind. The world has entered what I call a geopolitical depression, with (at least) four dangerous revisionist powers – China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea – challenging the economic, financial, security, and geopolitical order that the United States and its allies created after WWII. There is a sharply rising risk not only of war among great powers but of a nuclear conflict. In the coming year, Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine could escalate into an unconventional conflict that directly involves NATO. And Israel – and perhaps the US – may decide to launch strikes against Iran, which is on its way to building a nuclear bomb. Subscribe to PS Digital now to read all the latest insights from Nouriel Roubini. Digital subscribers enjoy access to every PS commentary, including those by Nouriel Roubini, plus our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content, including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More. For a limited time, save $15 with the code ROUBINI15. Subscribe Now With Chinese President Xi Jinping further consolidating his authoritarian rule, and with the US tightening its trade restrictions against China, the new Sino-American cold war is getting colder by the day. Worse, it could all too easily turn hot over the status of Taiwan, which Xi is committed to reuniting with the mainland, and which US President Joe Biden is apparently committed to defending. Meanwhile, nuclear-armed North Korea has once again been seeking attention by firing rockets over Japan and South Korea. Cyberwarfare occurs daily between these revisionist powers and the West, and many other countries have adopted a non-aligned posture toward Western-led sanctions regimes. From our contingent vantage point in the middle of all these events, we don’t yet know if World War III has already begun in Ukraine. That determination will be left to future historians – if there are any. Even discounting the threat of nuclear Armageddon, the risk of an environmental Apocalypse is becoming increasingly serious, especially given that most of the talk about net-zero and ESG (environment, social, and governance) investing is just greenwashing – or greenwishing. The new greenflation is already in full swing, because it turns out that amassing the metals needed for the energy transition requires a lot of expensive energy. There is also a growing risk of new pandemics that would be worse than biblical plagues, owing to the link between environmental destruction and zoonotic diseases. Wildlife, carrying dangerous pathogens, are coming into closer and more frequent contact with humans and livestock. That is why we have experienced more frequent and virulent pandemics and epidemics (HIV, SARS, MERS, swine flu, bird flu, Zika, Ebola, COVID-19) since the early 1980s. All the evidence suggests that this problem will become even worse in the future. Indeed, owing to the melting of Siberian permafrost, we may soon be confronting dangerous viruses and bacteria that have been locked away for millennia. Moreover, geopolitical conflicts and national-security concerns are fueling trade, financial, and technology wars, and accelerating the deglobalization process. The return of protectionism and the Sino-American decoupling will leave the global economy, supply chains, and markets more balkanized and fragmented. The buzzwords “friend-shoring” and “secure and fair trade” have replaced “offshoring” and “free trade.” But on the domestic front, advances in AI, robotics, and automation will destroy more and more jobs, even if policymakers build higher protectionist walls in an effort to fight the last war. By both restricting immigration and demanding more domestic production, aging advanced economies will create a stronger incentive for companies to adopt labor-saving technologies. While routine jobs are obviously at risk, so, too, are any cognitive jobs that can be unbundled into discrete tasks, and even many creative jobs. AI language models like GPT-3 can already write better than most humans and will almost certainly displace many jobs and sources of income. In due course, some scientists believe that Homo sapiens will be rendered entirely obsolete by the rise of artificial general intelligence or machine super-intelligence – though this is a highly contentious subject of debate. Thus, over time, economic malaise will deepen, inequality will rise even further, and more white- and blue-collar workers will be left behind. Hard Choices, Hard Landings The macroeconomic situation is no better. For the first time since the 1970s, we are facing high inflation and the prospect of a recession – stagflation. The increased inflation in advanced economies wasn’t “transitory.” It is persistent, driven by a combination of bad policies – excessively loose monetary, fiscal, and credit policies that were kept in place for too long – and bad luck. No one could have anticipated how much the initial COVID-19 shock would curtail the supply of goods and labor and create bottlenecks in global supply chains. The same goes for Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, which caused a sharp spike in energy, food, fertilizers, industrial metals, and other commodities. Meanwhile, China has continued its “zero-COVID” policy, which is creating additional supply bottlenecks. While both demand and supply factors were in the mix, it is now widely recognized that the supply factors have played an increasingly decisive role. This matters for the economic outlook, because supply-driven inflation is stagflationary and thus increases the risk that monetary-policy tightening will produce a hard landing (increased unemployment and potentially a recession). What will follow from the US Federal Reserve and other major central banks’ current tightening? Until recently, most central banks and most of Wall Street belonged to “Team Soft Landing.” But the consensus has rapidly shifted, with even Fed Chair Jerome Powell recognizing that a recession is possible, that a soft landing will be “very challenging,” and that everyone should prepare for some “pain” ahead. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s model shows a high probability of a hard landing, and the Bank of England has expressed similar views about the United Kingdom. Several prominent Wall Street institutions have also now made a recession their baseline scenario (the most likely outcome if all other variables are held constant). History, too, points to deeper problems ahead. For the past 60 years in the US, whenever inflation has been above 5% (it is above 8% today), and unemployment has been below 5% (it is now 3.5%), any attempt by the Fed to bring inflation down toward its 2% target has caused a recession. Thus, a hard landing is much more likely than a soft landing, both in the US and across most other advanced economies. Sticky Stagflation In addition to the short-term factors, negative supply shocks and demand factors in the medium term will cause inflation to persist. On the supply side, I count eleven negative supply shocks that will reduce potential growth and increase the costs of production. Among these is the backlash against hyper-globalization, which has been gaining momentum and creating opportunities for populist, nativist, and protectionist politicians, and growing public anger over stark income and wealth inequalities, which is leading to more policies to support workers and the “left behind.” However well-intentioned, such measures will contribute to a dangerous wage-price spiral. Other sources of persistent inflation include rising protectionism (from both the left and the right), which has restricted trade, impeded the movement of capital, and heightened political resistance to immigration, which in turn has put additional upward pressure on wages. National-security and strategic considerations have further restricted flows of technology, data, and talent, and new labor and environmental standards, as important as they may be, are hampering both trade and new construction. This balkanization of the global economy is deeply stagflationary, and it is coinciding with demographic aging, not just in developed countries but also in large emerging economies such as China. Because young people tend to produce and save more, whereas older people spend down their savings and require many more expensive services in health care and other sectors, this trend, too, will lead to higher prices and slower growth. Today’s geopolitical turmoil further complicates matters. The disruptions to trade and the spike in commodity prices following Russia’s invasion were not just a one-off phenomenon. The same threats to harvests and food shipments that arose in 2022 may well persist in 2023. Moreover, if China does finally end its zero-COVID policy and begin to restart its economy, a surge in demand for many commodities will add to the global inflationary pressures. There is also no end in sight for Sino-Western decoupling, which is accelerating across all dimensions of trade (goods, services, capital, labor, technology, data, and information). And, of course, Iran, North Korea, and other strategic rivals to the West could soon contribute in their own ways to the global havoc. Now that the US dollar has been fully weaponized for strategic and national-security purposes, its position as the main global reserve currency could eventually begin to decline, and a weaker dollar would of course add to inflationary pressures in the US. More broadly, a frictionless world trading system requires a frictionless financial system. But sweeping primary and secondary sanctions have thrown sand in what was once a well-oiled machine, massively increasing the transaction costs of trade. On top of it all, climate change, too, will create persistent stagflationary pressures. Droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and other disasters are increasingly disrupting economic activity and threatening harvests (thus driving up food prices). At the same time, demands for decarbonization have led to underinvestment in fossil-fuel capacity before investment in renewables has reached the point where they can make up the difference. Today’s large energy-price spikes were inevitable. The increased likelihood of future pandemics also represents a persistent source of stagflation, especially considering how little has been done to prevent or prepare for the next one. The next contagious outbreak will lend further momentum to protectionist policies as countries rush to close borders and hoard critical supplies of food, medicines, and other essential goods. Finally, cyberwarfare remains an underappreciated threat to economic activity and even public safety. Firms and governments will either face more stagflationary disruptions to production, or they will have to spend a fortune on cybersecurity. Either way, costs will rise. The Worst of All Possible Economies When the recession comes, it will not be short and shallow but long and severe. Not only are we facing persistent short- and medium-term negative supply shocks, but we are also heading into the mother of all debt crises, owing to soaring private and public debt ratios over the last few decades. Low debt ratios spared us from that outcome in the 1970s. And though we certainly had debt crises following the 2008 crash – the result of excessive household, bank, and government debt – we also had deflation. It was a demand shock and a credit crunch that could be met with massive monetary, fiscal, and credit easing. Today, we are experiencing the worst elements of both the 1970s and 2008. Multiple, persistent negative supply shocks have coincided with debt ratios that are even higher than they were during the global financial crisis. These inflationary pressures are forcing central banks to tighten monetary policy even though we are heading into a recession. That makes the current situation fundamentally different from both the global financial crisis and the COVID-19 crisis. Everyone should be preparing for what may come to be remembered as the Great Stagflationary Debt Crisis. While central banks have been at pains to sound more hawkish, we should be skeptical of their professed willingness to fight inflation at any cost. Once they find themselves in a debt trap, they will have to blink. With debt ratios so high, fighting inflation will cause an economic and financial crash that will be deemed politically unacceptable. Major central banks will feel as though they have no choice but to backpedal, and inflation, the debasement of fiat currencies, boom-bust cycles, and financial crises will become even more severe and frequent. The inevitability of central banks wimping out was recently on display in the United Kingdom. Faced with the market reaction to the Truss government’s reckless fiscal stimulus, the BOE had to launch an emergency quantitative-easing (QE) program to buy up government bonds. That sad episode confirmed that in the UK, as in many other countries, monetary policy is increasingly subject to fiscal capture. Recall that a similar turnaround occurred in 2019, when the Fed, after previously signaling continued rate hikes and quantitative-tightening, stopped its QT program and started pursuing a mix of backdoor QE and policy-rate cuts at the first sign of mild financial pressures and a growth slowdown. Central banks will talk tough; but, in a world of excessive debt and risks of an economic and financial crash, there is good reason to doubt their willingness to do “whatever it takes” to return inflation to its target rate. With governments unable to reduce high debts and deficits by spending less or raising revenues, those that can borrow in their own currency will increasingly resort to the “inflation tax”: relying on unexpected price growth to wipe out long-term nominal liabilities at fixed interest rates. How will financial markets and prices of equities and bonds perform in the face of rising inflation and the return of stagflation? It is likely that, as in the stagflation of the 1970s, both components of any traditional asset portfolio will suffer, potentially incurring massive losses. Inflation is bad for bond portfolios, which will take losses as yields increase and prices fall, as well as for equities, whose valuations are hurt by rising interest rates. For the first time in decades, a 60/40 portfolio of equities and bonds suffered massive losses in 2022, because bond yields have surged while equities have gone into a bear market. By 1982, at the peak of the stagflation decade, the average S&P 500 firm’s price-to-earnings ratio was down to eight; today, it is closer to 20, which suggests that the bear market could end up being even more protracted and severe. Investors will need to find assets to hedge against inflation, political and geopolitical risks, and environmental damage: these include short-term government bonds and inflation-indexed bonds, gold and other precious metals, and real estate that is resilient to environmental damage. The Moment of Truth In any case, these megathreats will further contribute to rising income and wealth inequality, which has already been putting severe pressure on liberal democracies (as those left behind revolt against elites), and fueling the rise of radical and aggressive populist regimes. One can find right-wing manifestations of this trend in Russia, Turkey, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, the US (under Donald Trump), post-Brexit Britain, and many other countries; and left-wing manifestations in Argentina, Venezuela, Peru, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, and now Brazil (which has just replaced a right-wing populist with a left-wing one). And, of course, Xi’s authoritarian stranglehold has given the lie to the old idea that Western engagement with a fast-growing China would ineluctably lead that country to open itself up even more to markets and, eventually, to democratic processes. Under Xi, China shows every sign of becoming more closed off, and more aggressive on geopolitical, security, and economic matters. How did it come to this? Part of the problem is that we have long had our heads stuck in the sand. Now, we need to make up for lost time. Without decisive action, we will be heading into a period that is less like the four decades after WWII than like the three decades between 1914 and 1945. That period gave us World War I; the Spanish flu pandemic; the 1929 Wall Street crash; the Great Depression; massive trade and currency wars; inflation, hyperinflation, and deflation; financial and debt crises, leading to massive meltdowns and defaults; and the rise of authoritarian militarist regimes in Italy, Germany, Japan, Spain, and elsewhere, culminating in WWII and the Holocaust. In this new world, the relative peace, prosperity, and rising global welfare that we have taken for granted will be gone; most of it already is. If we don’t stop the multi-track slow-motion train wreck that is threatening the global economy and our planet at large, we will be lucky to have only a repeat of the stagflationary 1970s. Far more likely is an echo of the 1930s and the 1940s, only now with all the massive disruptions from climate change added to the mix. Avoiding a dystopian scenario will not be easy. While there are potential solutions to each megathreat, most are costly in the short run and will deliver benefits only over the long run. Many also require technological innovations that are not yet available or in place, starting with those needed to halt or reverse climate change. Complicating matters further, today’s megathreats are interconnected, and therefore best addressed in a systematic and coherent fashion. Domestic leadership, in both the private and public sector, and international cooperation among great powers is necessary to prevent the coming Apocalypse. Yet there are many domestic and international obstacles standing in the way of policies that would allow for a less dystopian (though still contested and conflictual) future. Thus, while a less bleak scenario is obviously desirable, a clear-headed analysis indicates that dystopia is much more likely than a happier outcome. The years and decades ahead will be marked by a stagflationary debt crisis and related megathreats – war, pandemics, climate change, disruptive AI, and deglobalization – all of which will be bad for jobs, economies, markets, peace, and prosperity.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 22987 Views
  • International Workers' Day

    Due to the extended holiday weekend (we celebrate #Labor_Day as a national holiday and non-working days are Monday and Tuesday), we planned a short vacation in a Spa in Hungary.
    All-day bathing and enjoying the healing effect of thermal waters - just what a tired body and spirit needs. I'm sorry that the thermal water treatment has exhausted me so much that I don't have the strength to keep my eyes open and watch all posts from yesterday and today and vote, but I'll be back on Tuesday, stronger than ever :-)
    International Workers' Day Due to the extended holiday weekend (we celebrate #Labor_Day as a national holiday and non-working days are Monday and Tuesday), we planned a short vacation in a Spa in Hungary. All-day bathing and enjoying the healing effect of thermal waters - just what a tired body and spirit needs. I'm sorry that the thermal water treatment has exhausted me so much that I don't have the strength to keep my eyes open and watch all posts from yesterday and today and vote, but I'll be back on Tuesday, stronger than ever :-)
    Like
    Wow
    17
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1660 Views
  • …, Budapest is so beautiful - Who was ever here ???
    #question #somee #budapest #hungary #europe
    …, Budapest is so beautiful - Who was ever here ??? #question #somee #budapest #hungary #europe
    Like
    14
    2 Comments 0 Shares 1638 Views
  • …, just arrived In Budapest
    #europe #spring #tour
    #hungary
    …, just arrived In Budapest #europe #spring #tour #hungary
    Like
    8
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1690 Views
  • …, beauty day to prepare my Hungary tour
    #hungary #tour #europe #succsess
    …, beauty day to prepare my Hungary tour #hungary #tour #europe #succsess
    Like
    11
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1410 Views
  • Hungary has called for a UN investigation into the “scandalous” attack on the Nord Stream pipelines, which journalist Seymour Hersh asserted were destroyed by the United States.

    https://summit.news/2023/02/27/hungary-demands-un-investigation-into-scandalous-attack-on-nord-stream-pipelines/ #un #nordstream #hivelist #someeofficial #cent #pay #sbt #dec #proofofbrain #hustler
    Hungary has called for a UN investigation into the “scandalous” attack on the Nord Stream pipelines, which journalist Seymour Hersh asserted were destroyed by the United States. https://summit.news/2023/02/27/hungary-demands-un-investigation-into-scandalous-attack-on-nord-stream-pipelines/ #un #nordstream #hivelist #someeofficial #cent #pay #sbt #dec #proofofbrain #hustler
    Like
    4
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2377 Views
  • Mount Mecsek, Baranya Hungary ????????

    ???? :Edina Rozsafi
    ????#NaturalbeautyoftheEarth
    Mount Mecsek, Baranya Hungary ???????? ???? :Edina Rozsafi ????#NaturalbeautyoftheEarth
    Like
    5
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1467 Views
More Results