Connexion
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s statement and answers to media questions at a joint news conference following talks with Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran Abbas Araghchi, Moscow, December 17, 2025
[Note: We posted the highlights but the context makes it so much clearer]
Media members,
Foreign Minister of Iran Abbas Araghchi and I held detailed and substantive talks today and, as always, they were held in a friendly, constructive, and trust-based atmosphere.
We stated progress in Russia-Iran relations which have become significantly stronger in recent years. In 2025, the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between the Russian Federation and the Islamic Republic of Iran was signed and entered into force on October 2. The fact that President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of Iran Masoud Pezeshkian put their signatures under this treaty underscores its importance for Moscow and Tehran.
We discussed the tasks set by our respective presidents during their meeting in Ashgabat last week and expressed confidence that once implemented this treaty will give a powerful boost to bilateral interaction and help us align our approaches to regional and multilateral issues with a primary focus on expanding the capabilities of the two countries in the interest of improving stability and security in our common region.
We noted the particularly trust-based nature of the political dialogue at the top, intergovernmental, and interparliamentary levels, as well as at the interagency and ministerial level. Civil society contacts are expanding to further strengthen neighbourly ties between our countries.
We highly praised the advanced level of practical bilateral cooperation in trade, the economy, and investment. Trade has been steadily up by more than 10 percent for the second straight year, over 15 percent last year. The Permanent Russian-Iranian Commission on Trade and Economic Cooperation is fully operational with its co-chairs, Minister of Energy Sergey Tsivilyov and Iranian Minister of Petroleum Mohsen Paknejad, remaining in contact at all times. We discussed the importance of making thorough preparations for the next meeting of the intergovernmental commission, which will take place in Tehran in February 2026.
We share a common view on the importance of promoting business ties. In this regard, the entry into force of the Free Trade Agreement between the EAEU and Iran this year, and Tehran obtaining observer status in December 2024, is of utmost importance. We are interested in continued expansion of the legal and regulatory framework between our countries with an eye towards eliminating trade barriers.
We underscored the importance of carrying out flagship infrastructure projects, including the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant. With the support of the Russian personnel, it continues to operate in standard mode and remained operational even amid the June aggression by Israel and the United States. We reviewed in detail the status of the implementation of the project to build the Rasht-Astara Railway section financed through a state loan provided by Russia. The construction of this railway is monitored by our respective presidents as a priority project. The railway is the key to the full-on launch of the western branch of the strategic North-South International Transport Corridor.
The exchange of views on international and regional issues reaffirmed our overlapping positions or close views on most matters. We spoke in favour of further democratisation of international life based on multipolarity, which is on track to become a reality in full accordance with the principles enshrined in the UN Charter that have been sabotaged by the collective West for many decades now.
The objective course of history warrants the implementation of the lofty principles of the UN Charter. Importantly, these principles must be acted upon, respected and applied in practice not occasionally, but exclusively as an indivisible and interdependent whole.
This strongly resonates with the Ukraine conflict, where the collective West is pushing to manipulate every provision of international law and to replace them with its own “rules” that are at odds with the universally recognised international legal norms and serve only the push of the collective West, above all Europeans, to continue their neocolonial policies aimed at living off other nations the way they did over the past 500 years starting in the era of colonialism. The neocolonial economic, trade and financial dependence of African countries, as well as many countries in Asia and Latin America, on the West has remained unchanged to this day.
We denounced the use of unilateral coercive measures that undermine international law which fact has become particularly glaring amid the Ukraine crisis. Europe is trying to scuttle the constructive ideas put forward by the Trump Administration, as it violates every rule and principle that have until now governed international economic and financial relations, encroaching on property that the West itself had only recently declared inviolable, and eroding in many ways the principles promoted by Europeans, including as part of the globalisation efforts. What we are witnessing today is a process of fragmentation, not globalisation.
Speaking about the use of unilateral coercive measures, we stand fully in solidarity with Iran and a number of other countries. We advocate creating a group of countries that have a stake in countering this lawless behaviour. I believe this process will gain ever more supporters as it moves forward. We agreed to consolidate members of the international community who share these approaches. We will continue substantive work to neutralise the negative impact of illegal sanctions on the economies of our respective countries.
We covered in depth the Iranian nuclear programme dynamics amid the unapologetically aggressive and unlawful anti-Iranian policies adopted by a group of Western countries. Once again, Russia confirmed its readiness and willingness to help its Iranian friends identify acceptable solutions to overcome the nuclear dossier-related crisis created by the West. Acting in violation of all existing agreements and regulations that are legally established by the UN Security Council, Western Europeans are doing everything in their power to re-impose UN sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran, even though these sanctions expired more than a month ago alongside Security Council resolutions that were used to impose them.
We decry such disregard for law and international legislation, and the attempts to prioritise self-serving interests over the principles of the UN Charter. We hope that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, whom they are also trying to weave into this game, can clearly see that he is being nudged into a trap and will say no to those who conspire to take advantage of his authority, reputation and office of Secretary-General to push through the Western countries’ self-serving and unlawful plans.
Clearly, any decisions regarding potential arrangements that could put an end to the current crisis and put the process on a constructive track must be taken exclusively by the Iranian government based on the interests of the people of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and with full respect of its right, as a full-fledged member of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.
We will continue to deepen our cooperation at the UN, the SCO and BRICS. We covered several important regional issues, including the situation in the Middle East, primarily, the Palestinian territories, the South Caucasus, the Caspian region, Afghanistan, and neighbouring countries.
I would like to close by once again expressing satisfaction with the outcomes of the talks and to thank my Iranian counterpart for accepting the invitation to visit Russia.
Question (retranslated from Farsi): International relations are getting more intricate by the day. The international situation is marked by securitisation. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council, what can Russia suggest in order to keep international law intact? How serious is Russia about fortifying multilateral policy on international platforms? Is Russia ready and willing to support BRICS and the SCO?
With the US seeking dominance, especially in the context of the ongoing developments in the Caribbean, is the UN under threat of falling apart?
Sergey Lavrov: As President Putin has repeatedly made it clear, including in his most recent remarks, the UN is the finest creation of diplomacy in the entire history of humanity, because there has never been a universal entity that would bring together all independent states of the modern-day world. This organisation is vested with authority and mandates in virtually every sphere of human activity, ranging from security and disarmament to the economy, investment, climate protection, and now also AI and other cutting-edge achievements in ICT.
The UN system, which comprises around 20 specialised agencies and institutions, is, by all accounts, unique. However, just like any other bureaucracy, it is affected by intrinsic flaws. Regrouping the currently functioning entities is the order of the day. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has spoken in favour of this change as well. In his UN80 Report released ahead of the UN anniversary, he pointed out that the organisation was overstaffed, noting that the opportunities to conduct personnel optimization looked good. I am confident that it will end up taking place eventually.
At the same time, based on the experience and impressions from my contacts with my colleagues in Europe, reforming the UN Secretariat and its units and departments will be no small feat, but still a much less daunting endeavour than reforming the EU bureaucracy in Brussels which has broken every record known to humanity. We even went as far as to draw the attention of the senior officials from the UN Secretariat to what is happening with the Brussels-based elite that continue to attempt to usurp the powers and legitimate rights of the sovereign governments of nation states.
Truth be told, the UN Secretariat has never come even close to such an adventurous undertaking. However, there have been half-hearted attempts by certain Secretariat bureaucrats, primarily in New York, to shove their own ideas down the throats of UN member states. In most cases, these attempts were backed by our Western colleagues. We brought this to their attention during the discussions that followed the Secretary-General’s report on UN reforms. Without a doubt, this issue will take centre stage in the context of overcoming disproportionate representation of the Western countries at the UN Secretariat, where the bulk, if not all important positions (with extremely rare exceptions), are held by citizens of Western states or citizens of other countries with second Western, mainly US or UK, citizenship.
This violates the UN Charter’s requirement for fair geographical representation across all bodies serving the organisation. This is kind of a congenital/acquired disease.
The US actions in the Caribbean are rejected by almost all countries except Europe. The latter have hunkered down and remain silent with regard to what Washington is doing. All they can think of is to persuade the Trump Administration to go down the European path on the Ukraine issue in order to perpetuate the war unleashed by the West against the Russian Federation and, as I said earlier, to bring the Americans over to their side of the fence and to prevent them from advancing their constructive agenda aimed at resolving the Ukraine crisis.
All other countries have made their positions clear. We are very concerned about what the US Navy is up to and, more broadly, about the bellicose rhetoric of the Pentagon whereby they are planning a ground operation on top of illegal actions involving the sinking of civilian vessels without trial or investigation in the Caribbean Sea. Looking at the prevailing balance of power in the international arena, all of the above undermines hope that agreements can ever be reached and honoured. Nevertheless, the United States remains open to a dialogue, but not on all issues. President Trump claims that he has made every decision there was to make on a number of issues, and carrying them out is all that’s left to do.
Nonetheless, we welcome the positive side of the current Trump Administration as compared to the administration led by Joseph Biden, which refused to talk to anyone about anything and was incapable of any meaningful actions to begin with.
Your question was what we think about BRICS and the SCO. Unlike the EU, or what has become of it, and unlike NATO with its discipline of the rod, these are truly constellations of a new type. Incidentally, the EU and NATO alike are being subjected to attempts by their administrative heads, the head of the European Commission and NATO Secretary General, to bring them to heel.
If you ever have a chance to read what these characters have to say, you will get an impression that they think of themselves as the high and mighty political leaders of our time, rather than hired bureaucrats who are expected to carry out the will of the member states.
Nothing of the sort can even happen in the SCO or BRICS, which follow the principles of the UN Charter that have been tested over many decades now, namely sovereign equality of states, peaceful settlement of any disagreements, the search for consensus and common agreement on all issues, and concentration of efforts on implementing practical projects based on the principle of mutual benefit.
The work done by the SCO and BRICS will come as a reliable benchmark for making changes that are overdue at the UN and which, I would like to underscore this once again, should lead not to something revolutionary, but exclusively to reaffirmation by all UN members of their commitment to strictly observe all provisions of the UN Charter in their entirety and interconnection. I look forward to our Western colleagues, including the United States, contributing to the efforts designed to achieve such consensus.
Question: You said in your opening remarks that Russia is ready to help Iran look for a way out of the nuclear file crisis. Does it also imply Russia’s readiness to mediate the possible signing of an agreement between Iran and the United States?
Sergey Lavrov: For a number of years, Mr Abbas Araghchi and yours truly have been involved in preparing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which was adopted in 2015 and approved by the UN Security Council several months later.
Russia, as well as the other participants in this process, is deeply involved in the details that constitute the basis of that agreement and the details of how it was destroyed by the United States. This is the cause of the current problems. Those who have destroyed the JCPOA and undermined the UNSC resolution that approved it are now trying to shift the blame onto the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is clear to everyone.
We maintain contacts and regularly communicate with our Iranian friends. Our presidents communicate, and it is the fifth time that we have met with my Iranian colleague this year. Just like Mr Araghchi, senior advisor to the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran Ali Larijani has visited Russia and met with President Putin.
These issues were discussed. Both Russia and Iran would like to stabilise and normalise the situation, precluding any further use of force. Exclusively political and diplomatic solutions is what we need in the current situation.
Since Russia is cooperating with Iran in the nuclear sphere, we have built and are now expanding the capacity of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Since we are well aware of the situation in relations between Iran and the IAEA, we regularly discuss the approaches made public by European countries and the United States. Incidentally, we raise these questions during our expert contacts with our American colleagues, urging them to look for mutually acceptable solutions.
Therefore, the mediation services we can offer are well known. President Putin mentioned them during his contacts with Iranian and other representatives, and we also discussed them at the level of foreign ministers.
We are not imposing these mediation services on anyone. If the Islamic Republic of Iran as the main participant in that process decides that such services are necessary, we are ready to provide them, if Tehran’s other counteragents agree.
Question (retranslated from Farsi): We see that the Iranian-Russian relations are at their peak, especially after the entry into force of the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership.
On the other hand, you know that our enemies are trying to sour our relations. What do you think about our bilateral interaction and practical efforts in trade, the economy and science, as well as in defence and security, in light of the implementation of the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership? What other measures should we take to continue strengthening this common stance?
Sergey Lavrov: Speaking about our practical cooperation in the material sphere – in trade, the economy and investments, we talked about it in detail during our opening remarks at this news conference, so I won’t repeat it.
As you correctly said, we are developing our military-technical cooperation in full compliance with international norms and without violating universal international rules in any way. There are contacts between our militaries, including aimed at training to combat common threats and challenges such as terrorism and drug trafficking. This cooperation will continue.
There are also cultural, humanitarian and educational ties and scientific contacts, which are rapidly developing, both within our bilateral relations and also in the context of Russia and Iran’s participation in various multilateral formats such as BRICS, the SCO and the Caspian Five. The interregional factor and contacts between municipalities are increasing their stance on the agenda of these structures. This is probably the best guarantee of the sustainability of these organisations and associations, because they reach to the ground, to the level of towns and cities, connecting the people living in them with the strong ties of friendship and contacts.
I have very optimistic expectations regarding the further build-up of our strategic partnership in full compliance with the new treaty.
As for additional measures, today you attended the signing of the plan of consultations between our ministries for 2026˗2028. We did not have such documents or used such practice before. We held consultations, but it is the first time that we are planning them for three years ahead. I am confident that this will increase the effectiveness of our foreign policy cooperation as our contribution to the implementation of the tasks set out in the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership.
We are ready to develop our ties in all spheres. We discussed this today, and we have reached agreements on a number of specific issues.
Question: Are you discussing the drafting of a new agreement between Iran and the IAEA to replace the Cairo agreement, or can the Cairo agreement be relaunched? If so, is Russia involved in this process?
Sergey Lavrov: We discussed this issue today. My colleague, Mr Araghchi, briefed us on Iran’s stand regarding contacts with the IAEA. We fully share this view, including because any steps in this direction should be based on the good will and fundamental assessments of our Iranian friends after the Israeli and US attacks on the facilities that have been and officially continue to be under the IAEA safeguards.
Of course, it worth noting that the IAEA has not yet expressed its attitude to the fact that facilities under its safeguards have been flagrantly subjected to illegal attacks.
As I have said, we appreciate the good will of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is ready to resume cooperation with the IAEA despite these facts but not in the interests of promoting the Western agenda. There is no doubt that agreements with the Islamic Republic of Iran are possible if the IAEA Secretariat acts in strict compliance with the powers assigned to it. We wish success to these efforts.
We’ve seen this, but now with a few words from Dr. Quan Le in our China Writers’ Group, as we see zionist-israel weaponizing and politicizing the shooting at Bondi Beach.
We are also learning how powerful the zionist lobby is in Australia. Syrian Girl’s Telegram Channel has some interesting information. https://t.me/syriangirlpartisan/485
The Zionist Mossad had just joined the investigation into the Bondi Beach shooting. The bloodlust toward Iran, which is now blamed, is fast becoming a massive media fire. These people mobilize very fast. The blame game mobilized fast as well. “Netanyahu blames the attack in Australia, which killed at least 11 people, on Australia signaling its support for a Palestinian state.” But what they do not say, is what AHH mentioned in the Hearty Salon today: “As I thought, the fools that shot up the zionazi vacationers in Oz were salafis. Remote-controlled mindless drone-proxies without a shred of honor or sense. No normal muslim or human takes it out on civilians on another continent when the armed enemy sits pretty elsewhere. A meaningless action, and calculated to harm their own kind and advance narratives, but some are stupid beyond help
Recently, we posted material on how zionism is growing and literally called it a new Pax Judaica. We also see in the LAC the strong push to support zionism. https://sovereignista.com/2025/12/10/rise-of-the-jewish-empire-with-prof-david-miller/
Dr Quan
“I sometimes allow myself a small irrational comment :
I love the teenager look of the Chinese academic Zhang Sheng because it reminds me of the physical description by the Grand Historian Sima Qian (145 bce~86 bce) of another Zhang guy, also an intellectual, who lived 22 centuries ago : Zhang Liang (~251 bce-189 bce), a nobleman from one of the six kingdoms having lost against Ying Zheng (259 bce/ruled as King Zheng of Qin from 247 bce to 221 bce and as Emperor from 221 bce to his death in 210 bce). Ying Zheng is better known worldwide as the First Emperor of China.
Zhang Liang (~251 bce-189 bce) was the main & savvy advisor of Liu Bang (256 bce/ruled from 206 bce to 202 bce as King of Han and as Emperor from 202 bce to his death in 195 bce), the Founding Father of the 426-year long great Han Imperial dynasty (206 bce-220 ce) which gave to the Chinese people their name in Chinese, the 漢 Han people and having precisely conquered the inaugural but quite short-lived First Empire of the Qin dynasty (221 bce-207 bce).
Let’s hope that Zhang Sheng, and other advisors, will give wise and awesome counsels to the present & future Chinese rulers so the words besides Zhang Sheng’s photo will become a dazzling factual reality :
CHINA WILL BREAK ZIONISM.”
—
The United States just managed to pass a highly controversial resolution in the United Nations Security Council, which basically transforms Gaza into a UN Mandate and makes Donald Trump its governor. Resolution 2803 has alredy been heavily criticized by Human Rights experts like Francesca Albanese and Craig Mokhiber. The puzzling thing in this is that Russia and China, both abstained from voting, thereby helping the resolution to pass.
To help understand China’s position on West Asia, I’m today joined by ZHANG Sheng, a Non-resident Visiting Researcher at Turkey’s KUASIA (Coach) University, and the author of a very popular video on Youtube where he recently explained Chinese approaches toward Gaza.
This is what fell on the radar of friends quietly talking:
Financial implications of EU and UK emergency powers.
11 Dec 2025. Mercouris. 1 hour, 9 mins.
https://www.ft.com/content/7e90d3be-687c-4348-a663-132576f98086
11 Dec 2025. UK Bankers’ warning to UK government. [Behind a paywall.]
https://tass.com/society/2057847
12 Dec 2025. Bank of Russia files a lawsuit against Euroclear in Moscow Arbitration Court
https://tass.com/politics/2057999
12 Dec 2025. EU to rue indefinite freezing of Russian assets — RDIF CEO
https://theduran.com/eu-crosses-rubicon-permanent-asset-freeze-falls-into-russias-trap/
12 Dec 2025. Christoforou & Mercouris. 31 mins.
Japan has opposed the EU seizure of Russian assets, and the move below may be related to this, because the seizure could could lead to a wider war.
https://tass.com/economy/2058013
12 Dec 2025. Japan moves to allocate record $58 billion for defense in 2026 fiscal year — Kyodo
THE RECKONING has arrived. As Trump sets a hard deadline on Ukraine, Europe sinks deeper into political decay, and governments push new demands to “hand in your socials,” George Galloway is LIVE tonight to expose the truth behind the headlines the mainstream won’t touch.
Judge Andrew Napolitano — One of America’s most influential legal minds and host of Judging Freedom. The Judge joins George to break down Trump’s latest Ukraine ultimatum, the constitutional crises unfolding in Washington, and the global implications of Europe’s political collapse. (Twitter: @judgenap)
Larry C. Johnson — Former CIA analyst, State Department counter-terrorism veteran, and founder of BERG Associates. Larry delivers a hard, unfiltered update on the Ukraine war, NATO’s weakening position, Russia’s next moves, and the intelligence failures that led to this moment. (Twitter: @LarrySonar21)
Tonight on MOATS:
– Trump’s Ukraine deadline — what it really means for Zelensky, NATO and the future of the war.
– Europe in decay: Macron, Starmer, Baerbock, von der Leyen — who is actually in control?
– “Hand in your socials”: the rise of digital authoritarianism across Western democracies.
– Gaza, Iran, Venezuela, Nigeria, Pakistan — the global crises accelerating simultaneously.
– Larry Johnson on the new reality: Ukraine’s battlefield collapse and the West’s failed strategy.
– Judge Napolitano on political overreach, media manipulation, and the crumbling trust in institutions.
– Gayatri Galloway’s Social Media News Update.
– Your calls LIVE from the US, UK, Europe, the Middle East, Asia and beyond.
Tonight’s MOATS Poll: Will Imran Khan die in jail?
Alternatively, China has launched a few of its new missiles, and where exactly they will detonate remains to be seen. They will detonate, as we’ve all had enough of the hegemonic claim to the ‘Western Hemisphere’.
China stands ready to work with LAC countries having diplomatic relations with China to
At present, changes unseen in a century are accelerating in the world, and a significant shift is taking place in the international balance of power. The Global South stands out with a strong momentum and plays an increasingly important role in human progress. In the meantime, the world is beset by lackluster economic growth, frequent regional conflicts and disturbances, and unilateral bullying undermining international peace and security. Human society is facing unprecedented challenges.
China has realized its First Centenary Goal of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects, and is striving to build a great country and advance national rejuvenation on all fronts through Chinese modernization. China remains firm in pursuing an independent foreign policy of peace, and is dedicated to the common values of humanity. It is implementing the Global Development Initiative (GDI), Global Security Initiative (GSI), Global Civilization Initiative (GCI) and Global Governance Initiative (GGI), and deepening high-quality Belt and Road cooperation. It advocates an equal and orderly multipolar world and a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization, and promotes the building of a community with a shared future for humanity.
As a developing country and a member of the Global South, China has always stood in solidarity through thick and thin with the Global South, including Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC).
In recent years, Chinese President Xi Jinping has set forth a series of major initiatives and measures on strengthening the China-LAC relationship and cooperation across the board, adding new dimensions to the relationship. The Chinese government hereby releases China’s third policy paper on LAC to draw experience, plan the future, elaborate China’s policy on LAC, and bring the relations and cooperation between the two sides in various fields to a new level.
LAC is an important part of the Global South, and a major force for world peace and stability, and global development and prosperity. In recent years, LAC countries have actively explored development paths suited to their national conditions, sought strength through unity, and participated in global governance, with its global influence continuously on the rise.
The region as a whole boasts a glorious tradition of independence and unity for strength, and enjoys bright prospects. It is an essential force in the process toward a multipolar world and economic globalization.
Though far apart, the peoples of China and LAC have a long history of friendship. In the early days since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, the China-LAC relations were primarily characterized by people-to-people exchanges. After the 1960s, with the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and some LAC countries, exchanges and cooperation between the two sides became increasingly close, with both supporting each other in safeguarding national sovereignty, independence and dignity. With the efforts of successive generations, the China-LAC friendship has taken deep root in the heart of their peoples.
In 2008, the Chinese government issued its first policy paper on LAC, proposing to establish a comprehensive and cooperative partnership featuring equality, mutual benefit and common development with LAC countries. In 2014, the leaders of China and LAC countries held a meeting in Brasilia and jointly announced the establishment of the comprehensive and cooperative partnership of equality, mutual benefit and common development.
In 2016, the Chinese government issued its second policy paper on LAC, stating China’s commitment to building a new relationship with LAC with five salient features, and its goal to bring the comprehensive and cooperative partnership to a new height.
In recent years, under the strategic guidance of head-of-state diplomacy, China-LAC relations have entered a new stage of equality, mutual benefit, innovation, openness and benefits for the people, setting a shining example of South-South cooperation. China and LAC countries are advancing hand in hand as a community with a shared future. This community is founded upon equality, powered by mutual benefit and win-win, invigorated by openness and inclusiveness, and dedicated to the people’s well-being. It exhibits enduring vitality and holds immense promise.
China stands ready to join hands with Latin America and the Caribbean to promote the five programs on Solidarity, Development, Civilization, Peace and People-to-People Connectivity to advance shared development and revitalization, and write a new chapter in building a China-LAC community with a shared future.
1. Solidarity Program
(1) High-Level Exchanges
China wishes to give full play to the guiding role of head-of-state diplomacy, maintain exchange of visits and meetings at multilateral international events between leaders of China and LAC countries, enhance exchanges and mutual learning of experience on state governance and modernization, and strengthen communication on bilateral relations and major issues of common interest.
(2) Mutual Support of Each Others’ Core Interests and Major Concerns
The one-China principle is the important political foundation and premise for China to develop diplomatic relations with other countries. The Chinese government appreciates that the vast majority of LAC countries abide by the one-China principle, recognize that there is but one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory, and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China, oppose “Taiwan independence” in any form, and support the Chinese government in safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity and realizing national reunification. China is ready to establish and develop state-to-state relations with LAC countries on the basis of the one-China principle.
China stands ready to work with LAC countries having diplomatic relations with China to enhance strategic mutual trust, continue to render mutual understanding and support on issues concerning national sovereignty, security, territorial integrity and other core interests and major concerns, support each other in following development paths suited to national conditions, and oppose hegemonism and power politics.
(3) Intergovernmental Dialogue and Consultation Mechanisms
Efforts will be made to fully leverage the role of mechanisms such as the high-level coordination and cooperation committee, high-level mixed committee, intergovernmental standing committee, strategic dialogue, political consultation, mixed committee on economy and trade, high-level group, free trade committee, and mixed committee on technology, and further improve the relevant dialogue and consultation mechanisms to enhance intergovernmental dialogue and cooperation.
(4) Exchanges Between Legislatures
On the basis of respecting each other, deepening understanding and promoting cooperation, the National People’s Congress of China wishes to strengthen multilevel, multichannel friendly exchanges with national parliaments and regional and sub-regional parliamentary organizations in Latin America and the Caribbean by fully leveraging the role of high-level exchanges and exchanges at other levels such as those between special committees, friendship groups and offices.
(5) Exchanges Between Political Parties
Based on the principles of independence, full equality, mutual respect and non-interference in each others’ internal affairs, the Communist Party of China wishes to strengthen exchanges and cooperation with political parties and organizations of LAC countries and invite party cadres of the member states of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) to visit China to further enhance mutual understanding and trust.
(6) Implementing the Global Governance Initiative (GGI)
China is ready to work with Latin America and the Caribbean to adhere to the vision on global governance featuring extensive consultation and joint contribution for shared benefit, fully implement the GGI, firmly uphold the U.N.-centered international system, and deepen exchanges and cooperation in the U.N. and other international organizations and on other international occasions, so as to enhance the representation and voice of the Global South, advance the building of a more just and equitable global governance system, and jointly build a community with a shared future for humanity. China supports LAC countries in playing a bigger role in international affairs.
(7) Promoting Reforms of the Global Economic Governance System
China will work with LAC countries to strengthen coordination and cooperation in international economic and financial organizations and mechanisms such as the G20, APEC, BRICS, the IMF, World Bank, the Bank for International Settlements, the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, enhance cooperation within the framework of the WTO-centered multilateral trade system, actively implement the outcomes of previous WTO Ministerial Conferences, and promote necessary reforms of the WTO, so as to better protect the development rights, interests and space of developing members. Efforts will be made to promote economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region. China calls on the international community to further promote global economic governance reform, improve and optimize global economic and financial rules, and further advance the IMF quota and governance reforms, with a view to increasing the representation of emerging markets and developing countries. China will firmly defend international fairness and justice, uphold the multilateral trade system and oppose unilateral bullying practices, safeguard the stability of global industrial and supply chains and reject attempts of “decoupling” and “reinventing the wheel,” so as to protect the open and cooperative international environment and steer economic globalization toward the right direction.
(8) Collective Cooperation Between China and Latin America and the Caribbean
China supports the regional integration process of Latin America and the Caribbean and highly values relations with CELAC. China is ready to work with LAC countries to uphold the principles of respect, equality, diversity, mutual benefit, cooperation, openness, inclusiveness and unconditionality, and actively promote cooperation in various fields within the framework of the China-CELAC Forum. Concrete actions will be taken to give full play to the role of such mechanisms as the ministerial meeting, the dialogue of foreign ministers of China and the “Quartet” of CELAC, and the meeting of national coordinators, make full use of the cyber secretariat of the Forum, hold successful and more diverse sub-forums in various fields, encourage the active participation of all social sectors of the two sides, further improve the institution building of the China-CELAC Forum, and hold summits of state leaders of China and CELAC member states when the condition is mature.
China welcomes the active participation of regional organizations and multilateral institutions of Latin America and the Caribbean in the collective cooperation between the two sides, and will accommodate the needs of the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing countries in the region into the collective cooperation.
(9) Trilateral Cooperation
The China-LAC relationship does not target or exclude any third party, nor is it subjugated by any third party. It meets the fundamental interests of the two sides and the trend of our times featuring world peace, development, cooperation and win-win.
Based on the principle of mutual respect and by leveraging complementary strengths, China is ready to carry out trilateral development cooperation in LAC countries with relevant countries outside the region and international organizations under the premise that such cooperation is proposed, agreed upon and dominated by countries in the region.
China encourages its enterprises to carry out trilateral cooperation in economic, social and cultural fields in LAC countries with relevant parties on the basis of commercial principles.
2. Development Program
(1) Implementing the Global Development Initiative (GDI)
China is ready to cooperate with LAC countries within the framework of the GDI, continue to share development opportunities of Chinese modernization, accelerate the implementation of the U.N. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and advance common development.
(2) High-Quality Belt and Road Cooperation
China welcomes more LAC countries to join high-quality Belt and Road cooperation. Following the principle of extensive consultation and joint contribution for shared benefit as well as the philosophy of open, green and clean cooperation, China will work with partner countries in the region to actively enhance alignment of development strategies, promote cooperation in various fields, jointly ensure the safe and smooth advancement of cooperation projects, and strive to make Belt and Road cooperation high-standard, people-centered and sustainable, so as to achieve modernization of peaceful development, mutually beneficial cooperation and common prosperity for all countries, and contribute to the building of a community with a shared future for humanity.
(3) Trade and Investment Cooperation
China will further tap into the potential of bilateral trade with LAC countries, promote trade of specialty products, goods with competitive advantages or high value-added and technology-intensive products, and strengthen cooperation on trade in services and digital trade. Based on the principle of reciprocity and mutual benefits, China will explore establishing long-term and stable trade relations and discuss FTAs and other trade facilitation arrangements with LAC countries. China is delighted to witness the expansion of bilateral trade, and welcomes LAC countries’ participation in the China International Import Expo, the China Import and Export Fair, the China International Fair for Trade in Services, the China International Consumer Products Expo, the China International Fair for Investment & Trade, the China International Supply Chain Expo, the China International Industry Fair, the China International Small and Medium Enterprises Fair, the World Manufacturing Convention, etc. China encourages and supports its domestic enterprises in attending LAC-related international and regional fairs. China will properly manage trade frictions with LAC countries, promote sound and balanced trade and foster a diversified trade structure.
China stands ready to work with LAC countries to make good use of economic and trade cooperation mechanisms, and continue holding the China-LAC Industrial Investment and Cooperation Forum, the China-LAC Business Summit, the China-LAC High-Level Forum on Investment and Cooperation, the China-Caribbean Economic and Trade Cooperation Forum, and the China-CELAC Private Sector Forum or activities such as promotion events. China will provide a fair, open and non-discriminatory business environment for enterprises from both sides to operate and invest. China will discuss with LAC countries on signing more agreements on investment protection and avoidance of double taxation, so as to create a sound environment and favorable conditions for investment cooperation between enterprises.
China follows the principles featuring business-led, market-based operation, pursuit of the greater good and shared interests, and win-win cooperation. China supports domestic enterprises in doing business and making investment in LAC countries to boost local employment, promotes the alignment of China’s high quality production capacity and advanced equipment with LAC countries’ demand, and helps those countries in need enhance self-reliance and capabilities for sustainable development.
(4) Financial Cooperation
China will support its financial institutions in strengthening exchanges and cooperation with national, regional and international financial institutions in LAC countries, and further optimize the construction of branch networks in the region. Efforts will be made to enhance dialogue and cooperation between the central banks and financial regulatory authorities of the two sides, expand cross-border local currency settlement, discuss RMB clearing arrangements, and steadily promote monetary cooperation including local currency swap. In line with the market-oriented and law-based principle, the two sides will discuss cooperation on Panda bonds. Building on existing bilateral financial cooperation, China will give full play to the role of China-Latin America Cooperation Fund, concessional loans, China-LAC Special Loan for Infrastructure, China-Latin American Production Capacity Cooperation Investment Fund and financing arrangements between China and the Caribbean countries, actively explore cooperation forms including insurance and financial leasing, further expand cooperation with regional financial institutions in LAC countries, and support cooperation in key areas and major projects between the two sides.
(5) Energy and Resources Cooperation
Based on the principles of win-win cooperation and sustainable development, China stands ready to expand and deepen China-LAC cooperation on energy development and utilization across the whole industrial chain, increase cooperation in oil, gas and other traditional energy sectors, strengthen cooperation on clean energy such as hydropower, solar power, wind power and hydrogen energy, deepen cooperation on peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and enhance green development and utilization of mineral resources at various stages. China is ready to work with LAC countries to actively explore establishing mechanisms of long-term supply and local currency pricing and settlement of energy and resource products, so as to reduce the impact of external economic and financial risks.
(6) Infrastructure Cooperation
China will work to strengthen cooperation on technology consulting, construction, equipment manufacturing and operation management in traditional fields of transportation, trade logistics, storage facilities, information and telecommunication technologies, energy and electricity, water conservancy projects, housing and urban construction, as well as in emerging fields such as renewable energy, smart transportation, digital infrastructure and smart cities. China encourages and supports competent domestic enterprises and financial institutions in actively participating in the planning and construction of infrastructure in Latin American and Caribbean countries, so as to enhance regional infrastructure connectivity and consistently empower regional economic growth and sustainable development. The China-LAC Infrastructure Cooperation Forum will continue to be convened.
(7) Manufacturing Cooperation
China will enhance synergy in industrial development strategies, increase exchanges in industrial policies, deepen cooperation on raw materials, consumer goods, equipment manufacturing, green and low-carbon industries, industrial and supply chains and industrial parks, and promote smart, digital and green development of industries in China and LAC countries. China will work toward a closer China-LAC partnership in industrial and supply chains, and promote the negotiation and signing of cooperation documents. The China-LAC High-Level Dialogue on Industrial Cooperation will continue to be held. China will promote policy exchanges on the development of small and medium-size enterprises, provide guidelines for their growth, and thus contribute to the industrial upgrading of LAC countries.
(8) Agricultural Cooperation
China will improve agricultural cooperation mechanisms, encourage enterprises on both sides to actively engage in agriculture trade, push for further exchanges and cooperation in agricultural science and technology, personnel training and other fields, and deepen cooperation in livestock and poultry breeding, forestry, fishery and aquaculture. China will work to enhance exchanges on public policies and market information on food security, and encourage relevant institutions in China and LAC countries to carry out targeted exchanges and cooperation in such areas as nutrition quality of grains and technologies that reduce post-harvest losses, with a view to jointly promoting food security. China will continue to set up and improve agricultural technology demonstration programs, promote the development and demonstration of modern agricultural technology, and enhance agricultural technology innovation, agricultural production and processing capacity and international competitiveness of both sides. China supports scientific research cooperation in areas such as bio-breeding, and the building of the China-LAC Sustainable Food Innovation Center. China welcomes agricultural enterprises from LAC countries to participate in the China International Agricultural Trade Fair, the China Grain Trade Conference and other fairs. The China-CELAC Forum of Ministers of Agriculture will continue to be convened.
(9) Science and Technology Innovation
China will strengthen inter-governmental mechanisms for scientific and technological innovation cooperation. The China-CELAC Science, Technology and Innovation Forum will continue to be held. China will actively explore advancing high-tech cooperation in such areas as information technology, Artificial Intelligence (AI), aviation and aerospace, new energy, new materials, biomedicine and integrated circuits, and further implement the China-LAC Science, Technology and Innovation Partnership Plan. China will enhance exchanges between researchers and promote the implementation of exchange programs between young scientists. Scientific and technological personnel from LAC countries are encouraged to actively participate in the Talented Young Scientist Program and the International Training Program. Support will be given to young scientists from LAC countries to carry out short-term scientific research in China. China will explore cooperation in the construction of joint laboratories, R&D centers and high-tech parks, and support universities, innovative enterprises and research institutes on both sides in carrying out exchanges and cooperation and promoting joint research and development. China supports the China-LAC Technology Transfer Center in enhancing research capacity and the application of scientific and technological achievements, and welcomes the LAC side to use this platform for practical cooperation on the promotion of applicable technologies and demonstration of advanced technologies.
China supports the China-LAC Sustainable Food Innovation Center in becoming a platform for high-level cooperation on agricultural technology and helping China and LAC countries advance agricultural technology and jointly tackle shared global challenges such as food security. China welcomes the LAC side to take the Center as a platform to carry out practical cooperation in bio-breeding and other fields of agricultural technology.
China stands ready to work with the LAC side to engage in dialogue and cooperation on Artificial Intelligence, jointly implement the Global AI Governance Initiative, the AI Capacity-Building Action Plan for Good and for All and the Global AI Governance Action Plan, and advance global AI development and governance.
(10) Aerospace Cooperation
China will actively explore cooperation with LAC countries in such fields as communication and remote sensing satellites, satellite data application, aerospace infrastructure, and aerospace education and training, work with the LAC side to jointly promote the application of space technology in disaster prevention and mitigation, agricultural and forestry monitoring, climate change and other fields, and make good use of space technology to boost LAC countries’ scientific, technological and industrial development, contributing to sustained advancement in the fields of science, technology, economy, etc.
China welcomes LAC countries to use the BeiDou Navigation Satellite System and supports co-hosting a China-LAC BeiDou Navigation Satellite System cooperation forum. China is ready to explore the joint construction of a China-LAC BeiDou application cooperation and development center to deepen cooperation on BeiDou application.
China welcomes the active participation of LAC countries in China’s manned space program and lunar and deep space exploration missions, as well as cooperation with LAC countries on space science and its application and International Lunar Research Station. The China-Latin American and Caribbean States Space Cooperation Forum will continue to be convened.
(11) Maritime Cooperation
China will deepen practical cooperation with LAC countries in such areas as marine science and technology, marine ecological protection and restoration, marine observation, forecasting, disaster prevention and mitigation, blue economy, polar scientific expedition and logistical support, so as to promote the development of maritime endeavors of the two sides. China will deepen cooperation and exchanges with LAC countries in international and regional fisheries governance, fishing port logistics services, fisheries science and technology, fisheries resources conservation, and combating illegal fishing, so as to jointly promote the sustainable development of fisheries of both sides.
China will cooperate with LAC countries to build logistical supply base(s) for China’s Antarctic expedition and invite researchers from LAC countries to board Chinese research vessels for joint polar scientific expedition.
(12) Cooperation on Customs Inspection and Quarantine
China is ready to strengthen exchanges and cooperation between customs inspection and quarantine departments with LAC countries, to promote trade safety and facilitation, and ensure quality of products and food safety. China welcomes more LAC countries to join Smart Customs cooperation partnership and Import & Export Food Safety Cooperation Mechanism for the Countries of the BRI, and stands ready to negotiate, sign and jointly advance cooperation documents with LAC countries regarding mutual administrative assistance on customs matters, quarantine access of animal and plant products, AEO mutual recognition, Single Window connectivity for international trade, etc. China will enhance cooperation on Smart Customs and food safety, actively cooperate on customs law enforcement, trade facilitation, capacity building, trade in goods statistics, animal and plant inspection and quarantine, food safety, and standardization, as well as cooperation and exchanges between customs authorities.
China welcomes safe and high-quality agricultural food products from LAC countries to enter the Chinese market. China is ready to establish and improve mechanisms for communication and cooperation, continue to strengthen cooperation on imports and exports of agricultural food products with LAC countries, prevent animal and plant epidemics and the spread of invasive alien species, and promote trade in agricultural products.
(13) Cooperation Between Trade and Investment Promotion Agencies and Business Associations
China will deepen cooperation with trade and investment promotion agencies, business associations and business communities in LAC countries, and make good use of relevant mechanisms and platforms for bilateral, multilateral and collective cooperation to facilitate exchanges between enterprises of the two sides, so as to promote win-win cooperation.
(14) Cooperation on Environmental Protection, Climate Change and Disaster Reduction
China will support the role of the UNFCCC process as the main channel in global climate governance, and act on the objectives, principles and rules of the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement in a comprehensive, good-faith and effective manner, particularly the principles of equity, and common but differentiated responsibilities. China will further consolidate and strengthen cooperation with LAC countries on the UNFCCC process and other relevant mechanisms, actively promote consultations and exchanges between the two sides on climate response and cooperation in relevant programs, support LAC countries, particularly small island states, in their climate response. China will work with LAC countries on biodiversity protection to jointly promote the building of a community of life for man and nature.
China will deepen cooperation on disaster management with LAC countries, give full play to the role of the China-LAC disaster management cooperation mechanism, and strengthen cooperation in comprehensive disaster reduction, disaster monitoring and warning, risk assessment, disaster prevention, emergency preparedness, emergency rescue capacity building, and post-disaster recovery and reconstruction, so as to jointly improve disaster management capacity.
China will strengthen exchanges in the construction of digital cities, green cities and sponge cities, and engage in exchanges and cooperation with LAC countries in addressing extreme climate events and strengthening weather forecasting.
(15) Development Assistance
Based on full respect for the will of LAC countries, and in light of China’s financial capacity and economic and social development, China will continue to provide development assistance to LAC countries without attaching any political conditions, and, in accordance with the needs of LAC countries, gradually expand the scale of assistance within its capacity, and innovate its assistance model, with a focus on human resources development, development planning, economic policy consulting and training, infrastructure construction, agriculture and food security, poverty reduction, climate change and humanitarian assistance.
(16) Tax Cooperation
China is ready to carry out extensive and in-depth cooperation with LAC countries under the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative Tax Administration Cooperation Mechanism, and looks forward to the participation of more LAC countries as members, so as to strengthen communication on cooperation and capacity building on tax collection and administration, and build a growth-friendly tax environment.
(17) Market Supervision Cooperation
China is ready to sign cooperation documents on standardization with LAC countries, deepen cooperation and exchanges on standardization in key areas and jointly promote the formulation and application of international standards. China will continue carrying out standard information exchange, comparison and alignment, and standardization capacity building.
3. Civilization Program
(1) Implementing the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI)
China will work with LAC countries to implement the Global Civilization Initiative, uphold the vision of equality, mutual learning, dialogue, and inclusiveness between civilizations, and champion humanity’s common values of peace, development, fairness, justice, democracy, and freedom. We will work with LAC countries to strengthen people-to-people exchanges and cooperation, consolidate social foundation of friendship, and promote world peace and development by implementing resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly and promoting Global Civilizations Dialogue on multilateral platforms such as the UN.
(2) Enhancing Civilization Exchanges and Mutual Learning Between China and Latin America and the Caribbean
China will work with LAC countries to hold a conference on China-LAC inter-civilizational dialogue, strengthen exchanges and cooperation on cultural heritage, carry out research on ancient civilizations, jointly crack down on illegal trafficking of cultural property and facilitate the return of lost cultural relics back to their countries of origin. China will deepen exchanges on culture and art, support institutionalized cooperation between cultural and art organizations, and promote mutual visits and exchanges among high-level art troupes and artists with LAC countries. China will work with LAC countries to support each other in hosting bilateral and multilateral activities such as cultural festivals, carnivals, and cultural tour exhibitions.
China welcomes the participation of LAC countries as partners in the Alliance for Cultural Heritage in Asia launched by China, so as to carry out practical cooperation on cultural heritage including the study of ancient civilizations, joint archaeological excavation, ancient site restoration, and museum exchanges. The two sides will also cooperate on tracing, claiming and return of lost cultural relics.
(3) Education and Human Resources Training
China will support the cooperation between educational institutions and companies of both sides in terms of exchanges between teachers and students, academic discussion, professionals training and joint research. China will step up cooperation in human resource development, capacity building and other fields, continue to provide LAC countries government scholarships and training opportunities in China. China will actively engage in vocational education exchanges and cooperation such as the Luban Workshop program.
China will support Chinese language education in LAC countries, facilitate the joint development of Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms, establish in due course new Centers for Chinese language and Professional Skills, Chinese+Vocational Skills Development Centers and local Chinese language teachers training centers, and continue to provide international Chinese language teacher scholarships, opportunities for the Chinese Bridge summer (winter) camp in China, Chinese textbooks, and teaching materials for LAC countries.
China attaches importance to cooperation in digital education with LAC countries and welcomes LAC participation in the World Digital Education Alliance. China is ready to engage in policy dialogue and practical cooperation to share its experience and progress of its digital transformation in education, so as to jointly build a more equitable, inclusive and sustainable global digital education system.
(4) Sports
China will deepen exchanges and cooperation in sports, encourage closer exchanges between sports organizations, and support friendly exchanges of athletes, coaches and sports managers with LAC countries. We will encourage exchanges on sports the two sides excel in to help improve athletic performance of both sides.
(5) Exchanges and Cooperation in Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television
China will strengthen dialogue and cooperation in press, publication, radio, film and television, and encourage the signing of bilateral agreements on radio, film and television with LAC countries. China will work with LAC countries to encourage exchanges and co-production of programs and participation in festivals or exhibitions on press, publication, radio, film and television held in each other’s countries, and strengthen personnel exchanges as well as media technology and industrial cooperation. China will support media content co-creation and news exchanges and cooperation between each other’s news agencies, provide convenience for the exchange of resident journalists, carry out joint interviews, exchange of news and personnel training. China will invite more journalists from LAC countries to China for short-term and medium-term visits and provide training opportunities in China for scholars, media, and independent content creators. China will enhance exchanges and cooperation in radio and television, support The Bond, an exhibition of Chinese films and TV programs, and translation of each other’s quality TV series or audio-visual programs. Strong and influential Internet media from both sides will be encouraged to enhance cooperation in portal development, new media capacity building and other aspects. The publishing agencies of the two sides will be encouraged to cooperate to translate each other’s classical works.
(6) Academic and Think Tank Exchanges
Efforts will be made to support academic research institutions and think tanks on both sides to carry out various forms of communication and cooperation such as subject research, academic exchanges, seminars, publications, etc. Universities of both sides are encouraged to carry out research cooperation. China is committed to continuing the operation of the China-LAC Think Tanks Forum, the China-CELAC High-Level Academic Forum, the China-CELAC Academic Forum, the China-Latin America Development Forum, and will support the construction of the China-LAC Development Knowledge Network.
4. Peace Program
(1) Implementing the Global Security Initiative (GSI)
China stands ready to work with LAC countries to uphold the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security, balance development and security imperatives, implement together the GSI, carry out exchanges and cooperation in the fields of peace and security and jointly promote regional and global peace and stability.
China supports the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace and the Declaration of Member States of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean. It advocates the peaceful settlement of international disputes and hotspot issues and oppose willful threat or use of force.
China stands ready to work together with LAC countries to uphold the authority of international law such as the Biological Weapons Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention, and strengthen coordination and cooperation.
(2) Military Exchanges and Cooperation
China will actively carry out military exchanges and cooperation with LAC countries, expand friendly exchanges between defense and military leading officials of the two sides, strengthen policy dialogue and set up working meeting mechanisms. The two sides will conduct mutual visits between delegations and vessels, deepen professional exchanges in such fields as military training, personnel training and U.N. peacekeeping operations, expand practical cooperation in non-traditional security fields such as humanitarian relief and counter-terrorism, and enhance cooperation in military trade and military technology. China will continue to host the Defense Forum of China-LAC based on voluntary participation. China welcomes LAC countries’ participation in the Beijing Xiangshan Forum.
(3) Law Enforcement and Judicial Cooperation
Efforts will be made to promote exchanges and cooperation between competent authorities of both sides in law enforcement and judicial areas. The two sides will accelerate the negotiation and signing of treaties on extradition, judicial assistance in criminal, civil and commercial affairs and other law enforcement and judicial cooperation agreements. Cooperation will be strengthened and expanded between the two sides in areas including extradition and repatriation of criminal suspects, transfer of sentenced persons, and seizure, attachment, confiscation and return of criminal assets. Efforts will be made in coordinating positions of the two sides on international multilateral law-enforcement cooperation, and in jointly combating non-traditional security threats such as cross-border crimes and terrorism. The two sides will deepen counter-narcotics cooperation, and jointly combat drug smuggling. China welcomes LAC countries’ participation in the Conference of Global Public Security Cooperation Forum (Lianyungang).
(4) Anti-Corruption Cooperation on Fugitive Repatriation and Asset Recovery
In accordance with respective domestic laws and United Nations Convention against Corruption, the two sides will expand cooperation in combating corruption, money laundering and illicit financial flows, and vigorously advance practical cooperation in fugitive repatriation and asset recovery. China will enhance experience sharing and practical cooperation with LAC countries on clean Belt and Road, and promote the Beijing Initiative for the Clean Silk Road. China will continue to host the Anti-Corruption Seminar for BRI Partners, and provide training slots for LAC countries. The two sides will explore to continue to hold the China-Caribbean Conference on Anti-corruption Law Enforcement Cooperation at an appropriate time. The two sides will conduct multilateral anti-money laundering cooperation under the FATF framework, and advance bilateral anti-money laundering cooperation through signing MOUs.
(5) Cyber Security
Based on the Global Data Security Initiative and the principles of peace, sovereignty, shared governance, inclusiveness, the Chinese government stands ready to work with LAC countries to build an open, secure, cooperative and orderly cyber space of peace, and put in place a multilateral, democratic and transparent Internet governance system. Efforts will be made to formulate an international code of conduct for cyber space under the framework of the U.N. that is generally acceptable among all parties, to bring the United Nations Convention against Cyber Crime into force at an early date and to actively build a community with a shared future in cyberspace. China opposes cyber hegemony and the use of cyberspace to interfere in other country’s internal affairs or undermine their political, economic or social stability. China will continue to host the China-LAC Internet Development and Cooperation Forum.
(6) Non-Proliferation Export Control
The Chinese government stands ready to work with LAC countries to firmly uphold the U.N. as the main platform in the non-proliferation governance of weapons of mass destruction and promote establishing a fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory export control order of non-proliferation. The two sides will strengthen exchanges and cooperation to promote the comprehensive, balanced and sustainable implementation of UNGA Resolution 1540. Efforts will be made to balance development and security imperatives, and uphold the legitimate rights of developing countries in the peaceful use of science and technology.
5. People-to-People Connectivity Program
(1) Social Governance and Social Development
China stands ready to conduct exchanges and cooperation with LAC countries on strengthening and innovating social governance, share and learn from each other’s governance experience, jointly promote the modernization of national governance system and governance capacity, and continuously make social governance more law-based, smarter and more specialized, and enhance its public participation level in a bid to uphold the stability and order of their societies and enduring peace and stability of their countries.
Efforts will be made to further promote exchanges and cooperation between the two sides in social development areas such as social welfare and social assistance, strengthen policy sharing, and promote and realize practical cooperation in providing services and assistance to special groups such as the elderly, people with disabilities, and children, as well as disadvantaged groups in urban and rural areas.
(2) Poverty Reduction Cooperation
Efforts will be made to promote dialogue and exchanges with LAC countries in fields such as rural revitalization, poverty reduction, hunger elimination, and the narrowing of income gap, share information on poverty identification as well as experience in targeted poverty alleviation. The two sides will conduct technical cooperation to enhance capacity building for poverty reduction, and promote the formulation of economic and social policies in favor of the people living in poverty and the disadvantaged groups on both sides. Effort will be made to encourage and support exchanges and cooperation between relevant departments of the two sides, and continue to hold the China-CELAC Poverty Reduction and Development Forum. China will also continue to deepen cooperation with LAC countries in areas related to people’s well-being and implement “small and beautiful” livelihood projects for LAC countries.
(3) Health Cooperation
China will continue to help LAC countries train medical personnel and improve medical facilities, and send medical teams to LAC countries to deliver free medical consultations. Efforts will be made to strengthen cooperation in traditional medicine cooperation, promote exchanges on drug regulation, increase dialogue on public health policy, deepen cooperation in public health and strengthen cooperation and exchanges on frontier health and quarantine. Efforts will be made to support cooperation between health care institutions at all levels, support the sharing of best practices in disease prevention and control, as well as infectious disease prevention and treatment.
(4) Consular Cooperation
Efforts will be made to strengthen and expand exchanges and cooperation between the consular departments of the two sides, make good use of the consular consultation mechanism and earnestly safeguard the safety and legitimate rights and interests of enterprises and citizens of China and LAC countries in each other’s countries. China stays committed to high-standard opening up and will continue to facilitate people-to-people exchanges.
(5) Tourism Cooperation
The China-LAC Tourism Dialogue will be launched. Tourism authorities and enterprises on both sides are encouraged to promote tourism resources and products to each other, expand tourism cooperation, and jointly support the travel agencies of both sides to visit each other’s countries for route inspection and participate in tourism exhibitions. China will explore together with LAC countries to initiate more facilitation policies to promote two-way travels, support and encourage airlines on both sides to carry out various forms of business cooperation such as code-sharing, and launch air routes and flights in light of market demand. The consumer protection departments of both sides will strengthen dialogue and cooperation, prioritizing the protection of consumer rights of international travelers.
(6) People-to-People and Sub-National Exchanges
Efforts will be made to encourage people-to-people exchanges between the two sides and support social organizations to carry out various forms of friendly exchanges and public welfare activities. Communication between government departments of youth affairs and youth organizations on both sides will be advanced. The organization of China-Latin America Youth Encounter, China-Latin America Youth Campus, China-LAC Youth Development Forum, Latin American and Caribbean Diplomatic Delegation Program will be continued. Efforts will be made to deepen friendly cooperation between women organizations on both sides to jointly promote gender equality and women empowerment. Non-governmental players on both sides are encouraged to cooperate in areas such as disaster prevention and reduction, health promotion and livelihood development at the community level in a bid to enhance local communities’ capacity in disaster response and comprehensive development.
The organization of the China-LAC People-to-People Friendship Forum and the Local Government Cooperation Forum will be continued and more sister-city/province relationships are encouraged. Efforts will be made to set up a dialogue mechanism led and supported by governments of China and LAC countries for their respective sub-national governments. Dialogues under the mechanism will be co-hosted by the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries and government-affiliated institutions on the LAC side, with a view to bringing exchanges and cooperation between the sub-national governments of the two sides to a new high.
Following Russian-Indian talks, Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi made statements for the media. The statements were preceded by a ceremony for the exchange of signed documents.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/78657
29 Documents were signed by the parties. The video, at the link above, lists these – I am sure we will get a list that is not video and can easily be read.
Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi (retranslated): Your Excellency Vladimir Putin, my dear friend,
Representatives of the two countries, and our friends from India, good afternoon.
I am delighted to welcome President Putin to the 23rd Russia – India Annual Summit.
President Vladimir Putin’s visit to India is taking place at a time marked by several historical dates in our relations. President Putin laid the groundwork for our strategic cooperation 25 years ago, and 15 years ago, in 2010, we upgraded our partnership to the level of a special privileged strategic partnership.
Over the past 25 years, President Putin has been relentless in promoting these relations by demonstrating his wise leadership and vision. Regardless of the circumstances, it is his leadership that has reinforced our mutual relations and enabled us to achieve new heights.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to President Putin for his friendship and for his unwavering commitment to working with India.
Friends,
The world has faced numerous ups and downs over the past 80 years, during which humankind has had to endure many crises and challenges. And throughout this time, the friendship between Russia and India has successfully weathered these storms. These relations are based on mutual respect and deep trust and have invariably stood the test of time.
Today, we discussed our ties and cooperation in all their aspects with a view to creating an even more solid foundation.
We want to reinforce our economic cooperation and elevate it to a new level. This is the objective we share and it is our shared priority. To make this a reality, we have agreed to implement a programme for economic cooperation until 2030. It will provide for diversifying our trade and investment, making them more balanced and sustainable. At the same time, it will help unlock new dimensions in our cooperation.
Today, President Putin and I will be taking part in the Russia – India Business Forum. I am convinced that this platform will also help strengthen our business ties and open new doors for exports, joint manufacture and technical innovation.
Both countries have been proactive in working on a free trade agreement between the Eurasian Economic Union and our country.
Our cooperation in agriculture and fertilisers is extremely important for our food security and the prosperity of our farmers.
I am happy that our countries will work together to promote our mutual production of urea.
Friends, promoting connectivity between our countries is another priority for us.
We will redouble our efforts regarding the discussions on the North-South International Transport Corridor and the Vladivostok-Chennai Maritime Corridor.
I am confident that we will effectively cooperate in the interests of promoting polar trade via local trade routes. We have offered an opportunity to strengthen our cooperation in the Arctic, which will create new jobs for Indian young people.
At the same time, our deep cooperation in shipbuilding will help us boost our joint initiatives. This is yet another important example of our mutually beneficial cooperation, which is increasing the number of jobs and skills while strengthening regional connectivity.
Energy security is another important pillar of partnership between Russia and India. Our cooperation in the field of civilian nuclear energy, which is rooted in our history, has helped us uphold our commitment to providing clean energy, which is extremely important for both countries.
I have no doubt that our mutually beneficial cooperation in the field of critical minerals will also be important for a safe and diversified provision of resources to the world.
We also maintain our cooperation in such areas as clean energy, high technologies and modern industries.
Friends,
Our cultural relations and ties between individual representatives of our countries are of special importance for relations between Russia and India. Over the past decades, our peoples have demonstrated respect and admiration for each other’s cultures, and we have coordinated various measures to further strengthen this cooperation.
The recent opening of two Indian consulates in Russia is a significant step forward, facilitating contacts for all our citizens and bringing our nations even closer together.
This October, hundreds of thousands of pilgrims received blessings at the sacred relics of Buddha Shakyamuni in Kalmykia. I am confident that we will soon implement a 30-day visa-free regime for tourist groups, which will greatly enhance travel between our countries. This measure will not only bring our peoples closer but also invigorate our societies and unlock new opportunities. I am therefore pleased that today we were able to sign two key agreements to advance this initiative.
Our collaboration will also deepen in education and professional development, including through increased student and academic exchanges.
Friends,
Today, we discussed a range of pressing regional and global issues. On Ukraine, India’s position has been consistent from the outset: we stand for peace. We welcome all initiatives and efforts aimed at achieving a peaceful, long-term resolution of this conflict. India has always been ready to support such efforts, and we will continue to do so.
India and Russia have always supported one another and worked shoulder to shoulder in the fight against terrorism. The terrorist attack in Pahalgam and the cowardly atrocity at Crocus City Hall are connected by a common, hateful ideology. India firmly believes that terrorism constitutes a direct assault on universal human values. Our unity within the global community is the only effective way to combat this evil.
We cooperate closely within the UN, the G20, the SCO, BRICS, and other multilateral forums. We will continue this essential dialogue and cooperation across all these platforms.
Your Excellency,
I am confident that our enduring friendship will provide the strength needed to address global challenges. Together, we can help lead the way towards a more prosperous future.
Once again, I thank you and all members of your delegation for your visit to India. Thank you very much.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr Prime Minister, dear friend,
Ladies and gentlemen,
My sincere thanks to the President of the Republic of India, Droupadi Murmu, to you, Mr Prime Minister, and to all our Indian colleagues for the exceptionally warm and cordial welcome extended to the Russian delegation.
The discussions we have just concluded with our Indian colleagues, along with our highly productive one-on-one conversation last night – for which I thank you again, Mr Modi, for your generous hospitality – were held in a constructive and friendly spirit, reflecting the privileged partnership between Russia and India.
I would note that the Prime Minister and I have established a close working and personal rapport. We have met at the SCO summit in September, we maintain regular contact by telephone and personally oversee the development of our strategic cooperation across all key areas, as well as the progress of major bilateral projects.
Today, with the participation of our delegations, we conducted a thorough and comprehensive review of the entire spectrum of Russian-Indian cooperation. We also exchanged views on current international and regional issues.
The joint statement we have adopted outlines clear priorities for advancing our ties in politics, security, trade, the economy, and cultural and humanitarian affairs. As you have seen, this was complemented by the signing of a substantial package of intergovernmental, interdepartmental, and corporate agreements.
Many of these documents are aimed at expanding our economic partnership. This is only natural, as our nations are important partners in trade, investment, and technology. Last year, our bilateral trade grew by a further 12 percent, reaching a new record. While various estimates differ slightly, the consensus places the figure somewhere between US$64 and US$65 billion. We project trade will stand at a comparable level by year’s end.
That said, we believe there is clear potential to increase this volume to US$100 billion. To realise this ambitious goal, we have now agreed upon a joint Programme for the Development of Russian-Indian Economic Cooperation until 2030. This comprehensive roadmap provides clear guidelines. Our intergovernmental commission and the relevant economic ministries and agencies are tasked with removing barriers to the flows of goods and capital, implementing joint industrial projects, and deepening our collaboration in technology and investment.
Today, His Excellency the Prime Minister shared a comprehensive list of issues with us. It goes without saying that both Russia and India will be extremely diligent and responsive in reviewing them. Make no mistake, we will work on this matter.
Of course, having India create a free trade zone with the Eurasian Economic Union would help boost Russia-India business ties. The effort to draft an agreement to this effect is already in progress.
I must express my satisfaction with the fact that the two countries have been consistent in their commitment to switching to national currencies in mutual transactions. Their share in business deals has already reached 96 percent. Our two countries have developed resilient interbank channels for lending and financial transactions. Russian economic actors have been making wider use of the rupees they generate from export contracts. Major joint projects receive their funding in Russian rubles.
There has been positive momentum in our energy partnership. Russia is a reliable supplier of energy resources and everything India needs for developing its energy sector. We are ready to continue ensuring uninterrupted fuel supplies for the Indian economy to support its rapid expansion.
Of course, our bilateral energy cooperation goes far beyond this horizon. The flagship project to build India’s biggest NPP, Kudankulam, is underway. Two out of six reactors have been connected to the power grid, while the other four are in the engineering and construction stages.
Once this NPP reaches its full capacity, it will make a meaningful contribution to India’s energy mix, helping Indian companies and households access affordable and clean energy. We believe that building small modular reactors and floating NPPs could also be relevant, just as using nuclear technology for non-energy purposes, including in healthcare, agriculture and other sectors.
We are also working with our Indian partners to create new effective international transport logistics routes. This includes a project to create the North-South corridor linking Russia and Belarus to the Indian Ocean. Infrastructure development along the Trans-Arctic Transport Corridor, including the Northern Sea Route as its main artery, offers ample opportunities for expanding bilateral trade.
There are many other economic sectors in which Russia and India have built a positive track record. We are working on joint initiatives in manufacturing, machine building, digital technology, space exploration and other research-intensive domains.
For example, a business agreement that was signed as part of the visit provides for building a major Russian-Indian pharmaceutical plant in the Kaluga Region for producing high-quality anticancer medicine using cutting-edge Indian technology. At the same time, Russian companies will start producing their goods as part of the Make in India programme, which is Prime Minister Modi’s flagship project.
Prospects for strengthening interaction between Russian and Indian entrepreneurs and business communities are being discussed in detail at the business forum that is currently underway in New Delhi. Mr Prime Minister and I will attend its plenary session later today.
Russian-Indian humanitarian cooperation is ongoing in many spheres. Our peoples have been sincerely interested in each other’s traditions, history and spiritual values for centuries. Our scientific and educational contacts, as well as youth and public exchanges are actively developing. The regular cross festivals of Russian and Indian films invariably enjoy success. Mutual tourist flows grow every year.
The Russian RT channel will begin broadcasting to India today. This will certainly help the Indian audience learn more about Russia and Russians and acquire objective information about current developments in our country.
Our discussions on key global and regional issues have reaffirmed the similarity of our countries’ positions. Russia and India pursue an independent and sovereign foreign policy.
We are working together with our allies in BRICS, the SCO and other countries of the Global Majority to promote the shaping of a more just and democratic multipolar world order, and to protect the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the UN Charter. These include the right of every country to its own path of development, the preservation of its own cultural and civilisational identity, respect for sovereignty and a delicate balance of interests of all members of the international community.
Russia and India, as the founding nations of BRICS, have done and continue to do a great deal to enhance the prestige of that organisation. As you know, India will assume the BRICS chairmanship next year. We will provide all-round assistance to our Indian friends in their work on the current BRICS agenda.
Of course, I would also like to say that Russia and India have traditionally worked closely together in the military-technical sphere. Our country has been assisting the modernisation of the Indian army, including the air defence, air force and navy, for over 50 years.
Overall, we are certainly satisfied with the results of our talks. Our plans include a meeting with President of India Droupadi Murmu. However, I can already express my confidence that this visit and the agreements reached will effectively promote the further strengthening of the Russian-Indian strategic partnership for the benefit of the people of India and Russia.
Thank you.
Recommended by Jeff J Brown
Class must be prioritised in any analysis…
But over centuries and millennia, the collective “recipes for living” (Clifford Geertz’ famous definition of culture) that emerges from particular conditions and trajectories does become a force which also shapes history.
Materialism is the foundation and primary key to understanding human society in the capitalist era. But at the same time, the accumulated effects of culture, solidified into sets of distinct arrangements and convictions, in other words, civilisation, does also play a great role in national politics, in world affairs, in revolutionary process, and besides Marxism, in the rise of modern China.
The ideology of the Communist Party of China is not only socialism, but Socialism With Chinese Characteristics.
In this essay we will examine some of those characteristics as shaped by historical development, so that we may better understand The Central Realm, its contemporary governance, future trajectory, and what the coming Chinese millennium might mean for the world.
Seemingly trivial and insignificant, ordinary social conventions are often results of entrenched philosophical foundations and expressions of core cultural values. Lets take brief stock of a few in China and beyond, particularly pertaining to food.
Chinese chopsticks are longer than Korean and Japanese chopsticks because everyone shares the dishes placed at the center of the table, rather than only eat one’s own portions.
When Chinese people sit down to eat together, it is considered rude and childish to serve oneself first. Instead, one should always pass food to others before oneself, with the order determined by seniority — but the senior, for example an older sister, is also expected to make sure that her younger brother has enough to eat before she does herself.
Ordering food for a party is always a complicated group effort: the meal is a collective composition of contrasting and complementary elements that works for the entire group, but should also satisfy the particular palettes of every member — an experience more than the sum of its parts.
In restaurants of not only China, not only East Asia, but also South, South East, West Asia, as well as many parts of Africa and South America, it’s typical for people to argue over who gets the privilege of paying the bill — partly because who ever pays is seen as the bigger person. Travellers to every part of the Global South and anywhere indigenous cultures and sensibilities survive, have noted a supreme generosity, and that locals, complete strangers, often insist on buying or inviting them to their homes for a meal.
This generosity and propensity for sharing is biologically rooted in the evolved behavioural traits of human beings. It is seen clearly in indigenous cultures all over the world, especially those in arid and difficult conditions, such as the Amazigh of the Saharan desert who will slaughter their last goat for a starving stranger knocking at their door in the middle of the night.
State formation coinciding with the world-historic rise of Proprietary Patriarchy and its attendant class society around 6,000 years ago began a process of erosion and suppression of this original human convivial sociality, but not equally, not in the same way, and not to the same extent around the world. This is the main reason, not any innate deficiency of humanity, for extreme divergence from indigenous hospitality in some parts of the world; for example, cash apps in Northern Europe where friends request 2 or 3 Euros from each other for having consumed half a sandwich more than the other during lunch.
Keep these observations in mind while reading the rest of this essay; their relevance and meaning will become increasingly apparent.
INTERNAL GOVERNANCE
Massive, prolonged, recurring floods regularly devastated the Yellow River valley, destroying settlements and agriculture. It was a repeating crisis that threatened the very survival of the nascent civilisation.
After countless failed attempts to solve this problem, legend has it that Emperor Yu mobilised tens of thousands of people from various clans and chiefdoms, and laboured tirelessly for 13 years, digging channels to divert and manage water to the sea. Because of his monumental success in taming the floods and making the land habitable and fertile, Yu gained immense prestige. The various groups of people were so impressed and grateful that they transferred their loyalty to him, which allowed him to consolidate power and found the Xia Dynasty (c. 2070–1600 BCE), the first centralised state in Chinese history.
The very first state in China formed for the explicit purpose of combatting the existential threat of catastrophic natural disasters; its primary Staatsräson was building infrastructure, massive public works for the benefit of all.
The Xia dynasty was followed by the Shang and Zhou dynasties, the “Spring and Autumn Era, then a chaotic, roughly 300 years long Warring States period in which warlords fought for dominance and populations greatly suffered, ending in roughly 200 BCE.
During the Warring States era there emerged 3 main strands of political doctrines: Daoism, Legalism, and Confucianism.
Daoism and Legalism
Daoism, commonly referred to in the West as the grandfather of anarchism, focused on the natural energy flow of the universe (the Dao, or “path”), which human beings should not go against, but seek alignment and harmony with. The central concept of “Wu-wei”, roughly translated as “Do Nothing”, “Non-Action”, “No Force”, or “Spontaneously living in the moment”, is the way towards tranquility and happiness.
Daoism cautioned against competition and instructed that the emptying of the mind and ridding of Earthly desires is the way for humanity to change its violent ways that creates so much needless suffering. (The later fusion of Daoism with Buddhism came to be known as Chan Buddhism, late exported to Japan as Zen). Politically, Daoism is suspicious of centralised power, and urged rulers to be humble, restrained, pacifist, to avoid stringent laws and harsh punishments.
Stringent laws and harsh punishments are main features of Legalism. In many ways the dialectical antithesis of Daoism, this rigid ideology became the guiding principle of the Qin dynasty that ended the Warring States period in 220 BCE.
Legalists see human nature as inherently selfish and violent, and devises a system of absolute monarchic authority atop a centralised bureaucracy, enforcing unbending codes and severe punishment, as the only method with which it can be controlled. And for them, suppression of rival philosophical doctrines was the only way to prevent contending factions from gaining power. In Legalist society, warriors were rewarded based on the number of enemy severed heads they brought back.
Legalism produced very strong police and military, but also widespread resentment among the population, and quickly lead to a series of large scale rebellions that overthrew the Qin after merely 17 years, ending the only, very short period of Chinese history where Legalism dominated.
Brute force failed to maintain peace and unity, but its opposite, the lofty and relaxed, nature-loving, profoundly unfettered ideals of Daoism also, unsurprisingly, was not enough to deal with the real problems faced by monarchic governance over such a large and diverse territory, with objective contradictions between farmers and land lords, between land lords and merchants, between the people and their rulers. The succeeding Han dynasty rejected both, and chose Confucianism as its ideology and political system.
Daoism remains a constant underlying influence on Chinese culture and politics in countless ways, and will always be an important philosophy of life.
Elements of Legalism also live on in Chinese statecraft, even today: the punishments for political corruption and white collar, elite crimes, including seizure of entire companies, long prison terms, and the death sentence, is often much more harsh than those in the West.
In many ways, the most contentious political debates in China, regarding a general definition of good governance and optimum organisation of society, management of contradictions, were more or less settled around 2000 years ago. With some variation through out the eras where different ideas gain and lose favour, Confucianism would come to be the main guiding principle of Chinese governance, beginning with the Han dynasty.
Confucianism
Confucianism posited that human nature is essentially good; that with education, everyone can become virtuous; and that emperors should lead by example, with benevolence. At the same time, the Confucian state retained Legalist centralized bureaucracy, strict laws, and the option of forceful methods to control and maintain power.
Confucianism (儒家, Rújiā) provided a concrete set of guidelines for preserving balance between emperors and people, in attempt to recreate, approximately, what Confucian scholars and historians remembered as an ideal, peaceful, prosperous, harmonious era of the first, Xia dynasty some 2 millennia prior.
Classic Confucianism centered around Man’s connection to the heavens (universe), and posited that social order depends on individual autonomous study and ethical cultivation.
But at the same time, Confucianist doctrine also clearly stated that individual virtue is not possible with poverty — the idea that the state is responsible for the eradication of poverty and wellbeing of citizens was enshrined in China some 2000 years ago (a relative new, about 500 years old, idea in Western politics).
The creation of equality was always a centrally important goal of the state, the precondition for a harmonious society.
In response to continued social unrest and another period of chaotic infighting between warlords, the era of the War of Three Kingdoms (263 – 280 CE), over the centuries scholars further adapted Confucianism in attempt to make political hierarchies increasingly less arbitrary and less unjust, by reducing the importance of inheritance, and further basing the justification of power on objective merit and virtue.
The concept of the Mandate of Heaven (天命, Tiānmìng) is a foundational ideological principle of Chinese governance, and its origin is precisely dated to the founding of the Zhou Dynasty around 1046 BCE. The Mandate is granted by “the heavens” (the cosmos, nature, the supreme force of order and morality in the universe, not a single deity) to only virtuous and just rulers who made the people happy. If an emperor becomes corrupt or ineffective, Heaven will withdraw its support, leading to social unrest, natural disasters, and ultimately, the emperor’s downfall and replacement.
In later millennia, the idea increasingly came to mean approval of the population, becoming, essentially and effectively, an ancient version of democracy.
Crucially, as much as justifying monarchic rule, the “Mandate of Heaven” also embodies the “right to rebel”: the very concept was created by the founders of the Zhou Dynasty in order to justify their rebellion against and overthrow of the previous Shang Dynasty.
The Zhou leaders argued that the last Shang kings had become tyrannical, morally corrupt, and dissolute, neglecting the rituals, oppressing the people, and had lost the virtue necessary to rule. Based on these allegations, leaders of the Zhou rebellion claimed that Heaven had withdrawn the Shang’s right to rule and transferred the Mandate to King Zhou, who was virtuous and fit for the responsibility.
This was a revolutionary idea. The Mandate of Heaven moved the source of political legitimacy away from mere ancestry (the Shang’s claim) to moral performance and just rule.
Since the very beginning of China, the authority of the emperor, the “Son of Heaven” (Tianzi), has not been absolute, but conditional on incorruptibility, honesty, prudence, generosity, benevolence, and wisdom.
To keep the Mandate of Heaven, a ruler must be ethical, prioritise wellbeing of the people, and perform the correct rituals. A ruler who became corrupt, unjust, and lets society fall into chaos shows that he had lost the Mandate — at which point it is not only right but righteous to overthrow him. The success of a rebellion, dependent upon the will of the population, was itself proof that Heaven had transferred its mandate to a new dynasty.
Neo-Confucianism emerged during the Tang Dynasty (618-907 CE), was fully systematized in the Song Dynasty (960-1279 CE), and reached its canonical form in the 12th century. It was influenced by Buddhist and Daoist metaphysics, outlined a pragmatic methodology for social balance and well being, developed concepts like **Principle (_Li_ 理)**—the underlying rational order of the universe—and **Material Force (_Qi_ 气)**—the psychophysical stuff that constitutes all things, and later introduced ideas like learning based on evidence (influenced by Western empiricism).
In practical application, in more recent millennia Neo-Confucianism developed a fraught, as symbiotic as contradictory, relationship with Legalist-style statecraft. The question of when to lead by inspiration, example, and moral instruction, and when to use law and force to preserve order, was a constant dialectical debate.
During the Song Dynasty, in the 1070s, Confucianism took an explicitly leftist turn:
“The state should take the entire management of commerce, industry, and agriculture into its own hands, with a view to succoring the working classes and preventing them from being ground into the dust by the rich.”
– (attributed to a summary of Wang AnShi)
Wang AnShi advocated for alleviation of suffering among the peasantry, by preventing the consolidation of large land estates. He called elements that came between the people and the government “jianbing”: owners of large estates, rural usurers, urban businessmen, speculators responsible for instability in the market, those who monopolized wealth and made others dependent on them, and the bureaucrats who represented their interests in government. Wang believed that suppression of the jianbing is one of the most important goals of politics.
“Today in every prefecture and subprefecture, there are jianbing families that annually collect interest amounting to several myriad strings of cash without doing anything… What contribution have they made to the state to [warrant] enjoying such a good salary?”
— Wang Anshi
Wang Anshi and the left wing of Confucianism was ultimately defeated by the rightists, but this strand was later revived and today serves to inform and guide the Communist Party of China.
It must be noted that the Confucian idea of “harmony” is emphatically not “sameness”, as the word partially implies in the Western definition.
An important passage in the Analects of Confucius (Book 13: Zilu) reads:
“君子和而不同，小人同而不和。”
Which translates to: “The noble man seeks harmony but not conformity; the petty man seeks conformity but not harmony.”
The confucian state does not demand uniform opinions in the state, in the population, or of its neighbouring countries, but strives for peaceful co-existence and balanced diversity between people and groups with different ideas. This is how there can be multiple ideological factions within Chinese government today: to the right of Xi JinPing there are politicians calling for expanding the private sector and further liberalisation, and to the left of Xi JinPing there are those who call for re-collectivisation and Great Cultural Revolution Part 2.
This diversity of ideas and a political culture of vigorous debate is how Chinese governance and policy under the same party can change, adapt, and evolve, according to circumstance and historical necessity, so drastically. The Communist Party is constant, but its policies during the Great Leap Forward, during the GCR, during Reform and Opening up, and even between the early 2000s and the current Xi JinPing period — are extremely different.
The idea of “Harmony without conformity” in Chinese political philosophy since ancient times is also what makes possible the “One country, two systems” arrangements that the central government has used for Hong Kong before reclamation, for Macau with its unique laws with regard to gambling, for Taiwan with a government independent of the CPC, etc. No other nation has any similar tolerance for different ideologies, political systems, and laws within its borders.
This Confucian tolerance for difference is in sharp contrast to the ideological homogeneity demanded by liberal democracy, which tries to impose the same values on not only their own populations but also on other nations with extremely different histories and cultures, and force developing countries to adopt the same neoliberal economic model.
The concept of Da Tong, “The Great Unity,” “Grand Harmony,” is one of the most influential and enduring political and social ideals in Chinese thought: a vision of a perfect, utopian world order.
The most famous and definitive description of Da Tong comes from the “Liyun” (Record of the Rites) chapter of the Confucian classic, the Book of Rites (Liji). It is presented as a description of the golden age of antiquity, before decline.
Here is the key passage, which is memorized by generations of Chinese students:
“When the Great Way (Da Dao) prevailed, the world was shared by all alike. The virtuous and the able were selected. Sincerity was emphasized, and harmony was cultivated. Thus, people did not love only their own parents, nor did they treat only their own children as children.
The elderly were provided with a means to see out their lives; the adults were employed in work that utilized their abilities; the children were supported to grow and learn. Compassion was shown to widows, orphans, the childless, and the disabled—all had the means of support.
Selfish schemings were repressed and found no development. Robbers, filchers, and traitors vanished. Hence, the outer doors remained open and were never shut. This was the age of the Great Unity (Da Tong).”
The core tenets of Da Tong:
Immediately after describing Da Tong, the original text contrasts the ultimate ideal for future society with the current era of Xiao Kang (Small Tranquility), a lower, more pragmatic level of a well-ordered society. In the time of Xiao Kang, society before Da Tong can be acheived, people love their own parents and children; rulership is hereditary; and rituals and righteousness are established to maintain order in a society of propriety and stability built on distinctions (self vs. other, ruler vs. subject).
The deeper understanding of confucianism is that the adherence to strict heirarchies, to filial piety, etc. are not end goals, but temporary features during the current era of Xiao Kang, which anticipates and will eventually lead to a much better future time of perfect human harmony on Earth.
This confucian idea of historical progress through struggle is akin to the Leninist socialist path towards global communisation, on which political power, in its continuous optimisation, striving for more legitimacy and further intimate reflection of the will of the people, will incrementally dissolve. As human understanding and society advances, the trust, respect, empathy, mutual care, and harmony within the family and extended family will increasingly expand to include the neighbourhood, then the city, the province, the nation, clusters of nations, and eventually, the world.
The concept of Da Tong, China’s native, classical vision of the permanent resolution of societal contradictions, of a harmonious, egalitarian, and moral society, has served as a powerful inspiration and a critical standard for political thought for over 4,000 years. Da Tong became the ultimate Confucian ideal, a benchmark against which all governments were measured, inspiring countless later thinkers, including the founder of modern China, Sun Yat-sen, whose Three Principles of the People were aimed at achieving a modern form of Da Tong.
Many Chinese intellectuals in the late 19th and early 20th centuries saw parallels between Da Tong and communism/socialism, which helped facilitate the acceptance of Marxist theory in China. The Communist Party of China has also invoked the language of Da Tong to describe its socialist and communist goals, framing the ultimate aim of communism as a modern realization of this ancient Chinese idea of utopia.
During the 20th Century revolutionary period, Confucianism, the ideology of feudal China which justified monarchism, was widely discarded as outdated and decadent. But on the road of socialist construction in the contemporary era, the ancient wisdom of Confucianism found new purpose and application for steering society during a transitional period full of not-yet-resolvable contradictions.
Today, the Mandate of Heaven and Confucian meritocracy endures in the Chinese version of Democratic Centralism, the political system of the Communist Party of China (same as that of USSR 1.0). Just like in ancient times, legitimacy of the CPC and its leadership rests entirely on approval of the population. If Xi JinPing loses support of the central committee and the higher governing bodies, he would have to step down immediately; and if the communist party itself loses support of the people, another will soon take its place.
In this democratically centralised hierarchical system, local leaders of villages, cities, and provinces are chosen by popular elections; while leaders in the central government are appointed by the party. Democratic centralism ensures that the entire government is connected to the wishes and will of the people, at the same time able to make big decisions concerning the nation and the world, such as those regarding climate and geopolitics, free from the short sighted financial self-interest of citizens. (more on contemporary PRC domestic and foreign policy in the essay “The Long Game and its Contradictions”)
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Tributary System
China has never been an “empire” in the European definition and understanding of empire.
Instead of constantly seeking to conquer and directly administer neighboring territories, like Rome and every Western empire, ancient China set up the Tributary System. Neighboring states (such as Korea, Vietnam, Tibet, and various steppe peoples) would acknowledge Chinese cultural and political supremacy by sending periodic tribute missions. In return, they received gifts, legitimacy for their own rulers, and the benefit of trade. This was a more cost-effective and stable way for China to secure its borders and maintain its perceived cosmic role than conquest, occupation, violent and coercive domination.
In the tributary system, often overlooked by Western understanding, the return gifts to the smaller nations must always be of greater value than the tributes — because a bigger, “superior” nation should of course be more generous, and has a responsibility for ensuring the wellbeing of others, for the preservation of peace and the promotion of prosperity.
If a greater nation takes more than it receives, or acts in an immature, impulsive, imposing, controlling, or even violent way, it would no longer deserve its perceived greatness on the international stage, and the emperor responsible would lose face and legitimacy at home. All of this is especially true of the greatest nation of all, the central celestrial kingdom.
This was also a kind of “supremacism”, but a drastically different kind than that of Wesern civilisaion: “superiority” and “dominance” means being more charitable, considerate, tolerant, patient, wise, fair, ethical. To be domineering, manipulative, to force one’s way of life on others, to meddle in the affairs of others, to use coercive methods or even military force to get one’s way, was seen as stupid, ugly, vulgar, petty, arising from insecurity and a low level of understanding, the behaviour of small minded weaklings.
The contemporary Chinese political principle of non-interference emerges from such a value system, and is merely the next step in the continuous evolutionary path of a mutualist political philosophy.
Peace and War
The central emphasis and conclusion of the famous Daoist treatise on war-strategy, The Art of War, is that war should be always and absolutely avoided with diplomacy, because who ever “wins”, both sides lose, and the civilian populations of both suffer. If war cannot be avoided, it should be fought strategically and psychologically to minimize damage and the wasting of resources. Warfare should only be the very last resort after all attempts at negotiation fails, and heading into battle is already admitting a kind of defeat.
In imperial China, a statesman who resorts to military methods without exhausting every possible peaceful means of settlement and even beyond (if an agreement is not reached, a certain amount of self sacrifice in order to preserve peace is expected), is considered an inferior and stupid leader, and would, after the dust settles, face demotion or worse.
Compare and contrast this with the valorization of violence in the West, regarding the successful waging of war as sign of a great leader. Currently USAmerican politicians are attacking each other for being “too soft on (insert official enemy)”, for not being aggressive enough. The competition to be seen as the most combative and bellicose is something that does not exist in Chinese political competition, which proceeds according to a set of very different core values. Speaking in broad general terms, non-violence, restraint, and patience is usually seen in the West as weakness — for evidence we only have to look at contemporary Western mockery of its geopolitical enemies’ caution and moderation, interpreting it as weakness.
Softness is central to Asian ideas of strength. In the age-old concept of “Bamboo Diplomacy”, the ability to bend (while being firm) is seen as an attribute of power. And indeed, Chinese Traditional Medicine has maintained for thousands of years after the fall from the harmonious period of antiquity (the first Xia dynasty), that “the world is too Yang”, meaning too masculine, too calculating, too hard, not enough feminine, not enough empathy, not enough softness. And to this imbalance can be attributed much of the great illness of the world.
While in European culture to be soft tends to be seen as a shortcoming, as feminine, as silly, as embarrassing, as inferior, and as cause for mockery and ridicule.
Clash of Civilisations
These policies, arrangements, modes of engagement with others, are very different from those of Western empires, and emanate from a fundamentally different set of core values and ideas of governance.
But Chinese society in antiquity was basically the same monarchism/feudalism as that of ancient Greece or Rome, with the same hereditary hierarchical power structure presiding over the population. So class alone cannot explain why Zheng He, with ships and fleets 10X bigger than those of Christopher Columbus and 100 years earlier, equipped with unmatched weapons and technology, sailed around Asia and Africa, and merely traded, instead of conquering, colonising, or enslaving.
For much of the past 2000 years, the Central Realm, world’s top economic, military, cultural super power, was relatively stable, prosperous, and self satisfied, with a form of internal governance and foreign policy which prized above all the preservation of harmony and peace. During the last 1000+ years, China engaged in virtually zero expansionist wars.
Contrast with Europe at the time of global colonisation: emerging from 1000 years of constant warfare, Roman infrastructure laid waste, rampant diseases, peasants living without much hope under brutally oppressive feudal theocracy — all of which made European peoples accustomed to violence, excel at military matters, and thirst for new horizons where the oppressed poor can become oppressive kings (or at least that was the propaganda to get the peasants and prisoners to take the gruelling and dangerous journeys to the New World and do the dehumanising work of genocide, all to create new markets for the newly emergent bourgeoisie).
Seems obvious but it must be said: It isn’t due to any innate, unchanging qualities within the people that China tended to trade and Europe tended to conquer, but only different sets of socio-economic conditions and path of historical development. But at the same time, the real cultural, civilisational differences do objectively exist, and continues to shape geopolitics.
Class must be foregrounded, but to reduce the complex interplay of ideas and objective factors to *only* a straight forward, deterministic materialism, to only economic concerns, is to neglect entire dimensions of social dynamics, the dialectical part of dialectical materialism.
And this kind of reductive, one-dimensional thinking is itself an expression of a certain deeply seated civilisational character, shaped by the developmental path of the Western philosophical tradition, in many ways typified by the work of René Descartes. It is a perspective that tends toward a mechanistic and discontinuous conception of the world, where independent actors are motivated solely by short term self interest, producing a predilection for playing the game of zero sums, of “winner takes all”, rather than one of continuous reciprocity and mutual benefit.
As China continues to rise, and re-assumes its position at the center of world affairs after a brief aberrant period, let us not mistakenly make universal claims about “all empires”, “all governments”; make false equivalencies between socialist and capitalist states and between Western and Eastern civilisations; project the motivations, intentions, and modus operandi of the US and European colonial empires onto the People’s Republic of China.
China emerges from 2000 years of statecraft focused on the preservation of peace and building of mutually beneficial relationships, and very literally does not have the institutional genes for domination, colonisation, or imposing its cultural values, political system, and economic model on the rest of the world.
The socialist super power is embarked on a world-historic mission to re-balance global economy by developing under-developed regions, to democratise international power by displacing uni-polar hegemony, to build a New Silk Road connecting the world, to bring a permanent end of the historic imperialist era.
If we take a sober look at the 20th Century, how strong waves of international movements toward socialism in the 1930s, in the 1950s, were brutally crushed by imperialism, we see that there has been 1 single block on the road of human progress —— and that removal of this block can only mean global socialism, the planetary path towards Da Tong.
Internationalism
Any kind of exclusively unique Chinese disposition that is conducive to modern socialism is the wrong conclusion to draw from this essay. Lets remember that the outcome of the civil war which ended with communist victory was anything but certain, that it was a very close fight, and that China could have strayed away from its Daoist and left-Confucian roots to embrace Legalism and nationalism, and become an imperialist power.
And we must remember that while the same choice is open to all nations, every people on this planet comes from ancient egalitarian traditions with matricentrality, animism, and a deeply embedded sense of community with high levels of trust, empathy, and cohesion. For these are the evolved social traits, the inherited biological reality, of the Homo Sapien Sapiens species, which is only, to various degrees in different places, ruptured by the proprietary/patriarchal world historic counter-revolution of 6 to 10 thousand years ago (much more on this in separate essays).
Sure, different cultures in different regions are to different levels connected to or severed from their pre-proprietary/patriarchal roots. But no matter how buried, how cut-off, all peoples have the potential of remembering, drawing from, and restoring their own ancient traditions of sharing and cooperation, towards building home grown socialism with local, native cultural/civilisational Characteristics.
Joint Statement following the 23rd Russia-India Annual Summit December 05, 2025 “Russia-India: A Time-Tested Progressive Partnership, Anchored in Trust & Mutual Respect”
1. At the invitation of the Prime Minister of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. Narendra Modi the President of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. Vladimir Putin paid a state visit to India on December 4–5, 2025 for the 23rdRussia-India Annual Summit.
2. The Leaders reaffirmed their support for further strengthening of the Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership between Russia and India. This year marks the 25th anniversary of the Declaration on Strategic Partnership between Russia and India, established during the first state visit of the President of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. Vladimir Putin to the Republic of India in October 2000.
3. The Leaders emphasized the special nature of this long standing and time-tested relationship, which is characterised by mutual trust, respect for each other’s core national interests and strategic convergence. They underscored that, as major powers with shared responsibilities, this important relationship continues to be an anchor of global peace and stability that should be ensured upon the basis of equal and indivisible security.
4. The Leaders positively assessed the multi-faceted mutually beneficial Russia-India relations that span all areas of cooperation, including political and strategic, military and security, trade and investment, energy, science and technology, nuclear, space, cultural, education and humanitarian cooperation. It was noted with satisfaction that both Sides are actively exploring new avenues for cooperation while further strengthening cooperation in the traditional areas.
5. The Leaders underlined that Russia-India ties have remained resilient in the backdrop of the prevailing complex, challenging and uncertain geopolitical situation. Both Sides have strived to forge a contemporary, balanced, mutually beneficial, sustainable and long-term partnership. Development of Russia-India relations across the entire spectrum is a shared foreign policy priority. The Leaders agreed to make all efforts to unlock the full potential of the strategic partnership.
6. The Leaders welcomed the opening of two Consulates General of the Republic of India in Yekaterinburg and Kazan, and looked forward to their early operationalisation to further strengthen inter-regional cooperation, trade and economic relations and people to people ties.
7. The Leaders noted with satisfaction the continued intensification of contacts at all levels since the last Summit, including meetings between them on the sidelines of the 16thBRICS Summit in Kazan and the 25th Summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Tianjin; holding of the 26th Session of the Russia-India Intergovernmental Commission (IRIGC) on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technological and Cultural Cooperation (IRIGC-TEC) co-chaired by First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. D.Manturov and Minister of External Affairs of the Republic of India H.E. Dr. S.Jaishankar and the 22nd Session of the IRIGC on Military & Military-Technical Cooperation (IRIGC-M&MTC) co-chaired by Minister of Defence of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr A.Belousov and Minister of Defence of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. R.Singh; visits of Lok Sabha Speaker H.E. Mr. O.Birla, Minister of Defence of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. R.Singh, Minister of External Affairs of the Republic of India H.E. Dr. S.Jaishankar, Minister of Railways, Information Technology, and Information & Broadcasting of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. A.Vaishnaw, Ministers of State of Home Affairs H.E. Mr. N.Rai, Defence H.E. Mr. S.Seth, Youth Affairs & Sports H.E. Mrs. R.N.Khadse, External Affairs & Textiles H.E. Mr. P.Margherita and Vice Chairman NITI Aayog Mr. S.Bery from the Indian side; visits of Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. V.Volodin, First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. D.Manturov, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. D.Patrushev, Minister of Energy of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. S.Tsivilyov, Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation H.E. Mrs. O.Lyubimova; and holding of strategic dialogue at the level of the Secretaries of the Security Councils, Foreign Office Consultations, consultations on UN issues, meeting of the Joint Working Group on Counter Terrorism, etc.
Trade and Economic partnership
8. The Leaders reaffirmed their shared ambition to expand bilateral trade in a balanced and sustainable manner, including by increasing India’s exports to Russia, strengthening industrial cooperation, forging new technological and investment partnerships, especially in advanced high-technology areas and finding new avenues and forms of cooperation.
9. The Leaders welcomed the adoption of the Programme for the Development of Strategic Areas of Russian-lndian Economic Cooperation till 2030.
10. The Leaders appreciated the ongoing intensification of the joint work on a Free Trade Agreement on goods between the Eurasian Economic Union and the Republic of India covering sectors of mutual interest. They also directed both Sides to intensify efforts in negotiations on a mutually beneficial agreement on the promotion and protection of investments.
11. The Leaders welcomed the results of the 25th and 26th Sessions of the Russia-India Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technical and Cultural Cooperation and the Russia-India Business Forum held in New Delhi (November 2024) and Moscow (August 2025) respectively.
12. The Sides underline the importance of an open, inclusive, transparent and non-discriminatory multilateral trade system with the World Trade Organization at its core. Both Sides emphasised that addressing tariff and non-tariff trade barriers, removing bottlenecks in logistics, promoting connectivity, ensuring smooth payments mechanisms and regular interaction between the businesses of the two countries were among key elements for timely achievement of the revised bilateral trade target of USD 100 billion by 2030.
13. Russia and India have agreed to continue jointly developing systems of bilateral settlements through use of the national currencies in order to ensure the uninterrupted maintenance of bilateral trade. Additionally, the Sides have agreed to continue their consultations on enabling the interoperability of the national payment systems, financial messaging systems, as well as central bank digital currency platforms.
14. The Sides welcomed steps to ensure long-term supply of fertilizers to India and discussed the potential establishment of joint ventures in this area.
15. The Sides welcomed the signing of agreements on cooperation in combating irregular migration and on temporary labor activity of citizens of one state in the territory of the other state.
16. The Russian Side welcomed the participation of Indian delegations in the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum (June 2025) and the Eastern Economic Forum (September 2025). The two Sides noted the contribution of the Russia-India Business Dialogue organised on the sidelines of these economic forums for promotion of bilateral trade, economic and investment cooperation.
17. The Leaders noted the importance of productive and mutually beneficial bilateral trade in mineral resources, including energy sources, precious stones and metals, as well as critical raw materials for the reliability of the international supply chains. Efficient cooperation in this area, carried out by Russia and India as sovereign states, is a significant component of their national security and social wellbeing.
Energy partnership
18. The two Sides discussed and commended their wide-ranging cooperation in the energy sector as a significant pillar of the Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership. The Sides noted the current and potential cooperation between Russian and Indian companies in fields such as oil and oil products, oil refining and petrochemical technologies, oilfield services and upstream technologies and related infrastructure, LNG and LPG related infrastructure, various existing projects in their countries, underground coal gasification technology, nuclear projects, etc. They also noted the importance of expeditious resolution of issues related to investment projects in this area, and agreed to resolve the various concerns being faced by their investors in the energy sector.
Transport and Connectivity
19. The two Sides agreed to deepen cooperation in building stable and efficient transport corridors, with the focus on expanding logistics links for improving connectivity and enhancing infrastructure capacity to support the International North-South Transport Corridor, Vladivostok-Chennai (Eastern Maritime) Corridor and the Northern Sea Route. They welcomed the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways of the Government of India on the Training of Specialists for Ships Operating in Polar Waters.
20. The Sides noted fruitful cooperation between the railways of Russia and India, aimed at establishing partnerships in the field of mutually beneficial technology exchange.
Cooperation in the Russian Far East and Arctic
21. The two Sides confirmed their readiness to intensify trade and investment cooperation in the Far East and the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation. The Program of Russia-India Cooperation in Trade, Economic and Investment Spheres in the Russian Far East for the period from 2024–2029 provides the necessary framework for further cooperation between India and the Russian Far East region, especially in the sectors of agriculture, energy, mining, manpower, diamonds, pharmaceuticals, maritime transport, etc.
22. Both Sides underscored the importance of holding regular bilateral consultations on Arctic related issues and welcomed the progress made in multifaceted bilateral cooperation on the Northern Sea Route. The Russian Side appreciated the participation of the Indian delegation in the 6th International Arctic Forum held in Murmansk in March 2025. The Indian Side expressed its readiness to play an active role as an Observer in the Arctic Council.
Civil Nuclear Cooperation, Cooperation in Space
23. The Sides confirmed their intention to broaden cooperation in nuclear energy, including fuel cycle, life cycle support for operating Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plants (KKNPP) and non-power applications, as well as to elaborate new agenda of interaction in the field of peaceful use of atomic energy and related high technologies. The Sides noted the importance of the cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy as a significant component of the strategic partnership taking into account the plans of the Government of India to increase India’s nuclear energy capacity to 100 GW by 2047.
24. The Sides welcomed the progress achieved in implementation of KKNPP project including the construction of the remaining NPP units and agreed on adhering to the timeline for supplies of equipment and fuel.
25. The Sides noted the importance of further discussion on the second site in India for NPP; the Indian Side will strive to finalize formal allotment of the second site in accordance with earlier signed agreements.
26. The Sides agreed to accelerate technical and commercial discussions on the VVER of the Russian design, research and joint development of NPPs, localization and joint manufacturing of nuclear equipment and fuel assemblies for Russian designed large capacity NPPs subject to terms and conditions as mutually agreeable.
27. Noting the importance of cooperation in space, the two Sides welcomed the enhanced partnership between the Russian State Space Corporation “Roscosmos” and the Indian Space Research Organisation in the use of outer space for peaceful purposes, including in the human spaceflight programs, satellite navigation and planetary exploration. They noted the progress in mutually beneficial cooperation in rocket engine development, production and use.
Military and Military Technical Cooperation
28. Military and Military-Technical Cooperation has traditionally been a pillar of the Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership between Russia and India, which has grown from strength to strength through several decades of joint efforts and fruitful cooperation, steered by the IRIGC-M&MTC.
29. The Leaders welcomed the outcomes of the 22nd Session of the IRIGC-M&MTC held in New Delhi on December 4, 2025. Responding to India’s quest for self-reliance, the partnership is reorienting presently to joint research and development, co-development and co-production of advanced defence technology and systems.
30. The Leaders expressed satisfaction with regular military contacts, including the meeting of Minister of Defence of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr A.Belousov and Minister of Defence of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. R.Singh in Qingdao in June 2025 on the sidelines of the SCO Member-States’ Defence Ministers’Meeting. Both Sides appreciated the joint military exercises Indra of the Armed Forces and reaffirmed their commitment to maintain the momentum of joint military cooperation activities and expand military delegation exchanges.
31. Both Sides agreed to encourage joint manufacturing in India of spare parts, components, aggregates and other products for maintenance of Russian origin arms and defence equipment under Make-in-India program through transfer of technology and setting up of joint ventures for meeting the needs of the Indian Armed Forces as well as subsequent export to mutually friendly third countries.
Cooperation in Science & Technology
32. Both Sides called for ramping up government-to-government, academia and private sector collaboration to promote application of critical and emerging technologies.
33. Recognizing the strategic importance of critical minerals for emerging technologies and advanced manufacturing, the two Sides expressed interest in deepening cooperation in exploration, processing and recycling technologies of critical minerals and rare earths.
34. Emphasizing the importance of joint research in science, technology and innovation, the two Sides called for strengthening cooperation under the ”Roadmap for Science, Technology & Innovation Cooperation between Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Science & Technology of the Government of the Republic of India“. They agreed to facilitate collaboration between government and private sector to harness opportunities for start-ups and small and medium-sized enterprises of the two countries to address societal challenges through innovative technologies, including joint research and development and co-development of technologies. They confirmed their interest in further developing cooperation in the sphere of digital technologies, including those related to information protection, security of critical infrastructure and law enforcement. Both Sides agreed to design and implement soft support programs for start-ups to enable knowledge exchange, capacity building, and greater engagement of innovators and entrepreneurs.
35. Taking into account the existing rich experience of interaction between Russia and India in the field of science and higher education, the Sides expressed mutual interest in developing partner ties between educational and scientific organizations, including the implementation of various forms of academic mobility, educational programmes, scientific and research projects and the holding of specialized international exhibitions, conferences, seminars. Emphasizing the importance of joint research in science, technology and innovations, the Sides confirmed their readiness to expand cooperation within the framework of the ”Roadmap for Science, Technology & Innovation Cooperation between Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Science & Technology of the Government of the Republic of India“.
Cultural cooperation, Tourism and people to people exchanges
36. The two Sides agreed that cultural interaction and people to people exchanges are an important component of the Russia-India Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership. They appreciated the participation in major international cultural forums, book fairs, festivals and art competitions organized in both countries and welcomed the holding on a parity basis, of Cultural Exchange Festivals in their countries, aimed at the fullest demonstration of Russian and Indian culture.
37. Both Sides supported the idea of expanding cooperation in the film industry, including development of joint film production and mutual participation in international film festivals held in Russia and India.
38. The two Sides appreciated the steady increase in tourist exchanges between Russia and India and welcomed simplification of visa formalities, including introduction of e-Visa by both countries. They agreed to continue the work on further simplification of the visa regime in future.
39. The two Sides noted with appreciation the enhanced exchanges and contacts between the experts, think-tanks and institutes of Russia and India. Over the years, this track of dialogue has promoted increased mutual understanding between Russian and Indian strategic and policy making circles and businesses so as to further strengthen the Strategic Partnership.
40. Recognizing the traditionally strong cooperation between Russia and India in the sphere of education, both Sides appreciated efforts to ensure well-being of students and agreed to continue their efforts in promoting educational linkages between universities and educational institutions.
Cooperation in the UN and multilateral fora
41. Both Sides noted the high level of political dialogue and cooperation between them on issues at the UN and agreed to deepen it further. They stressed the importance of reinvigorating multilateralism, with a central coordinating role played by the United Nations. They also underlined the primacy of respect for international law and emphasized their commitment to the purposes and the principles of the UN Charter.
42. Both Sides called for comprehensive reform of the UN Security Council to reflect contemporary global realities and to make it more representative, effective and efficient in dealing with issues of international peace and security. Russia reiterated its steadfast support for India’s permanent membership in a reformed and expanded UN Security Council.
43. The two Sides highlighted their cooperation within the G20 format and agreed to intensify it. They emphasized that the important practical legacy of India’s G20 Presidency in 2023 was the consolidation of the priorities of the countries of the Global South in the agenda of the main platform for international economic and financial cooperation, as well as the entry of the African Union into the ranks of full members of the forum. They welcomed the holding of the Voice of Global South virtual summits under the Indian presidency, which sent an important signal in favour of building a multipolar world order and strengthening the position of developing countries in global affairs.
44. They emphasized that the G20 is the premier international economic forum that provides a platform for dialogue of both emerging and developed economies on an equal and mutually beneficial footing. They recognized the importance of the continued and productive functioning of the G20, based on consensus and focusing on its key mandate.
45. Both Sides stressed the importance of strengthening their BRICS partnership and further committed themselves to promote cooperation in the expanded BRICS under the three pillars of political and security, economic and financial, cultural and people to people cooperation. They reaffirmed their commitment to the BRICS spirit of mutual respect and understanding, sovereign equality, solidarity, democracy, openness, inclusiveness, collaboration and consensus. Russia pledged its full support for India’s upcoming BRICS Chairship in 2026.
46. The Sides reiterated the importance of their joint work within the framework of SCO for further deepening Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership between Russia and India.
47. India commended the Russian Side for the successful hosting of the SCO Council of Heads of Government Meeting in Moscow on November 17–18, 2025 under the Chairmanship of Prime Minister of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. M.Mishustin. The Russian Side appreciated India’s initiative to establish SCO Civilizational Dialogue Forum, the inaugural session of which will be held in India in 2026.
48. The Sides noted SCO’s increasing role in the formation of representative, democratic, fair multipolar world order, based on universally recognized principles of international law, and cultural and civilizational diversity.
49. Both Sides emphasized the importance of further strengthening SCO’s potential and cooperation in the fields of politics, security, economy, culture and humanitarian ties. In this context the two Sides stressed the necessity of promoting modernization of SCO, especially in the fields of countering terrorism, extremism, separatism, drug trafficking, cross-border organized crime, and information security threats. They will pay special attention to establishment of the Universal Center on Countering Security Challenges and Threats in Tashkent and Counter-Narcotics Center in Dushanbe.
50. The two Sides agreed to continue interaction within G20, BRICS and SCO on key issues such as efforts towards reformed multilateralism, reform of international economic governance institutions and multilateral development banks, contributing to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals in its economic, social and environmental dimensions, stimulating economic growth, enhancing sustainability and developing resilience of international supply chains, including critical minerals, compliance with free and fair trade norms and climate change.
51. The two Sides intend to further strengthen cooperation within the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, including the issues of the long-term sustainability of outer space activities.
52. Both Sides reaffirmed their commitment to further strengthening global efforts for non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Russia expressed its strong support for India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group. The two Sides urged all members of the international community to work towards enhancing the level of mutual trust in order to promote global peace and security. The Sides emphasized the non-proliferation nature of export controls and confirm their intention to continue cooperation in this area with the aim of ensuring balance between security and commercial consideration, as well as peaceful uses of technology.
53. The Sides underlined the importance of strengthening cooperation within various regional fora, aimed at deepening regional peace and security, including the East Asia Summit, ASEAN Regional Forum, ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus.
54. The Parties confirm the need for strict compliance with and consistent strengthening of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction (BTWC), including through its institutionalization, as well as the adoption of a legally binding protocol with an effective verification mechanism. They oppose the establishment of any mechanisms that duplicate functions of the BTWC.
55. The Sides confirm the urgent need to start negotiations on a legally binding instrument on prevention of an arms race in outer space with the prohibition of the placement of weapons in outer space and the threat or use of force in outer space, from outer space or against outer space. The Sides note that the basis for such a document could be the draft of the Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects as well as the report of the relevant Group of Governmental Experts, adopted in 2024.
56. The Leaders, reaffirming their commitment to the principles reflected in international treaties that ensure the conservation of biological diversity and the protection of rare and endangered species, especially migratory bird species, that are uniting our countries.
57. Both Sides welcomed the adoption of the Framework Agreement by the Russian side to join the International Big Cat Alliance. The Indian Side looked forward to Russia’s early joining of the International Solar Alliance and the Coalition of Disaster Resilient Infrastructure.
58. The Sides agreed to continue the development of joint approaches to addressing global economic challenges, mobilising increased access to climate finance and technologies for developing countries and economies in transition, and ensuring a reasonable reform of international institutions of economic governance, in particular multilateral development banks.
Counter terrorism
59. Both Sides reaffirmed their commitment to strengthening bilateral and multilateral cooperation in the field of combating such common challenges and threats as terrorism, extremism transnational organized crime, money laundering, terrorist financing and illicit drug trafficking.
60. The two Leaders reaffirmed their strong commitment to preventing and countering terrorism in all its forms and manifestations: including cross border movement of terrorists and terrorists’ financing networks and safe heavens. They condemned in the strongest terms the terrorist attack in India in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 22, 2025, and in Russia at Crocus City Hall in Moscow on March 22, 2024. They unequivocally condemned all acts of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation by any religious or ideological pretexts, whenever, wherever, and by whomsoever they may be committed. They also called for concerted actions against all UN-listed terrorist groups and entities, including Al Qaeda, ISIS/Daesh and their affiliates, aimed at rooting out terrorists’ safe havens, countering the spread of terrorist ideology, eliminating terrorist financing channels and their nexus with transnational crime, and halting cross-border movement of terrorists, including foreign terrorist fighters.
61. The Sides called for an uncompromising fight against international terrorism and extremism in all their forms and manifestations, noting the importance of increasing cooperation in this area, without hidden agendas and double standards on the solid basis of international law and the UN Charter. Besides, they stressed the need for firm implementation of relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, as well as the balanced implementation of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.
62. Both Sides emphasized the primary responsibility of states and their competent authorities in combating terrorism. They called for a zero-tolerance policy on terrorism and expeditious finalization and adoption of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism in the UN framework, as well as implementation of the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council resolutions on countering terrorism and violent extremism conducive to terrorism.
63. The two Sides recalled the Special Meeting of the UN Security Council Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC) held in India in October 2022 under India’s Chairship of the CTC and welcomed the unanimously adopted Delhi Declaration on countering the use of new and emerging technologies for terrorist purposes. They noted that the declaration aims to cover the main concerns surrounding the terrorist exploitation of information and communications technology, such as payment technologies, social media platforms and fundraising methods and misuse of unmanned aerial vehicles. Both Sides also expressed their readiness to develop further cooperation in this field with a special focus on preventing radicalization and the spread of extremist ideology in the online space. In this regard, they noted with satisfaction the positive dynamics of strengthening relevant mechanisms within the SCO and BRICS formats
Regional and International Issues
64. Both Sides noted with appreciation the close coordination between Russia and India on Afghanistan, including through the dialogue mechanism between the Security Councils of both countries. They emphasized the important role of the Moscow Format meetings.
65. The Leaders welcomed the counter-terrorism measures against international terrorist groups, including ISIS and, ISKP and their affiliates, and expressed confidence that the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan would be comprehensive and effective. They stressed the need to ensure urgent and uninterrupted humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people.
66. Both Sides reiterated their commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East, calling for restraint, protection of civilians and compliance with international law, and the need to refrain from taking actions that could further escalate the situation and compromise regional stability. They stressed the importance of resolving the Iran nuclear issue through dialogue. They expressed concern over the humanitarian situation in Gaza and strongly stressed the importance for all parties concerned to remain committed to agreements and understandings reached between them for cessation of conflict, humanitarian assistance and a sustainable peace.
67. The Sides noted the importance of expanding efforts to combat climate change and achieving the goals of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. The Sides welcomed the 1st meeting of the Joint Russia-India Working Group on the issues of climate change and low-carbon development held on September 10, 2025 in New Delhi within the framework of the Memorandum of Understanding on the issues of climate change and low-carbon development. The Sides agreed to intensify the bilateral dialogue on implementing mechanisms of the Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, developing low-carbon technologies and using sustainable finance instruments.
68. The Sides agreed to continue interaction within G20, BRICS, SCO on the key issues of climate change. The Sides welcomed the results achieved by a coordinated work within the BRICS Contact Group on Climate Change and Sustainable Development; including the launch of the BRICS Climate Research Platform and the BRICS Laboratory for Trade, Climate and Sustainable Development. Both Sides encouraged fruitful cooperation in the area of addressing climate change in BRICS during the India Chairship in grouping in 2026.
69. The Sides noted with satisfaction the resilience of the Russia-India Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership and the convergent and complementary approaches of their foreign policy priorities, and reaffirmed their commitment for further strengthening it. They stressed that Russia and India as major powers will continue to strive for global peace and stability in a multipolar world as well as in a multipolar Asia.
70. President of the Russian Federation H.E. Mr. Vladimir Putin thanked Prime Minister of the Republic of India H.E. Mr. Narendra Modi for the gracious hospitality extended to him and his delegation in New Delhi and invited him to visit Russia in 2026 for the 24th Russia-India Annual Summit.
Modi welcomed Putin himself. The dancing girls were appreciated, and Putin is at Modi’s house now.
It looks like RT is front and center for Russian media. The interview with India Today is here:
https://www.rt.com/on-air/628971-putin-interview-indian-media/
And the welcome, short for now, is here:
https://www.rt.com/india/628905-putin-set-to-arrive-in/
This is a really good geopolitical overview and not only about Venezuela, but describing how Venezuela became the fulcrum of change to multipolarity and the start of the end of the Monroe doctrine.
I am not sure if Mearsheimer’s face should be on there, but the content is accurate until one gets to the end, where the video proposes that the US still has the opportunity to rectify its strategic mistakes. I don’t believe so, and so this video is for the good analysis of the process of the fall of empire in the first 3/4.
Venezuela just shattered the unwritten rules of the Western Hemisphere — and Russia made sure the world noticed. In this special geopolitical investigation, we unpack how Russian warships sailed into Venezuelan waters with calm precision — a symbolic strike at two centuries of U.S. dominance in the Caribbean. This wasn’t merely a naval visit. It was a challenge to the Monroe Doctrine itself — the old idea that Washington alone sets the boundaries of power in the Americas.
What the world witnessed wasn’t Russian aggression… It was Russian positioning — a strategic counter-move decades in the making. From NATO’s long eastward push to years of sanctions pressure on Venezuela, we trace how U.S. policies inadvertently drove Caracas deeper into Moscow’s orbit. The result: one of the most consequential geopolitical realignments in the Western Hemisphere since the Cold War.
Backed by verified research, foreign-policy scholarship, and historical context, this episode explores: • why Venezuela became a central arena of U.S. influence after the Cold War, • how sweeping American sanctions punished its economy — but failed to force political change, • how Russia built a slow, deliberate strategic lifeline to Caracas, • why the Caribbean can no longer be assumed to be an uncontested sphere of U.S. influence, • and why the quiet arrival of Russian destroyers signals a new era in hemispheric geopolitics. Told in the analytical spirit of John Mearsheimer, this long-form deep dive links realist theory to modern power struggles — revealing how the cracks in the unipolar world first appeared not in Europe… but in the Caribbean.
-Trump turning up the pressure on Venezuela
As Washington sharpens its tone, what does this mean for Maduro, the region, and the global balance?
-Ukraine’s quiet talks in the US Behind the scenes, Kyiv is engaged in desperate diplomacy — but is anyone still listening?
Netanyahu’s bid for a pardon
With Israel in political freefall, George examines the Prime Minister’s latest manoeuvre for survival.
Tonight’s Guests
RANIA KHALEK Journalist & Host of Dispatches on BreakThrough News @RaniaKhalek
ANDREI MARTYANOV Military analyst & author Veteran voice on global conflict and strategy
Kevin from Inside China Business
Russian envoy to US: Until Washington shifts policy, strategic dialogue can’t restart
Ambassador Alexander Darchiev discusses prospects for relations with the United States
The indefinite postponement of the Russian-American summit, which was due to take place in Budapest, has led to suggestions that the momentum from Russian President Vladimir Putin’s meeting in August with his US counterpart Donald Trump has already disappeared.
Russian Ambassador to the United States Alexander Darchiev spoke about whether this is actually the case.
Q: Donald Trump has claimed that the US will conduct nuclear tests “very soon.” How will this affect Russian–American relations and strategic stability? Moscow’s initiative to extend the quantitative ceilings of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) has been met with a prolonged pause in response; it expires on February 5, 2026.
Alexander Darchiev: The situation is paradoxical. The American administration has still not provided an official explanation, requested by the Russian Foreign Ministry, among others, as to whether the US president was referring to live tests involving the detonation of a nuclear warhead, which would effectively bury the arms control regime that the Americans themselves have largely destroyed, or to tests of new delivery systems. This leaves a lot of room for speculation and insinuation.
If the Americans argue that they need to carefully analyze the Russian initiative in order to maintain the limits established by the New START Treaty for one year after its expiration — a process that can be completed quickly and without negotiations — then creating uncertainty around this crucial issue of international security and strategic stability does not contribute to mutual trust and casts doubt on the American side’s responsible approach.
It is worth noting that the potential resumption of nuclear testing in the United States has drawn sharp criticism not only from Donald Trump’s political opponents, but also from experts in the relevant professional community, who warn of the serious negative consequences of such a move. Claims that Russia and China are testing nuclear weapons and that America must therefore follow suit are unfounded.
Such reversals by the current administration are driven by the desire to ensure US military superiority. In Moscow, however, they are viewed calmly in light of the breakthrough models of the latest weapons developed in recent years, which provide reliable security for our country.
We have always been willing to engage in honest and equal dialogue on this vitally important issue while strictly observing Russia’s national interests. However, it is important to recognize that the conditions for such a dialogue will only be met when we observe positive changes in Washington’s policy towards Russia.
Q: The stalled negotiation process and Donald Trump’s cancellation of the proposed summit with Vladimir Putin in Budapest indicate that Washington has backed off the Ukrainian issue. Can we say that the positive momentum of the Anchorage summit has been exhausted?
Alexander Darchiev: Not at all. The significance of the first personal meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, now back in the White House, lies in the fact that the two leaders negotiated on equal terms, trying to find common ground. Just because the dialogue stalled does not mean it has stopped. Contacts at various levels continue, and this requires patience and persistence.
At the same time, of course, one cannot ignore the pressure exerted by the ‘deep state’ and its representatives in power who oppose Donald Trump.
They are pushing the president to increase pressure on Moscow, which is futile, in order to force the Russians to immediately cease hostilities and save Zelensky’s regime.
Furthermore, the fundamental principles of Trumpism, ‘America First’ and ‘peace through strength’, imply the necessity of robust negotiations to eliminate accumulated ‘irritants’, rather than relying on the personal ‘chemistry’ that has developed between the leaders.
However, the bumps and pitfalls of such a disillusioned dialogue, which I reiterate is taking place outside of the public eye and away from the channels exposed in the media, should not distract from the main point:
As great powers, Russia and the United States are doomed to agree on at least non-confrontational coexistence.
This was well understood by Soviet and American leaders when they established diplomatic relations in 1933. Following Donald Trump’s inauguration, the presidents of our countries also recognized this when they agreed in a telephone conversation on February 12 that they would seek to normalize the Russian–American agenda.
Q: What is the current status of consultations on ‘irritants’ in bilateral relations? These were initiated by the previous administration and, given the new circumstances, were intended to facilitate the swift removal of existing bans and restrictions on the operations of diplomatic missions from both countries. This has not yet happened. Furthermore, the conditions for issuing visas to Russians have become more stringent. Why?
Alexander Darchiev: Dialogue on ‘irritants’ has been ongoing, and certain improvements have been achieved to date. However, these do not change the restrictive system imposed by Joe Biden; they merely mitigate its most objectionable aspects.
For example, the notification regime for diplomatic mission staff travelling outside the 25-mile free movement zone has been relaxed. Previously, permission had to be obtained for each instance of crossing the zone, but now, permission is only required for travel outside the agreed quotas. Now, relaxations within agreed quotas have been introduced for business and tourism travel.
You correctly noted that the issuance of regular visas to our citizens, whom the Americans have stopped serving in Moscow due to a lack of personnel, is now limited to the consular sections of US embassies in Astana and Warsaw, where a Schengen visa is required. At the same time, the situation with diplomatic and service visas has improved somewhat. This is important given the mass expulsion of Russian diplomatic staff initiated by Washington, followed by retaliatory measures which ultimately led to a shortage of personnel on both sides. Incidentally, despite the smaller staff, the working regime of our depleted consular offices has not changed.
During the aforementioned consultations on ‘irritants’, the parties also agreed to ensure uninterrupted banking services for diplomatic missions. They committed not to block financial transactions with their capitals, with appropriate exemptions from the sanctions regime. This primarily concerns the United States.
However, progress has stalled in addressing the ‘root causes’ of the abnormal state of bilateral relations, which hinders the normalization process envisaged by the presidents. The US State Department categorically refuses to discuss the return of six properties that have effectively been confiscated from the Russian Federation and are now being treated as private property. The American special services, which have taken the properties under their protection, are illegally denying access to the Russian ambassador and diplomats. Similarly, by linking the commencement of any meaningful discussions on this matter to a resolution in Ukraine that aligns with US interests, the US is responding to the suggestion of resuming direct air links, which Washington suspended following the commencement of the special military operation.
Q: Is there any hope that this dialogue will get off the ground?
Alexander Darchiev: We are not giving up. We are urging the State Department negotiating team not to ‘narrow’ the dialogue on ‘irritants’, contrary to the task set by the presidents. It is important not to limit ourselves to visa issues and the day-to-day practicalities of ensuring the functionality of diplomatic missions, but rather to focus on restoring normality more broadly. The first step is to return to December 2016, when Barack Obama, frustrated by Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the presidential election, initiated the Russian-American diplomatic war. We are now painfully dealing with the consequences of this. We will continue to work persistently in this direction.
This interview was first published by Kommersant, and has been translated and edited by the RT team.
By Anastasia Dombitskaya, Kommersant correspondent
This is Brian’s video accompanying his article on NEO: https://journal-neo.su/2025/11/18/al-qaeda-in-the-white-house-and-its-implications-far-beyond-it/
This comes with my recommendation. Brian again talks about the imperial Continuity of Agenda and connects far-flung events, and places these events where they fit in that agenda. If you think the imperial has given up on anything, you must please think again. This has never happened, and the agenda is in full swing. Brian also explains the imperial’s primary weapons and how they are deployed. He spends time on Syria and teases out how the neo-warrior cadres are being used. Empires fall and sometimes shrivel. They don’t just give up. Never has an empire given up, as it is its task and its life-force to maintain control and keep up its slavery.
Brian’s work isn’t the most romantic, and in general, he talks about the mundane and things that aren’t so exciting. His work is solid. We can always quibble about small details, but that would take us away from the overall description of how this river flows. His conclusions are accurate, and he is developing into an excellent investigative journalist in his chosen field.
Following is a controversial statement: currently, we see many useful idiots building their careers on convincing everyone how savvy they are regarding Russia, and how many ‘very important people’ they can have interviews with and which ‘important platforms’ they can be invited to. Think on that for a moment and ponder the real value, this bunch of westerners explaining to you and me how Russia thinks, as if they know. Do we really have to see Russia through a western lense? Where are the deep studies into how the empire is progressing? Of course, this is a controversial statement because these folks are setting themselves up as saviors. Allow me to ask a question. If all of these latest ‘Watch Me in Russia’ videos disappeared, what would we really lose? This is a serious question. Many years ago, in my previous job, I discussed with my boss an extension of his blog, and that would be the East and China. That direction was approved at the time, but only to a limited extent. I was early in my assessment that we need to look at the broader world.
Russia is currently seeking an identity. It may be as short as an identity statement. They are floundering in this search. China has found that identity and continually works on being equal to its own statement through good ‘ol communist self-examination. One interview or article with Professor Karaganov can tell us more about what Russia thinks, and what not, and a few Lavrov interviews can hammer that in. Yes I know – not as romantic as the Watch Me in Russia videos, but are we here for entertainment, or for understanding? (Yes yes, entertainment is fine of course.) It is of great necessity for all of us to understand the complete and whole movement to multipolarity in all of its aspects, the good, the bad and the ugly, and then, the complete and full resistance to the current war on the world. Initially, we thought it would be a war on BRICS, and it is, of course, but it is much broader than that.
Take a little time to understand all the hot spots and how they converge. You may also know on a more profound level why we are seeing the performance art around the so-called Gaza peace agreement, as well as the current performance art peace agreement for Russia and Ukraine. There is one Agenda, and the individual events all play in, sometimes by design, and sometimes as a result of years and decades-long persistence in working on Continuity of the Agenda. There is no change vis a vis Russia. The imperial still wants to break it apart and own it. There is no change vis a vis China. The imperial still wants to own and control it. We need to get the big picture and then work locally to resist. The barbarian crusades are in full swing.
All social media and many reliable media are in chaos. The major issues:
Even Sony Thăng started speaking out, only to be met with screeds and pages of justifications. These journalists feel scorned because Russia, China, and BRICS are not taking the action they decided should be taken.
In addition, we have AI. Here we have to change our perspective. Whereas before we ‘trusted’ certain information from well-known and reliable journos, essayists, and commentators, our default position now has to change. We cannot believe what our eyes see or what our ears hear.
Trust Nothing Unless Verified. Everything is someone else’s opinion. Use extreme informational filters on everything and everybody. Don’t stop resisting!
The reality is that even the good can become crazy overnight, as this level of crazy is communicable.
Is the move to multipolarity fun enough for you yet?
This is the NO RULES commenting thread. Say what you want. I just did and have more. Your karma is yours.
In a compelling lecture at GIBS, world-renowned economist Professor Jeffrey Sachs unpacked one of the most important geopolitical dynamics of our time: the rebalancing of global economic power from the North Atlantic to Asia – and the implications for Africa’s development trajectory.
Drawing on history, economics, and global strategy, Prof Sachs offered a clear, evidence-based narrative:
The 2015 Council on Foreign Relations report explicitly framed preventing China’s rise as essential to preserving US primacy.
Adam Smith’s 1776 insights on trade foreshadowed today’s global realignment — a shift the West now struggles to accept.
Asia’s growth is a structured continuum: Japan’s modernisation (1868) → the Asian Tigers → China’s reforms (1978) → India’s liberalisation (1991) → and today’s rapid advances in Central Asia and the Gulf.
China has accelerated this trajectory, adapting lessons from Japan and Singapore to build one of the world’s most technologically advanced economies in just four decades.
Prof Sachs also emphasised a critical point for Africa: globalisation isn’t collapsing – it is reorganising. With Africa projected to hold 25% of the world’s population by 2050 and up to 40% by 2100, the continent has a historic opportunity to shape the next era of global growth. Achieving sustained 8–10% annual growth, however, will require deep investment in education, digital infrastructure, and institutional capability.
This session was not simply a geopolitical conversation – it was a strategic masterclass that connected 1776, 1945, 1978, and 2025 in a powerful through-line. For leaders, policymakers, and anyone invested in Africa’s future, it is essential viewing.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/78487
In the Kremlin’s St Catherine Hall, Vladimir Putin held a meeting with the heads of delegation attending the SCO Council of Heads of Government meeting.
Russia’s chairmanship of the SCO Council of Heads of Government ends in 2025. The Council met earlier today in Moscow under the chairmanship of Russia’s Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin.
* * *
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Colleagues, friends,
It is a great pleasure to welcome you all to Moscow.
Today, you have successfully concluded a regular meeting of the SCO Council of Heads of Government, outlining plans for our future joint work. This builds upon the foundations laid by the Tianjin Declaration and the SCO Development Strategy to 2035, which was adopted at September’s SCO Summit in China.
We are united by a common objective: to strengthen the authority and influence of the SCO as one of the leading regional associations, both across the Eurasian continent and globally. In this endeavour, our governments have a vital role to play. Governments always have a special role when it comes to practical work. It is, after all, our governments – the teams under your leadership – who translate our shared ambitions into concrete, practical cooperation and who drive the expansion of the Organisation’s multifaceted partnerships.
Throughout Russia’s chairmanship of the Council this year, we have hosted a substantial programme of events. Nearly 30 ministerial and expert meetings, as well as forums involving business, public, and youth representatives, have been held in Moscow, St Petersburg, and other major Russian cities, and a wide range of mutually beneficial projects and cooperation programmes have been agreed.
Governments traditionally prioritise issues of economic cooperation, promotion and diversification of trade and investment. Coordinated efforts in these areas are already yielding tangible results.
For example, Russia’s trade with SCO member states reached US$409 billion in 2024 and continues to grow. Of course, the largest share of this turnover is accounted for by our cooperation with the People’s Republic of China, however, trade with other SCO member states is also growing.
It is important to note that the share of national currencies in commercial transactions between the Organisation’s members is consistently increasing. For example, in our country’s trade with SCO partners, this figure already exceeds 97 percent.
Stable and uninterrupted payment channels are becoming increasingly vital, particularly in the current volatile economic environment, marked by turbulence in the global markets, unilateral sanctions, tariff restrictions and wars.
At the Russian side’s initiative, and with the support of its partners within the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, steps are being taken to expand payment, settlement, and depository infrastructure. The agenda also includes consultations on the creation of a future SCO Development Bank, as well as on the mutual recognition of credit ratings and goods indicator systems.
Other Russian proposals on the establishment of a database of industrial investment projects within the SCO are also being implemented. The creation of such an instrument will expand cooperation in the industrial sector, facilitate joint development of production capacity, support import substitution, and promote the introduction of new technologies and digital innovations, including artificial intelligence. Ultimately, these efforts will contribute to strengthening the technological sovereignty of our countries in the core sectors of the economy.
It would be appropriate to continue our joint efforts to build an extensive and competitive network of logistics routes across the vast expanse of the SCO and Eurasia as a whole.
Russia, situated at the very heart of the continent and at the intersection of key trans-Eurasian transport corridors, is allocating significant funds to modernise its transport infrastructure. The volume of road, rail, and multimodal traffic passing through Russian territory is growing noticeably, with due consideration given to the utilisation of new promising corridors such as North–South and the Northern Sea Route. Today, incidentally, another nuclear-powered icebreaker has just been laid down.
Our country is also making a substantial contribution to maintaining stability in global energy markets. We are doing everything to ensure reliable supplies of energy resources to consumers, despite attempts from outside to negatively influence supply chains, and we count on closer coordination among all SCO partners in the energy sector, in line with the relevant roadmap adopted in Tianjin.
It is evident that the Shanghai Organisation could play a more significant role not only in deepening sectoral cooperation but also, more broadly, in fostering a favourable atmosphere on our shared continent for stable, progressive growth and multifaceted economic interaction. In practical terms, it could also facilitate the alignment of the numerous integration projects being implemented across Eurasia. This is precisely the aim of the Greater Eurasian Partnership concept proposed by Russia. The idea is to harmoniously combine integration processes within the Eurasian Economic Union, the Belt and Road Initiative put forward by our Chinese friends, and numerous similar projects involving the countries of the Shanghai Organisation.
Naturally, cooperation within the SCO framework is by no means limited to the economy, though this is undoubtedly the primary focus. Our organisation also actively contributes to strengthening peace and stability across Eurasia, countering a wide range of challenges and threats, and shaping a new balanced security architecture in Eurasia.
An equally important component of the SCO’s activities is the development of humanitarian contacts and exchanges in the fields of culture, science, education, healthcare, environmental protection, and, of course, youth policy and sport. As I have said on numerous occasions, Russia is sincerely committed to the closest possible partnership with the SCO member states. I am confident that by acting in a coordinated and united manner, helping one another, we are capable of achieving truly impressive results in developing multifaceted cooperation among our countries.
Thank you for your attention.
Let’s redefine. Donald Trump’s peace is not by definition the end of war. The declarations of peace agreements do not indicate that there will be no war, but he …
demonstrates that the hegemon has taken that area, all of those eight or so ‘peace agreements’, back into hegemonic control.
Of course, most discuss the details of the so-called peace agreements, but few realize what their conceptual meaning is. For this, it is not necessary to have lasting, well-crafted peace agreements, because the redefinition of ‘peace’ only means control, not the absence of conflict. It is the ‘strength’ portion of Peace through Strength. It is ownership, it is a statement of new colonialism, it indicates new slavery. This is the depths of the applied methodology of the ‘rules-based international order. It is a new definition of who the slaves are, and it is much more critical to understand than our jokes about the eight new peace agreements. It is abuse and manipulation. It is brainwashing, gaslighting, and deception.
Just as democracy has been refined in application, and terrorists now are whoever we want to call a terrorist, the word peace is redefined.
I want to remind you of Trump’s inauguration speech, where he said, ‘We are an empire now, and empires grow and get bigger.’ So, this piece of gaslight indicates the areas that they consider are now back in their neo-colonial control. In reality, only India saw it and said the US had nothing to do with the agreement between India and Pakistan, thereby refusing to become a new colony and neo-slaves.
We saw two more refusals just recently. The refusal is, of course, of critical importance, but so is the understanding.
The first is the UNSC agreement on Trump’s ‘peace plan’, which we should now understand is a ‘slavery plan to grow the empire ‘, and the subsequent abstention of China and Russia, instead of what many expected, a veto. There is much misunderstanding about what happened and why.
The second is the Trump summit with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud yesterday. This is a half-refusal because, despite showering money on the Trump administration, which is to be expected, MbS refused to accept the Abraham Accords, saying that Palestine needs to have sovereignty. Despite this, Trump went off into paroxysms of how ‘peaceful’ the ‘Middle-East’ is now and how everyone will be happy and how the Palestinians love him. The more Trump is deprived of his ‘peace,’ which is slavery, the more marketing he spouts.
Let’s look at what happened at the UNSC, and this time, we won’t choose Russia, but China, as their reasons for the abstention were very clearly stated. The US went to the UNSC to supply cover for its evil. China and Russia made it impossible. Instead of the US being able to say that the ‘world community’ is in agreement, it is now clear that a whole large section of the world community is not. The US lost its cover. There is much bitterness among the cadres who think Russia or China owes them something, but let’s ignore them. They are just looking for a lollipop, and if they don’t get their lollipop, we see oodles of China Bad, Russia Bad from those that are bitter because the world is not giving them what they expect to be handed. We are in a very harsh phase, and if we do not understand what the new peace means, we will continue calling it wrong and misunderstand the reality of multipolarity. So, a summary from China: https://un.china-mission.gov.cn/eng/hyyfy/202511/t20251119_11755683.htm
China supports the Security Council in taking all necessary actions to achieve a lasting ceasefire, relieve the humanitarian disaster, and launch post-war reconstruction to rekindle the hope of peace and development for the people in Gaza. Regrettably, the draft resolution that was just voted on is lacking in many respects and is deeply worrisome.
First, the draft resolution is vague and unclear on many critical elements.
Second, the draft resolution does not demonstrate the fundamental principle of Palestinians governing Palestine. Gaza belongs to the Palestinian people, not to anyone else.
Third, the draft resolution does not ensure the effective participation of the UN and its Security Council. The draft resolution requests the Council to authorize the BOP to assume full responsibility for the civil and secure arrangements in Gaza, but it stipulates no oversight or review mechanism beyond the annual written reports.
Fourth, the draft resolution is not a product of full consultations among Council members. Less than two weeks after introducing the draft resolution, the penholder rushed the Council into making a critical decision on the future and destiny of Gaza. Council members responsibly engaged in the consultations, raising a lot of constructive questions and suggestions, but most of them were not taken on board. While there remained major concerns and serious differences among members, the penholder forced the Council to take actions on the draft resolution. We are deeply disappointed with such an approach, which is disrespectful to Council members and hurts the Council’s solidarity.
The Palestinian question lies at the heart of the Middle East issues. It is a matter about international equity and justice. The international community must steadfastly advance the two-State solution and pursue the political settlement of the Palestinian question. It means establishing an independent Palestinian state with full sovereignty on the basis of the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, therefore realizing the Palestinian people’s right to statehood and survival. And return.
The US was not seeking legality from the UNSC. It was seeking cover. It only wanted to use ‘the international community’ because, as we know, legality means nothing. It tried to continue with the scam of refusal to acknowledge the genocide. It did not need to go to the UNSC, and the scam failed. Now, the cover of the ‘international community stands with us” has been ripped off this piece of the neo-slavery scam. Many write that Russia and China wanted to maintain their relationships with the Palestinian authority, but this is so small. Think Big Picture Analysts! If they had vetoed, the US would blame them for sinking a peace agreement. Russia and China did the right thing, because now the world knows that this is just another scam, and the manipulation stands naked.
To summarize:
Peace in Trump’s terms means neo-colonialism and slavery.
Russia and China tore away the ability to quote the ‘international community’ as part of the Greater Israel effort – no more and no less – and they restated the rights of Palestine.
MbS in his summit with Trump gave us half a victory, strangely enough, despite much money changing hands and a new agreement on non-NATO friends forever.
Sony Thang, answering some questions, got it right out of the box!
You are confusing legal form with political function. And in the Security Council, those two things are not the same. Let me explain this in the simplest possible terms:
1. A resolution passing does not equal legitimacy for U.S. action. If that were true, Iraq 2003 would have been legal. It was not. The U.S. acted anyway. The U.S. does not seek legality in the legal sense. It seeks cover in the narrative sense. Those are not the same concept.
2. The U.S. wanted a resolution that it could claim represented international consensus. It did not get one. A resolution that passes without yes votes from major powers and with explicit objections written into their explanations is not interpreted as consensus. Everyone in diplomacy knows this.
3. A resolution that passes with abstentions from China and Russia does not give Washington the legitimacy it wanted. It gives Washington a text, but not the political authority to claim the UN endorsed its plan. That is why the difference matters.
4. You keep repeating “legally binding” as if the U.S. follows binding resolutions. It does not. It ignores them whenever they contradict its interests. Israel does too, with full U.S. protection. So tell me: What is the value of a “legally binding” resolution when the party you are talking about ignores legal binding altogether?
5. The only real leverage the UN has over the U.S. is narrative legitimacy, not enforcement power. China and Russia denied that legitimacy. A veto would have handed the U.S. the perfect excuse: “We tried peace. They blocked it.”
6. You are treating the UN like a court. It is not a court. It is a political theater where states signal, posture, deny, and legitimize. And in political theater, abstention is not neutrality. It is a refusal to bless the script.
7. So yes, the resolution passed. But the mandate did not. The consensus did not. The legitimacy the U.S. came for did not. You are looking at the procedure on paper. I am looking at the power in practice. A resolution passing is not legitimacy. Legitimacy is who stands behind it. And China and Russia refused to stand behind it.
This is a quick X post from Brian. He is correct.
Why Are there No Large Media Organizations Exposing US Political Interference and Regime Change???
Why doesn’t Russian and Chinese media – located in nations that understand and have successfully combated US political subversion and capture in their own countries – have at least a small team researching who is funding people involved in protests around the world so when they report on it at Sputnik, RT, CGTN, etc. – they can actually inform people of the truth behind this type of unrest rather than just repeating/amplifying what the BBC, CNN, or VOA says?
US political interference and regime change is Washington’s ultimate super weapon – one that has destroyed multiple nations over this 21st century alone and coercing many more nations to work against their own best interests and against that of multipolarism. US political interference and capture is surrounding Russia and China with dangerous US proxies like Ukraine, the Baltics – or in China’s case – Japan, the Philippines, and even China’s own island province of Taiwan.
No amount of arms production has or can be used to stop this – only exposing it and helping nations develop the means to successfully defend against it can stop it, just as Russia and China have done domestically.
Solutions:
1. Cut off US, European, Western foundation-funding to “NGOs,” opposition groups, parties, and programs targeting education and information space/media in a targeted nation/bloc of nations. Pass national security laws that ENFORCE already existing international law under the UN Charter regarding political independence and foreign interference;
2. Replace US-based and controlled social media platforms manipulating what people inside a country sees, believes, and aspires towards with social media platforms that reflect the best interests of that nation itself. Russia and China export weapons to help nations defend their borders, shores, and skies, why not versions of social media platforms they have themselves that allow others to defend their information space as well?;
3. Create academic/professional pipelines to create human resources for national media, foreign relations, political science, administrative roles, education/teaching, and business development INDEPENDENT of Western academic institutions, programs, scholarships/fellowships and agendas. A nation’s media, foreign ministry, universities and business community should be run by people educated by and reflecting the interests of their nation, not by or in the West at their own nation’s expense;
4. Create GLOBAL social media platforms beyond the manipulation and control of US information dominance – alternatives to YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram that constitute a majority of how people around the world currently “think” they are informing themselves. This includes creating supporting services that allow the public to support alternative media (alternatives to PayPal, Patreon etc) that are beyond the US’ ability to cut off to silence opposing narratives;
5. And as mentioned above, create research teams to actually RESEARCH global events like protests and conflict to determine what is really happening and report on it accurately, rather than echoing the lies of the West usually behind such protests/conflict;
US political interference is a global enterprise – it threatens peace, stability, development, and prosperity on every inhabited continent on Earth. Yet because it takes place over long periods of time, is done through boring programs, workshops, seminars, scholarships, fellowships etc., few are interested in researching it, and fewer still are interested in learning about it.
This leaves a tremendously powerful weapon in Washington’s hands – one that is hardly noticed, poorly understood, and almost entirely undefended against. By the time this long-term process reaches critical mass and attention-grabbing violence/conflict or worse erupts – IT IS TOO LATE TO STOP IT.
There are things that can be done – things that have stopped US interference and political capture – that can be and must be applied more widely.
Multipolarism cannot prevail if nations can be captured and redirected away from it and away from their best interests, toward Washington’s interests (at their own expense) which includes burying the very idea of multipolarism under continued US hegemony.
US NED-funded media like "Animal Politico" and US NED "Democracy Award" winner and former Mexican president/millionaire Vicente Fox are openly promoting the protests "organized" on mainly… pic.twitter.com/fLSJQyfp4T
— Brian Berletic (@BrianJBerletic) November 16, 2025
Andrei Martyanov writes an explanatory piece on Russian Talk Shows, which is necessary reading. Gilbert Doctorow, whom I certainly had some words about in the past, enters the arena again.
Read the complete short piece at Andrei’s blog. We summarize here:
… shows–as in any talk show in the West the main task is to create a shouting match between the guests and not to find the truth. Those hosts, from Solovyov, to Skabeeva with her hubby, to others are complete hacks who have been exposed by SMO as people who are not in complete agreement with their heads and also played a significant role in promoting a 404 fifth column in Russia, while in reality giving a vehicle to either outright or shadow assets of SBU and other intel orgs.
He continues to explain the ‘root causes’ of Doctorow’s current rage.
As Sir Bernard Pares wrote about Russia 90 years ago:
“And knowledge alone is not enough without understanding, which is much more hardly won. To no country does this apply more than to Russia….This gap has to be filled, or will it cost us dear.”
It is so that Russia is infested with various levels of 5th columns. This is perhaps why Professor Karaganov and others find it so difficult to define a Russian Idea-Dream in a short vision statement. I’ve had commentary during the past week or so, that this overall objective is why President Putin set together a formal organization on ethnic affairs. I’ve had further comment that the Russian history between the period of Bolshevikism and now what looks like capitalism is not yet well integrated in the Russia civilization community. Like China, Russia is rolling their own, and wrestling with historical contradictions in order to flow that into a civilizational statement of vision, ethics and morals. It is an age-old question. “Who am I?”
Beyond Andrei’s take-down of the hack Russian talk shows, there are a few others that need to be mentioned. I don’t like to disrespect others, but please ignore Paul Craig Roberts on Russian issues. There is no need to be unkind, but quietly ignore. A broken clock may be correct twice a day, but it is not enough for our current world. Understanding takes time and effort, and most of all, an inquisitive spirit initially starting with Tabula Rasa, and intent on staring a truth in the face, no matter how uncomfortable.
We also see from another vector extreme criticism against Russia continuing, and that is Syria. Yes, we lost Syria to the hegemon, as is demonstrated in the US media today, where we have a prologue of the whitewash of Netanyahu through Ahmad Al-Sharaa, who, with a name change, a smart suit, and years of special British tutoring, became a western darling. It is painful to this day but we’ve had prologue on instituting leaders for others before. “The United States recognizes Interim President Juan Guaidó as the legitimate President of Venezuela. ” This will harshly expose the non-existent respect from the Trump team to their proxies. Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa: “At the end of our meeting, President Trump gifted me a red MAGA hat”. One could feel sorry for the upgraded Takfiri who will probably meet his end as other proxies met theirs with something sharp entering where no-one wants something sharp.
Russia did not lose Syria for us. The hegemon won this round, and that’s all. Overall, I am very concerned about the continual ‘Greater Israel’ encroachment in the entire West Asia region. Currently, the pressure is being withstood by Russia, China, and others at the UN Security Council. A positive picture is not emerging, but again, we must face this truth. Months ago, we had this little comment from Trump that we saw in one of the many gaggles with prestitute geese. Trump looked down at a map, and almost wistfully, with a childlike rapture on his face lifted his gaze and said: “Israel looks so small on the map.” That comment rang the bell. The hegemon wants to own everything. With evangelical passion, it wants zionist-israel to own West Asia.
From this point onwards, we can start talking about strategic regions, the confluence of trade routes, and the cradle of western civilization, once known as the fertile crescent. Then we can again talk about the level of brutality as illustrated and owned among hegemon and zionist and nazi and for that matter fascist. Again, we’ve had prologue.
Today, I want to talk about a future vision.
The world is changing. The Fertile Crescent is now mainly desert. Wars are desertifying areas that were not previously desert. Whatever the hegemon wants to win, this garden will be sand. The region owns oil. But the world is changing. While it will take years, hydrocarbons will be replaced by other forms of energy propulsion. The importance of trade routes is changing. The Belt and Road Initiative, the Northern Passage, The NorthSouth corridor and the old passage around South Africa are gaining prominence. You cannot fill up your jet, seagoing transportation vessel, or one of the many vehicles in China’s low-altitude economy at your local petrol gas station. Propulsion will be built into the vessel or vehicle. This is the next phase of EVs. Like a tortoise, we will carry our zoom with us.
China’s automakers soar into low-altitude economy. China’s low-altitude economy is expected to reach 3.5 trillion yuan ($487.5 billion) by 2035, according to the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC). Attracted by this massive market, Chinese automotive manufacturers are rapidly expanding into the low-altitude economy sector. Several automakers have entered the flight-testing phase of their flying cars. The Govy AirCab represents a multi-rotor flying car design, with the upper section functioning as an aircraft and the lower section operating as a conventional vehicle. Its dual-mode system enables both ground-based intelligent driving and aerial flight. It is ideal for short-distance commuting and sightseeing.
To tie all this up back to Andrei Martyanov’s critique on Talk Shows, specifically Russian Talk Shows, when did you last see one of these discussing the fast-developing low-altitude economy? These Shows are like Neanderthals and dodos, trying to make sense of a world that is fast disappearing with the tools of this fast-disappearing world. China is building a low-altitude, next floor up for humanity. Imagine owning your real estate now in the low-altitude economy, where the Earth’s first floor is taking shape. Indeed, the sky is the new limit.
Pa’ mí, pa’ ti, arriba, y arriba
Y arriba, y arriba
Gen Z-led uprisings across the Global South point to long-term socioeconomic and environmental crises caused by neoliberalism. Yet they have often been coopted by entrenched social classes. Can their energy be channelled towards progressive ends?
From our friends at the Greanville Post
[While this is fine opinion, I don’t think Vijai does enough to explain that all of the Gen-Z uprisings are to one extent or another attempts at direct regime change or to implant NED and similar organizations deeper into the body politic of youth cadres. Just follow the money]
Vijai Prashad
Greetings from the desk of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.
The walls of Santiago, Chile, — the city where I live — are marked with faded graffiti from the estallido social (social uprising) of 2019.
Years later, these slogans continue to spill onto the sidewalks, from “Nos quitaron tanto que nos quitaron hasta el miedo” (“they took so much from us that they even took away our fear”) to “No son 30 pesos, son 30 años” (“it’s not 30 pesos; it’s 30 years”).
Both slogans refer to the 30 years of neoliberal austerity imposed on the Chilean people, including a 30-peso hike on the price of metro tickets and deep cuts to the country’s social wage system. The uprising was led by high school students born between 2001 (age 18) and 2005 (age 14), who are part of Generation Z or “Gen Z.”
However, this term, forced on the world by mainstream media, often erases the social complexity and national specificity of such uprisings. Nonetheless, this term, and the concept of a “generation,” are worth exploring.
The protests in Chile – which eventually drew in all age groups and delegitimised the right-wing government of Sebastián Piñera — were not singular. Young people born in this era led protests across the world, including mass mobilisations against a gang rape in Delhi, India (2012); the March for Our Lives campaign against gun violence in the United States (2018); and the Fridays for Future campaign against the climate crisis (2018), which was initiated by the Swedish activist Greta Thunberg (born in 2003 and recently tortured by the Israeli government).
The Chilean uprising was followed by the national strike in Colombia in 2021, the Aragalaya (struggle) in Sri Lanka in 2022, and the upsurge in Nepal earlier this year that resulted in the resignation of the centre-right government.
In each of these cases, what began as moral outrage over a singular issue snowballed into a critique of a system that has proven incapable of reproducing life for young people.
Joseph Mbatia Bertiers (Kenya), A Week before the Elections, 2007.
The concept of the generation was developed a century ago by the German scholar Karl Mannheim in his essay “The Sociological Problem of Generations” (1928). For Mannheim, a generation was not defined by the era in which a cohort was born but by their “social location” (soziale Lagerung). In political terms, a generation is produced when it experiences rapid and disruptive changes that make it re-encounter tradition through new “cultural carriers” (Kulturträger) — individuals and institutions that transmit culture — and becomes an active force for social change, a far cry from the way in which generations became a marketing typology after World War II (Baby Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y, etc.).
Mannheim saw generations as forces for social change, while neoliberal culture turned them into “segments” in their brand strategies.
The term Gen Z has been used in descriptions of protests taking place from the Andes to South Asia, where young people — frustrated with limited possibilities for social advancement — took to the streets to reject a failing system. Some elements of Mannheim’s theory are at work here. It is true that imperialist forces often intervene to instigate and shape these protests, but it would be inaccurate to view these protests as merely the product of outside intervention.
There are important internal sociological factors that require analysis in order to understand these “Gen Z protests.” Many of them are driven by a range of overlapping processes that emerge from the national context while being conditioned by the international conjuncture. In this newsletter, we propose seven theses to begin to understand these developments and perhaps channel them in a progressive direction.
Muvindu Binoy (Sri Lanka), Protest in Colour IV, 2022.
Thesis one. There is a youth bulge across the Global South, where the median age is 25 years, and people in these young societies find themselves victims of harsh debt-austerity policies, climate catastrophes and permanent wars. In Africa, the median age is 19 — lower than any other continent. In Niger, the median age is 15.3; in Mali, 15.5; in both Uganda and Angola, 16.5, and in Zambia, 17.5.
Thesis two. Youth in the Global South are frustrated with unemployment. Neoliberalism has weakened state capacity, leaving very few tools to address this issue (leading to demands such as opening up state employment opportunities, in the case of the Quota Reform movement in Bangladesh).
Educated youth with middle-class aspirations are unable to find suitable work, leading to structural unemployment or a skills mismatch. There are various colloquialisms for the kinds of precarious jobs on offer: in Algeria, there is a term for the unemployed that borrows from Arabic and French: those who “lean against the wall” to hold it up (hittiste from the Arabic hayt, meaning life).
“It is true that imperialist forces often intervene to instigate and shape these protests, but it would be inaccurate to view these protests as merely the product of outside intervention.”
In the 1990s, the university system was expanded and privatised, meaning that doors were opened — for a fee — to large sections of what would become Gen Z. These are children of the middle and lower-middle classes, but also of the working-class and smallholder farmers who were able to climb their way up the social ladder. Gen Z is the most educated generation in history, yet it is also the most indebted and underemployed. This contradiction between aspiration and precarity produces great resentment.
Thesis three. Young people do not want to have to migrate to have a dignified life. In Nepal, young protestors chanted against the compulsion towards economic migration: “We want jobs in Nepal. We don’t want to have to migrate for work.” This compulsion to migrate elicits shame about one’s own culture and a disconnection from the history of struggles that has shaped one’s society.
There are almost 168 million migrant workers in the world — if they were a country, they would be the ninth largest in the world, after Bangladesh (169 million) and ahead of Russia (144 million). Among them are Nepali construction workers in the Gulf states and Andean and Moroccan agricultural workers in Spain.
They send remittances that sustain household consumption in their countries; in many cases, total remittances (which amounted to $857 billion in 2023) are greater than foreign direct investment (as with Mexico). Social dislocation, the international colour line of labour, and the mistreatment of migrants — including disregard for their educational credentials — make the allure of migration near zero.
Sabita Dangol, Nepal, Protective Shelter, 2020. (Via Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research)
Thesis four. Large agribusinesses and mining companies have sharpened their assault on smallholder farmers and agricultural workers (the spur for the farmers’ revolt in India). Youth from these classes, fed up with the rural distress and radicalised by the often-failed protests of their parents, move to the cities and then abroad for jobs. They bring their experience from the countryside to cities and are often the main phalanx of these protest movements.
Thesis five. For Gen Z, the issue of climate change and environmental distress is not an abstraction but an impending cause of proletarianisation through displacement and price shocks. People in rural areas see that melting glaciers, droughts and floods strike precisely where imperialist “green” supply chains seek resources like lithium, cobalt and hydropower. They understand that the climate catastrophe is directly linked to their inability to build a present, let alone a future.
Thesis six. Establishment politics are unable to address Gen Z’s frustrations. Constitutions do not reflect reality and unaccountable judiciaries seem to live on another planet. This generation’s main interactions with the state are through tone-deaf bureaucrats and militarised police.
Political parties are paralysed by Washington’s debt-austerity consensus, and non-governmental organisations narrowly fixate on individual issues rather than the entire system.
The old national liberation parties have largely exhausted their agenda or had it destroyed by austerity and debt, leaving a political vacuum in the Global South. To “get rid of them all” is a politics that ends with a turn to social media influencers (such as Kathmandu’s mayor, Balen Shah) who have not participated in party politics but who often use their platforms to preach a gospel of anti-politics and middle-class resentment.
Thesis seven. The rise of informal work has created a disorganised society, with no hope of fellowship among workers or membership in mass organisations like trade unions. The uberisation of working conditions has created an informality of life itself, where the worker is alienated from all forms of connection.
The significance of social media rises with the increase in informality as the internet becomes the main medium for the transmission of ideas, supplanting the older modes of political organisation. It is tempting but inaccurate to suggest that social media itself is a driving force behind this wave of protests. Social media is a communication tool which has enabled a diffusion of sentiments and tactics, but it is not the condition for these sentiments.
It is also important to note that the internet is a tool for surplus extraction — platform workers, or gig workers, are disciplined by algorithms that drive them to work harder and harder for less and less pay.
Camilo Egas, Ecuador, Fiesta indígena or Indigenous Festival, 1926. (Via Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research)
The seven theses above attempt to outline the conditions that have produced the Gen Z uprisings in the Global South. These uprisings have been largely urban, with little indication that they have drawn in the peasantry and rural workers.
Moreover, the agendas of these protests rarely address the long-term structural crises in underdeveloped countries. To be blunt, the typical politics of the Gen Z uprisings lead into the abyss of middle-class resentment. These protests are often – as in Bangladesh and Nepal – co-opted by entrenched social forces that ventriloquise the voices on the streets and develop an agenda that benefits Western financiers.
Nonetheless, these uprisings cannot be discounted: their frequency will only increase due to the factors we have outlined. The challenge for socialist forces is to articulate Gen Z’s genuine grievances into a programme that demands a higher share of the social surplus and uses that surplus to enhance net-fixed investmentand transform social relations.
Please don’t ask Grok!
The “Dialog about Fakes 3.0” Forum brought together experts from over 80 countries in Moscow
On October 29, the third international forum “Dialog about Fakes 3.0” was held in Moscow, bringing together approximately 4,000 participants from over 80 countries. The event was held under the auspices of UNESCO and was included in the organization’s official calendar for Global Media and Information Literacy Week, making it the only Russian forum with this status. The forum was broadcast in three languages: Russian, English, and Spanish.
The forum brought together fact-checking experts, representatives of government agencies, international organizations, media outlets, and the scientific and technological communities.
The forum focused on developing methods to counter false information on a global level. Key topics for discussion included the challenges of the era of generative AI and deepfakes, the spread of fake news in science and education, the development of media literacy, and the verification of tools.
The president of the Global Fact-Checking Network (GFCN), Vladimir Tabak, addressed the forum participants with an opening speech:
“The wide geographic range of the forum’s participants proves that the problem of fake news knows no borders, which means our association must be open to all. We are removing barriers, including linguistic ones. Our shared goal is to establish effective rules to combat the information threats that endanger all of humanity.”
Speaking about the principles of the international expert community, the GFCN President outlined its key mission: “The essence of fact-checking is not about bans and censorship, but about ensuring the right to the truth. We provide people with the knowledge and tools to ensure their choices are free and informed, not the result of manipulation by others.”
Russian Foreign Ministry’s official spokesperson Maria Zakharova emphasized: “The Western world remains a generator of fake news, inventing provocations and blocking any dissent in the media, thereby preventing journalists and investigators from expressing a different point of view.”
“We must do everything in our power to ensure that the scales of truth are balanced. We are witnessing, as I have already said, a real epidemic, a pandemic of fake news and disinformation that has engulfed the entire world,” urged Maria Zakharova during the discussion “#Antifake: Truth always wins.”
Other quotes from speakers at the “Dialog about Fakes 3.0” forum:
Wang Delu, First Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Eurasian Bureau of China Media Corporation:
“To address these challenges, we first and foremost need to strengthen media cooperation. Chinese and Russian media leaders have repeatedly called for the creation of a unified information space. One of the priority areas of cooperation between our media is the protection of traditional values and the foundations of the international order.”
Christopher Helali, journalist (USA):
“Information is everywhere. It’s in cyberspace, it’s everywhere, and it’s present on a routine, everyday level when we use our phones and televisions. In terms of impact, we can compare this to the shock wave generated by a nuclear reactor or an explosion that could kill tens of millions of people.”
Freddy Nánez, Minister of Information and Communications of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela:
“Communication, instead of liberating us, has been privatized, commercialized, and instrumentalized by hegemonic interests, which reduce it to a mechanism of global control.”
Johannyl Rodriguez, Deputy Minister of Communications and Information of the Ministry of People’s Power of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela:
“Technology is leading us to a state devoid of language. And a state is impossible without language. None of us knows how algorithms work. We don’t understand the protocols that enable artificial intelligence. This is a very difficult problem.”
Guy Mettan, journalist, writer, and member of the Geneva Parliament:
“The mainstream media remain completely deaf to pluralism. That’s a fact. But I’m quite optimistic because we have so many people who are trying to somehow avoid this barrage of fake news and see the bigger picture.”
Emmanuel Leroy, President of the 1717 Institute (France):
“To preserve our culture, our mentality, and our religion, we need to create our own sovereign artificial intelligence. Right now, before our eyes, a battle is unfolding between, so to speak, ‘Silicon Valley’ and the rest of the world. On one hand, there is a unipolar, globalist artificial intelligence, while on the other, a multipolar artificial intelligence must develop — one that embraces freedom and equality.”
Reference: The organizer of the “Dialog about Fakes 3.0” forum is the ANPO “Dialog Regions”. The forum was held with the support of its partners: TASS, the New Media Workshop, and the Global Fact-Checking Network.
Recordings of the “Dialog about Fakes 3.0” forum sessions are available on the website: https://fakes2025.dialog.info/
Photo, source — ANPO “Dialog Regions”: https://disk.yandex.ru/d/AlqBqc8m6Ue_MQ
China is not worried; the tech expectation is that they won’t need anything from the US in the spectrum of 2 to 3 years.
So the latest incarnation of the much-hyped G-2 came and went. It did feel like a switch from Trump Tariff Temper Tantrum to Temporary Truce.
Naturally there has been an avalanche of spin focusing on the easing of “trade tensions”; but what really mattered in practical terms was the lack of a full “deal” after 1h40 of debate in South Korea – complete with a smiling handshake coda.
Well, anyone with an IQ over room temperature knew from the start what Trump wanted to extract from Beijing. Essentially 3 items:
There was never any chance that China would even contemplate discussing item 3 – considering the role of energy in the comprehensive Russia-China strategic partnership.
So what we had were minor concessions on items 1 and 2, still quite vague.
The Chinese Ministry of Commerce, for its part, officially announced that Washington will cancel the 10% so-called “fentanyl tariffs” and suspend, for an additional year, the 24% reciprocal tariffs levied on all Chinese products, including those coming from “one country, two systems” stawarts Hong Kong and Macao.
Soybean concessions were expected. Brazil played a not very wise game by raising the price of their soybeans from $530 per ton to $680. Beijing started to have second thoughts on buying more from their BRICS brothers: China moreover is Brazil’s top trade partner. Beijing combined the devaluation of the US dollar with the bumper US crop where farmers are willing to apply a discount of 10%, and in the end got out with a good deal – with the extra bonus of appeasing the Circus Ringmaster’s domestic supporters.
Navigating the “giant ship”
Instead of trademark Circus Ringmaster boasting/bragging re: deals that may exist only in his mind, it’s much more relevant to pay attention to how this G-2 was interpreted by China.
The emphasis was on cooperation, appeasement of Trump’s volatility plus a subtle History lesson – with a long view. See for instance the terminology employed by Xi, classic metaphorical China:
“In the face of winds, waves and challenges, we should stay the right course, navigate through the complex landscape, and ensure the steady sailing forward of the giant ship of China-U.S. relations.”
Other Chinese ministerial texts sailed even further than Xi’s “giant ship”. They emphasize the concept of “mutual achievement and common prosperity”. That’s not new, coming from official China. But then there was a startling, explicit statement:
“China’s development and revitalization and President Trump’s goal of ‘making America great again’ are not mutually exclusive.”
Translation: the Beijing leadership now is self-confident enough when it comes to China’s renewed strenghths and the “objective situation” – as in the state of the geopolitical and geoeconomic chessboard. So they believe that the US and China may not necessarily have to fall into the abyss of a zero-sum game.
It’s impossible to tell whether Trump himself fully understands it. Assorted Sinophobes advising him certainly don’t.
It’s also crucial to place the G-2 in South Korea in the context of what happened right before, earlier in the week, during the several summits inbuilt in the annual ASEAN sumitt in Kuala Lumpur, as I addressed it here.
The renewed interconnected trade drive between the ASEAN + 3 (China, Japan and South Korea) and the RCEP (encompassing most of Asia-Pacific) points to East Asia counteracting the imperial tariff tantrums as a concerted unit.
And on the crucial, progressive yuanization of the planet, it was also this week that Beijing officially boosted petroyuan deals with the Arab petro-monarchies while inviting all its BRICS brothers and partners to use the Chinese Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS): in short, the digital yuan.
In parallel, Li Chenggang, Vice-Minister of Commerce and China’s International Trade Representative, made sure how the rare earth export control measures will affect China’s foreign trade in green tech products.
He said that these export controls are most of all connected with improving security: “Green development is a development philosophy (…) On the relationship between security and development (…) in short, ensuring security is essential for better development, and better development, in turn, guarantees stronger security.”
Global South nations will understand that. Not necessarily the Pentagon.
Not a word on semiconductors or Taiwan
Right after the G-2, Xi continued to enjoy the limelight at the first session of the 32nd APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting, with a five-point proposal for promoting inclusive economic globalization, to the benefit of the “Asia-Pacific community” (not “Indo-Pacific”, which is conceptually void).
Xi talked directly to the Global South; he called for “joint efforts” to “safeguard the multilateral trading system”; build an “open regional economic environment”; keep the stability and “smooth flow of industrial and supply chains”; promote digitalization and greening of trade; and promote “universally beneficial and inclusive development.”
That’s not exactly a Trump 2.0 platform.
Well, China will host APEC 2026, and the US will host the G-20 in 2026. This G-2 in South Korea certainly may be seen as a symbolic pause, or a time out. Yet no one knows what the Circus Ringmaster may be up to next – including himself.
Two final, key points: not a word on both sides on possible US concessions related to export controls on advanced semiconductors. That means no deal. China is not worried; the tech expectation is that they won’t need anything from the US in the spectrum of 2 to 3 years.
And not a word on Taiwan. All bets are off – but it may be the case that somebody whispered on Trump’s ear (he doesn’t read) the content of Zhou Bo’s latest sharp column on the matter.
So no provocation and/or escalation. At least for now.
96 years ago, on October 29, 1929, Yevgeny Primakov was born – an eminent Soviet and Russian statesman, brilliant diplomat and Arabist.
He is among the world’s greatest statesmen and diplomats of the XX-XXI centuries, known as a consistent supporter of the principles of realism and pragmatism, a staunch defender of Russia’s national interests, who laid the conceptual foundations for the formation of a polycentric world.
• Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia (1996-1998)
• Prime Minister of Russia (1998-1999)
• Chairman of the Council of the Union of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union (1989-1990)
Russia’s foreign policy underwent radical transformation when Mr Primakov took office as Foreign Minister.
With NATO focused on expansion and ignoring Moscow’s interests, continuing rapprochement with the West seemed unfeasible. Under Primakov’s guidance, Russia pursued an independent foreign policy, aiming for equitable and mutually beneficial cooperation with a wide range of partners.
The legendary “Atlantic U-turn” on March 24, 1999 is among the most widely known foreign policy episodes involving Yevgeny Primakov. On March 24, 1999, while in route to the United States, he learned of NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia and ordered his plane turn back mid-flight, returning to Moscow. This act symbolized re-evaluating relations with the West marking Russia’s transition to a multi-vector foreign policy.
Primakov foresaw the rise of new centres of economic growth and political influence around the world and, in this sense, predicted the realities of multipolarity. The format he created, Russia-India-China, served as a precursor to BRICS, a genuine embodiment of multipolar diplomacy.
From Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s answer (https://t.me/MFARussia/6821) to a question from Vremya news show on Channel One (October 29, 2019):
Yevgeny Primakov assumed office at the Foreign Ministry at a time when our relations with nearly all other countries were chilled. He had to act in constrained conditions marked exclusively by pro-Western inertia. As a visionary, he knew that a policy can only be sustainable if it takes modern day realities into account. He predicted the realities of a multipolar world with new centres of economic growth, financial might and, consequently, political influence.
In 2019, on the 90th anniversary of this outstanding Russian diplomat, a monument (https://t.me/MID_Russia/10356) honouring him as a statesman and patriot was unveiled across from the Foreign Ministry.
The memory of Yevgeny Primakov lives on in the hearts of several generations of scholars, journalists, and public officials.
Permanent X link to Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur – the Occupied Territories.
A previous thread contains Netanyahu’s ‘spiritual needs’.
Previous thread: https://sovereignista.com/2025/09/27/the-war-genocide-thread-9/
Oct 26
Genocide Light
We are entering the 3rd week of the PEACE, Ceasefire, or whatever the Trump Plan is called. Demented Donald shouts peace: “We have a very strong PEACE in the Middle East”, while Netanyahu is testing his limits. It is my opinion that zionist-israel is now been taken somewhat formally as US proxy, as a colony. The Israeli hardliners hope Trump ‘flips again’ as this is now openly discussed in the zionist circles and media. “A senior IDF officer on assertions that the IDF is subordinate to the American headquarters in Kiryat Gat regarding operations in Gaza:
“This is not true. Obviously, the situation is sensitive and they want to move forward. But we are not subordinate to them in any way. There is coordination and cooperation, but they do not have a veto, and we have no obligation to report or request approval.”
Yet, in Trump’s salami slicing methods, American troops are now patrolling within Gaza, despite the assurances that they will not be deployed inside Gaza.
This is not a ceasefire: Zionist warplanes launched twin strikes on eastern Khan Younis in southern Gaza at dawn.
— Seyed Mohammad Marandi (@s_m_marandi) October 27, 2025
The mundane steps for pretending that this is a ceasefire, continues.
The decision was made during a meeting in Cairo with Egyptian intelligence, according to The Jerusalem Post, which cited KAN News.
Shawa’s official appointment still depends on approval from the US. https://t.co/9IWj2HFnaG pic.twitter.com/bWaEHyob8k
— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) October 27, 2025
Only now, after having been prohibited from entering, an Egyptian team enters Gaza to recover dead hostages. (Enemy media)
In a critical mission approved personally by PM Netanyahu, an Egyptian technical team has entered Gaza, Channel 12 reported. Their sole objective: locate and recover the bodies of the remaining 13 slain hostages. Both Israel and Hamas have provided intelligence on the bodies’ locations. Footage from social media show 4 heavy engineering vehicles entering Gaza through the Kerem Abu Salem crossing.
Some 12 or so corpses have not been found for handover to the zionists.
Some 9,000 Palestinians are still in prisons and jails in zionist-israel. One cannot help but think that there must be committed torturers in the zionist population to torture such a large number of people continuously.
West Bank
It is here that we see the zionist settlers are designated as a civilian quasi-military force. They beat Palestinians, raid villages and towns, hold people for arrest by the formal forces, steal the olive harvest, send their animals in to graze on Palestinian lands, and after stealing the olive harvest, chop down the trees. Closer to Gaza, they stop aid trucks from entering by blocking, with their babies and children, in front of the trucks.
Zionist-israel is bombing Lebanon at will.
333 days have passed since the so-called ceasefire agreement was signed between Israel and Lebanon.
During this period (2024–2025), 344 Hezbollah members were martyred (if including uninvolved individuals, over 400 were killed).
In the year between October 2023 and September 2024 (before the start of the Hezbollah–Israel war), about 500 Hezbollah members were martyred.
The difference between the two periods is that in ’23/’24 Hezbollah responded to every killing; so far, not a single response has been recorded, neither to the massacre, nor to the raids, nor to the repeated bombings of its bases and facilities.
An average of 1.03 members per day were martyred over the past 333 days.
The question now is: how long will Hezbollah stay as members of the government first, and as a resistance second?
The pressure to start a new war with Iran is a little less, yet Iran is on a readiness and war footing. Note Pepe Escobar’s comment with information that was released after his visit to Iran was cancelled because Iran is on a war footing:
Pepe Escobar
@RealPepeEscobar
·
Oct 24
Meet Esmaeil Khatib. A very serious character. He is Iran’s Minister of Intelligence.
Khatib released a bombshell when he publicly stated that 50 – I repeat, FIFTY – foreign intel agencies helped that death cult in West Asia during the 12-day war on Iran.
Khatib detailed how they unleashed a full-scale Hybrid War to try to balkanize Iran and provoke regime change.
FIFTY. That includes the whole of NATO and a lot of Arabs.
And two crucial players: Turjiye and Azerbaijan.
That explains why Iran had to stop: after all they were hammering the death cult big time, even in downtown Tel Aviv.
Tehran realized it could not fight in so many fronts at the same time.
We don’t have time to follow the African wars on the war thread. The major instigator is the UAE (the Emirates). and zionist-israel. Sudan looks as bad as Gaza. The African Global South is failing its own. African countries are more interested in walking the modelling runway for photo ops during the Russian SMO than in dealing with their own problems. It is fashionable to ‘solve Russian problems’ and sounds oh so Statesmanlike. It calls the press to solve zionist problems, so let’s start an ICC case that cannot really go anywhere, and let’s get Iran to pay for it. It is, of course, the easy way to blame colonialism for all, but not to set out and solve the rabid neo-colonialism, but in the majority of cases, enthusiastically take part. In my opinion, only the Sahel States, collectively, are solving the problems. The rest? What else are they doing besides making comments to the press?
The LAC is politically, ideologically and strategically much more prepared and much further down the road to sovereinty. With the imminent threat to Venezuela, we see the LAC drawing together and taking ownership, considering it a region-wide threat.
Femi Akomolafe talks about Kenya:
It galls the soul to see that what the British Empire failed to conquer with its Maxim machine guns, the Kenyan elite willingly surrendered with handshakes and smiles.
It seems independence meant merely swapping the governor’s mansion for the State House—different flag, same servitude.
https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/sudan-another-forgotten-war
Total Respects!
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/196/196-20251022-pre-01-00-en.pdf
This was generally unanimous. Israel is in full violation of International Law. In some cases 10 votes for and 1 against but few dissenting opinions. As occupying power, Israel has obligations – people must have their basic needs, they must not be pushed off their land, the UN staff and helper organizations and countries must have access and so on. This will be ignored by zionist-israel and the US, but it is another drop of ink in the zionist dark waters. All pressure helps. Note they talk about the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and that would include the West Bank and also the Golan Heights. This why Israel is now trying to pass a law internally to annex the West Bank as their own territory.
By a vote of 10 to 1, the ICJ ordered Israel to allow and actively facilitate all humanitarian relief efforts for Gaza’s civilian population, rather than obstruct them.
—
What are the obligations of Israel, as an occupying Power and as a member of the United Nations, in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, including its agencies and bodies, other international organizations and third States, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including to ensure and facilitate the unhindered provision of urgently needed supplies essential to the survival of the Palestinian civilian population as well as of basic services and humanitarian and
development assistance, for the benefit of the Palestinian civilian population, and in support of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination?”
Is of the opinion that the State of Israel, as an occupying Power, is required to fulfil its obligations under international humanitarian law. These obligations include the following:
to ensure that the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory has the essential supplies of daily life, including food, water, clothing, bedding, shelter, fuel, medical supplies and services;
to agree to and facilitate by all means at its disposal relief schemes on behalf of the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory so long as that population is inadequately supplied, as has been the case in the Gaza Strip, including relief provided by the United Nations and its entities, in particular the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, other international organizations and third States, and not to impede such relief;
to respect and protect all relief and medical personnel and facilities;
to respect the prohibition on forcible transfer and deportation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory;
to respect the right of protected persons from the Occupied Palestinian Territory who are detained by the State of Israel to be visited by the International Committee of the Red Cross; and
to respect the prohibition on the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare;
Is of the opinion that, as an occupying Power, the State of Israel has an obligation under international human rights law to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including through the presence and activities of the United Nations, other international organizations and third States, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory;
Is of the opinion that the State of Israel has an obligation to co-operate in good faith with the United Nations by providing every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, including the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory;
Is of the opinion that the State of Israel has an obligation under Article 105 of the Charter of the United Nations to ensure full respect for the privileges and immunities accorded to the United Nations, including its agencies and bodies, and its officials, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory;
Is of the opinion that the State of Israel has an obligation under Article II of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations to ensure full respect for the inviolability of the premises of the United Nations, including those of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, and for the immunity of the property and assets of the Organization from any form of interference;
Is of the opinion that the State of Israel has an obligation under Articles V, VI and VII of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations to ensure full respect for the privileges and immunities accorded to the officials and experts on mission of the United Nations, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Global Times report:
And so we see a step toward Xi Jinping’s Global Governance initiative – a professional mediation organization. Wanna make a war? Go Mediate!
The inauguration ceremony of the International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) was held in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) on Monday, attended by nearly 200 representatives from over 30 contracting and signatory states to the IOMed Convention, as well as from various sectors of HKSAR.
Some experts from the city’s legal field believe that the official launch of the IOMed marks a milestone moment, representing a new opportunity for the city and a new chapter for the rule of law. It not only opens a fresh avenue for resolving international disputes, but also demonstrates China’s commitment to promoting the rule of law on the global stage, they noted.
Vice Foreign Minister Hua Chunying, who attended the ceremony, said the IOMed had achieved the signing, entry into force, and official launch within just five months, a pace “rare in the history of international organization development,” according to a readout from the Chinese Foreign Ministry. This achievement reflects that the IOMed is in line with the global trend and receives broad international support.
The vision of the IOMed highly aligns with the Global Governance Initiative as it upholds the principles of reconciliation, cooperation, and harmony, adheres to fairness and justice, and embraces a spirit of consultation, co-construction, and shared benefits, Hua said at the ceremony.
By advocating a people-centered and pragmatic approach, the IOMed will inject positive energy of the rule of law into building a community with a shared future for mankind, while also helping Hong Kong develop as a ‘capital of mediation’.”
In these times of global instability, international mediation is indispensable for resolving disputes, preserving relationships and encouraging meaningful cooperation, HKSAR Chief Executive John Lee said on Monday at the ceremony. “With our world-class professional services, Hong Kong is dedicated to supporting the cause of dispute resolution,” Lee said.
He also called the inauguration on Monday “a testament of our shared commitment to a future in which dialogue, cooperation and mutual respect prevail over acrimony and conflict.”
According to the IOMed Convention signed in May, the functions of the IOMed are to provide mediation services for resolving international disputes. It will also promote the use of mediation in dispute resolution, to develop the culture of mediation, and to explore and promote best practices of mediation.
In addition, the organization plans to organize international, regional, national, and local forums and conferences on mediation, building a platform for communication and information sharing. It will promote cooperation for capacity building in the area of mediation, recognizing and giving priority to the need of developing countries.
The organization will also cooperate and communicate with other international bodies and dispute resolution agencies.
New milestone
The opening of the IOMed marks a new opportunity for Hong Kong and a new chapter for the rule of law, Louis Chen, a member of the Election Committee and general secretary of the Hong Kong Legal Exchange Foundation, told the Global Times on Monday.
“From an international perspective, the organization integrates the strengths of different legal systems and leverages the unique advantages of mediation to offer a flexible, efficient, and cost-effective means of dispute resolution,” Chen said. “It will help improve the international legal system and contribute to building a community with a shared future for mankind.”
The newly appointed secretary-general of the IOMed is Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah, who serves as the Institute’s legal representative, according to local media reports.
Cheng is a senior counsel from Hong Kong and an internationally recognized expert in arbitration and mediation. She previously served as Secretary for Justice of the HKSAR from 2018 to 2022.
The IOMed will be the world’s first intergovernmental international legal organization dedicated to resolving international disputes through mediation, and will be an important mechanism for upholding the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, according to a statement issued by the Department of Justice of the HKSAR in May.
“Dispute resolution is an art that contributes to mankind. Every small step to settle international conflicts via mediation is indeed an advance for civilization,” said Chu Kar-kin, a veteran commentator based in the HKSAR and member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
Hong Kong adopts the common law legal system which enhances the smooth progress of law practices and mediation worldwide, Chu said.
“The independent international institution may serve the purpose of offering constructive solutions which is enforceable and acceptable by participating parties,” he added.
Role of Hong Kong
Several representatives from Hong Kong’s legal field shared with the Global Times on Monday that with the advantages of “One Country, Two Systems,” world-class professional services, a strong rule-of-law tradition, and the common law system, Hong Kong is a natural fit for hosting the IOMed.
“As a meeting point between East and West, Hong Kong has a wealth of bilingual legal professionals fluent in both Chinese and English and well-versed in international rules, enabling effective resolution of cross-cultural disputes,” said Willy Fu, a law professor who is also the director of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong & Macao Studies.
The city’s sound judicial independence and highly internationalized service sector offer strong professional support for mediation, Fu added.
Following is an edited conversation with some Chinese in our Writer’s Group. What it shows is that a new dispensation is now flowing across us and our world. It is a dispensation that is not made up with hatred, and there is understanding, except for those who do not accept the fact that they are understood. This understanding is based on the differences between Civilization States, who happen to be Nation States as well, in modern terms. First, we see Wang Yi using a series of Chinese ancient teachings to describe China’s attitude towards Trump:
On February 14, 2025 local time, Wang Yi, member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and Foreign Minister, attended the Munich Security Conference, delivering a speech at the “China Session” and answering questions on the spot.
Regarding Sino-US relations, Wang Yi stated that China’s policy toward the US remains stable and consistent and will not be easily reversed, demonstrating the strategic resolve and international credibility of a major power. Our policy is based on the three principles proposed by President Xi Jinping: mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation.
China and the US have different social systems, a choice made by their respective peoples. Trying to transform or even overthrow the other is unrealistic. The correct attitude is mutual respect, which is the prerequisite for Sino-US relations.
Peaceful coexistence is even more natural. The two major countries, China and the US, cannot afford to clash, or the world will suffer. We must strengthen dialogue, enhance understanding, and build trust.
Win-win cooperation arises from the international community’s expectation that China and the US collaborate. Global challenges require joint responses from China and the US, and this is an international responsibility that both countries must shoulder.
China is ready to build a stable, healthy, and sustainable bilateral relationship with the US based on these three principles, and to find the right path for the two major countries to coexist on this planet. We hope the US will work with China in the same direction.
However, if the US is unwilling and insists on suppressing and containing China, we will fight to the end, resolutely counter the US’s unilateral bullying, and resolutely defend China’s national sovereignty, national dignity, and legitimate right to development.
China does this to uphold international fairness and justice and the basic norms governing international relations. The Chinese people have never believed in evil or feared evil. New China has grown stronger by overcoming all kinds of hardships and difficulties.
There’s an ancient Chinese saying:
“天行健，君子自强不息” (Heaven moves with vigor; the gentleman strives for self-improvement)
Another Chinese saying is very vivid:
“他强任他强，清风拂山岗；他横任他横，明月照大江” (Let him be strong, the breeze will blow over the hills; let him be arrogant, the bright moon will shine on the vast rivers.”
This embodies the Chinese people’s magnanimity and the character of the Chinese nation. Let the wind blow from the east, west, south, and north, I remain calm and unmoved.
https://www.mfa.gov.cn/wjbz_673089/xghd_673097/202502/t20250215_11555644.shtml
The next is a comment flowing out of the discussion of Wang Yi’s speech:
Awesome piece!
It’s really uber relevant for what’s happening right now on the international stage.
One of my friends said that China and the Global Majority will have to deal with the “White Supremacy Blues.
“But the Russians, the Iranians & the Arabs are White people too.
The West is made by the Semites (Arabs and true Jews with their ancestors from the Middle East, not the Ashkenazi who are with the Indo-European sub-group) & by the Indo-Europeans among whom are the Celts, the Ashkenazi, the different varieties of Germans including the French hereditary nobility coming from the Germanic tribe called the Franks, the Northern Indians, the Slavs, the Armenians, the Kurds, the Georgians, the Persians, etc.,
… So I prefer, in my desire to be as precise as possible, …
… to speak of the KSB (KSB, not USB) aka the *KFC-AZAEL Supremacy Blues*
(Kakistocratic Feudal Conglomerate of the Anglo-Zio-American Establishment).
The KSB is a serious, deep-seated mental pathology for which I know no certain cure except being unwaveringly firm and give them rationally AND moderately the needed number of slaps in their faces when absolutely necessary so the morons might, PERHAPS, wake up little by little, from their global, regional and local delusional entitlements.
Three centuries of humiliation for them to endure are not entirely excluded according to what I can understand for now. We’ll see …
Confucianism 儒 家 for the gentlemen 君 子
Legalism 法 家 for the barbarians 野 蛮
Wang Yi said the above with a much more sophisticated phraseology than I, needless to say, but it’s the same message, according to me. I took the liberty of translating Wang Yi’s refined wording with my blunt style but it has the immense advantage of being crystal clear.
It will a rough ride but China is ready.
I take the liberty to speak for Russia, Iran and the Global Majority : they’re ready too AND the TEAM WORK, with a lot of common efforts not forgetting the inevitable ups and downs in the ten years to come, will usher for all Mankind a real real …
… NEW GLOBAL REALITY.
Anyway, what needs to be done *situationally AND *structurally is done and will be ceaselessly done until the solid establishment of the aforementioned NEW GLOBAL REALITY.
This is an important, even vital piece.
—
With this as a backdrop, let’s refer to Mr.Putin’s earthy and pithy description of this exact Chinese style of wisdom.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.Let’s move to something topical. This is the bitterness that rose when a man called Julani visited Mr Putin and Russia. I saw many descriptions of ‘a dark day in the Kremlin. I also saw respected people like Vanassa Beeley insist on her original analysis. (This is with total respect to Vanessa. I disagree.)
This is Russia, two meetings spaced 15 months apart.
We do not yet know how deep and complex the ‘behind-the-scenes’ are, nor the many ongoing developments. One thing is clear: Russia has never been an ideological ally of the resistance, and it never will be.
—
Fact is, the scales are being torn from peoples eyes. Russia and China have never been ideological allies of the Resistance, they do not have some kind of higher purpose to end Western Imperialism. They act out of national interest and global capitalist agendas. The sooner people acknowledge this, the sooner we can move on from these ridiculous arguments and debates that do nothing more than bury us in pointless circular discussions that achieve zero to end what is being perpetrated against the oppressed peoples of this world.
This is intense criticism. But it is also criticism that comes from pain. I have never been able to blame Russia for the fall of Syria. What do we expect Russia to have done? At that point, start fighting the collective West and NATO? Have a doozie of a big war?
Their own pain makes people forget that Russia rescued Bashar al-Assad, and that many Syrians gathered around the Russian bases and were protected. This does not mean that I condone for one moment the fall of Syria. I don’t. It was inevitable that after a good 15 years of Assad Must Go, ” the West would win. That strength of the west was still available to them, at the time. It is changing now. I also cannot agree that Russia or China are separate from the resistance. Those are the two countries that brought down colonialism, yet we are aware that the process is not complete.
Putin, with this visit, refused to extradite Bashar al-Assad. Yes, I am aware that our resistance brothers and sisters are being killed in Syria. I am also aware that Bashar al-Assad, similar to Iran just a year or so ago, would not take leadership from Russia out of pride. This is not the time for hubris. Currently, Iran does take this leadership (and the weapons). Bashar al-Assad did not do what was needed to save Syria from a fall. Mr.Lavrov in fact did more. Bashar al-Assad depended on the Arab Ummah, which is not a successful strategy. I know some vehemently disagree with me, but it is better to have Terrorist Julani under the eyes of Russia than not under their eyes. Russia should retain its bases in Syria rather than not retain its bases. We may be entering World War territory. Russia now did its own assessment, and there was a certain coldness in Putin’s interaction with the man. Oh, the words were there, but watching the interaction, I think the request to extradite Bashar al-Assad was expected, but it revolted the Russians. Mr Putin focused on long-term history, making it very clear that Julani is but a speck in the sand.
The caravan moves on, and we are at the stage of confronting the New Global Reality. It is now a Historical Reality. The western world is in paroxysms of desperation while the resistance resolutely counters the US’s unilateral bullying.
Concluding his three-day stay in the Republic of Tajikistan, the President of Russia answered questions from representatives of the mass media.
There were a number of speeches and discussions during these meetings, which also included the meetings of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). I selected this one to comment on as it highlights the significant issues. The CIS now also has a CIS+, and this plus will be invited from the SCO. So we have growth here as well. CIS came into being when the Soviet Union ceased to exist. He also explains the confusion of the time. Putin explains the interactions and roles of CIS, the Russia–Central Asia summit, and the EAEU.
—
RT headlines: “The multipolar revolution you missed: The alliance everyone forgot is shaping Eurasia’s future”. At the CIS summit, Russia’s regional alliance quietly evolved from post-Soviet bureaucracy into a functioning pillar of the multipolar world.
—
The CIS consists of Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Moldova was part of this group, but suspended participation. Mr Putn explains that when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, people were not very clear about the role of CIS, and generally believed that it replaced the Soviet Union. I was looking for a map on Wikipedia, and sure, I found that it said CIS replaced the Soviet Union. “As the Soviet Union disintegrated, Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine signed the Belovezha Accords on 8 December 1991, declaring that the Union had effectively ceased to exist and proclaiming the CIS in its place.”
A cursory reading of this incredibly complex history soon makes it clear that the plan was for a group of countries like the EU (which came into existence more or less in the same historic period) to be relatively homogeneous and nicely manageable. Then came Mr Putin. I haven’t read much of this very recent history, but from what my father-in-law told me, it seems like the planning involved the creation of a manageable group of scattered countries. The world was being divided into blocs or groups to serve a master and simplify management. This was much less about the ‘dirty commies’ and much more about creating a world where one master would be in charge. This is evident even with a cursory investigation of the fall of the USSR, the creation of the Russian Federation, and the process of creating the EU. On the Russian side, it was during the era of Yeltsin and Gorbachev, with the happy Glasnost and Perestroika, which is the last that the Westoids heard of this vibrant Eurasian area. We westoids only saw mockumentary comedies such as Borat. Judging by what Mr. Putin explained in this presser, this ignorance of that Eurasian world was widespread, and not even the participants clearly knew what was going on.
Again, then came Putin.
[Note: By going through these questions and answers, we gain a clear lesson from Putin on how problems should be resolved in the tumultuous relationships as we transition to a new world order with new poles forming. We should have a different descriptor than the New World Order, though, as we are only now moving to the world order envisaged and clearly documented at the initial steps of creating the UN. This presser also illustrates the BRICS concept of decisions made by consensus and not by a vote. It is only highly developed civilizationals that will put in the time for problem solving, debate, even a fight or two, to clarify consensus. Again, from the West, the principle of voting, in a sense, disrupts consensus, and one continually faces the unhappy side of the vote. Westoids and unevolved societies cannot help but think that the opposite of a vote is a diktat, hence the nomenclature of anyone outside as a dictator. BRICS as an evolving group must learn the consensus mechanisms and embody them].
Mr.Putin starts with labor migration into Russia from Tajikistan, where they are combining police forces in order to calm down the migrants, through to unanswered questions on the Russian plane that crashed in Kazakhstan. He ends with the New START treaty, which, by all indications, currently will not be renewed.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good evening.
I will forgo any opening remarks or statements. If there are questions, I will gladly endeavour to answer them.
You are welcome to proceed.
Anastasia Savinykh: Mr President, good evening.
Anastasia Savinykh, TASS news agency.
You have been working here, in Dushanbe, for three days now, with approximately half of this time dedicated to the programme of your state visit to Tajikistan. You have spent many hours in negotiations with your counterpart, President Rahmon, both in a restricted format and within the delegation framework, the composition of which underscores the mutual commitment of our two countries.
Could you please summarise the outcomes of this state visit and highlight which areas are currently demonstrating the most active and dynamic development, as well as the prospects ahead?
If I may, a brief follow-up question on this topic: we have signed a programme with Tajikistan on developing labour migration. The Ministry of the Interior is opening representative offices both in Russia and Tajikistan. In your view, does this help regulate migration flows? Does it assist in minimising illegal migration and criminal activity, and are there plans to sign similar programmes with other countries in the region?
Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: I will begin with bilateral relations. Tajikistan is an important partner for us, both in general and specifically within Central Asia. Its significance lies in its position on the frontiers of the CIS – on the southern flank of the Commonwealth. While our two countries do not share a common border, this remains an issue of utmost importance for the security of the Russian Federation. It is not by chance that our border service personnel continue their work here, in close cooperation with their Tajik colleagues, and that our military base is stationed here.
Naturally, we have devoted considerable attention to reviewing all these matters. Indeed, we observe that the current government in Afghanistan is taking all necessary steps to normalise the situation in the country. Nevertheless, numerous challenges persist, as acknowledged by the Afghan leadership itself. Therefore, the border between Tajikistan and Afghanistan must remain entirely secure. That is the first point.
Secondly, we maintain substantial and serious economic cooperation. It suffices to mention our collaboration in the energy sector, including hydropower. Tajikistan, with its mountainous rivers, is one of the most robust hubs for this industry. Our projects – both those already completed and those under development – are well known. There are other areas of cooperation as well, including the extraction of mineral resources.
All this holds significant interest for our economies – mutual interest, I would clarify, for both Russia and Tajikistan. We observe the establishment of joint enterprises and continued investment from Russian businesses. I would also note Tajikistan’s competitive advantages in areas such as cotton cultivation and others. This is of considerable importance to us.
Of course, humanitarian cooperation is an essential area of our relations. It is extremely important that some time ago the President of Tajikistan proposed opening schools that not only teach Russian but where education is entirely in the Russian language and the curriculum is similar to that in our schools.
Many of our teachers are working here, and we will certainly help improve conditions for the branches of Russian universities that have opened here, and will also support the ambitions of young people from Tajikistan to study at Russian universities. One of the largest, if not the largest, quotas in the CIS has been approved for Tajikistan.
It is widely known, yet I would like to repeat that special attention is given in Tajikistan to the study of the Russian language and Russian culture. This includes theatres, but the most important thing is that the status of the Russian language has been enshrined in law. This is extremely important; it is the basis for the further development of our interstate ties.
As for migration, we are aware of the demographic situation in the Central Asian republics, of course. Several years ago, slightly more than five million people lived here [in Tajikistan]. The current figure is above 10 million. The population growth is rapid here, while Russia needs an additional workforce.
At the same time, we are interested in attracting the trades we need. This is the first point. And second, we want these people to live in good conditions, to respect our laws and rules and to be law-abiding citizens, as I always point out. Incidentally, this is primarily connected with knowing the language of the host country.
Nevertheless, there are quite a few problems, which the citizens of the Russian Federation point to. We must above all think about our own citizens. In this context, it is essential for the personnel of the concerned departments, in this case the interior ministries, to work in Tajikistan, I mean Russian police officers, and for their Tajik colleagues to work in Russia. This is extremely important.
Why? The reason is that they, as the legal representatives of the Tajik authorities, will be able to see for themselves what is going on, and second, will take part in adopting relevant administrative decisions together with their Russian colleagues.
In this case, the citizens of Tajikistan who live and work in Russia will see this in a totally different way. It is one thing when the police demand that they comply with some rules and laws, and it is quite another matter when law enforcement personnel from Tajikistan are involved. This will build trust on both sides and enhance the effectiveness of [law enforcement] efforts.
Kira Latukhina: Good evening, Mr President.
My name is Kira Latukhina, and I am from the Rossiiskaya Gazeta newspaper.
Two major international summits were held – the CIS summit and the Russia–Central Asia summit. How successful are they? And to what extent do we need such a format as the Russia – Central Asia summit? How popular is it, and what “added value” does it have?
Vladimir Putin: Some time ago, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the establishment of the CIS was announced. I believe that an overwhelming majority of our countries’ citizens did not have a very clear idea of what was going on – they believed that the CIS had replaced the Soviet Union. They believed that, in essence, very little would change. In reality, everything changed drastically.
Unfortunately, the citizens of our countries were not informed in detail about the changes underway. But we are living in conditions that have evolved historically. Apart from living in these conditions, we should see how we can improve this vast region, how to move forwards and what should be done so as not to lose competitive advantages that emerged following the establishment on the territory of the former Soviet Union of common logistics, common industrial cooperation projects, and a common cultural code, despite the cultural diversity of the Soviet Union’s nations. The CIS is called on to preserve all this.
It became obvious at a certain stage that the level of intra-CIS collaboration was not enough for addressing current complicated economic issues. For this reason, on the initiative of Kazakhstan and its President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, another association emerged – the EAEU, where its members are working within the framework of more profound cooperation between countries that deemed it possible, expedient and advisable to establish this association. But the CIS is not losing its significance; it essentially aims to maintain this common space, including its cultural and humanitarian aspects.
Regardless of the scale of cultural differences between the most diverse nations of the former Soviet Union, Soviet people had their own common and distinctive moral code, which is very significant. The CIS is called on to preserve the heritage of the Soviet Union, and it is accomplishing this objective rather successfully.
People-to-people contacts remain robust. Again, we are committed to preserving a seamless transport space, which is of paramount importance, and we actively support the Russian language as a language of interethnic communication. This is a fundamental element in uniting our efforts and preserving the competitive advantages that I mentioned earlier.
This collaborative spirit extends to addressing security challenges and combating the most dangerous types of crime, such as drug trafficking. If you examine the package of documents we adopted and signed today, you will see that it speaks directly to these priorities.
Ultimately, the preservation and strengthening of our unity is crucial for our shared future.
The situation in the Central Asian countries follows a similar logic, albeit with local specificities. We all recognise the region’s rich ethnic diversity. The further, the more each nation is developing based on its own foundation – its own economy, its own cultural code, its own traditions. Russia is developing in the same way. This makes it all the more important that we do not drift too far apart. We must maintain our shared conviction that something unites us – a great deal actually – because that is the reality.
Consider the movement of people: is there no surplus workforce in other countries? There certainly is. Yet Russia remains a primary destination for workers from the former Soviet space. Why? Because they feel that fundamental connection. They want to learn Russian – why? For the same reason. This underscores the need to actively seek out and nurture all the common ground we share and value so deeply.
Our shared history is an important unifying force. Today, we have discussed the common Victory over Nazism – a shared legacy and a source of pride for all our nations. We will talk more about it in our ongoing meetings. That is, while we are connected by the past and the present, we must constantly seek and build upon the things that will unite us in the future.
This format has been designed precisely to give special focus to this track of our foreign policy.
Alexander Yunashev: Good afternoon, Mr President.
Alexander Yunashev, Life.
Yesterday, you met with Ilham Aliyev. During these negotiations, were you able to outline pathways to resolve the current crisis in bilateral relations, or does a certain chill remain?
Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: You know, I would not even describe it as a crisis in interstate relations. Why? Because if this had been a crisis in interstate relations, we would not have seen growth in trade and economic ties. Yet despite everything we have witnessed and encountered, growth – significant growth – has continued. So, what kind of crisis in interstate relations would this be?
I would say it was more likely a crisis of emotions. It is clear why. We were confronted with a very grave incident, a tragic event – the loss of an aircraft and its passengers. Therefore, we needed to calmly analyse the situation; we required time to properly examine it.
It was necessary to conduct highly complex technical examinations – that is true. We had to locate the so-called black boxes, decode them, cross-reference all the data obtained by investigators from the Ministry of Defence, verify this information, and compile all the records gathered from air traffic control services – both ours and those of Kazakhstan. All of this had to be pieced together and analysed. This demands extensive, meticulous, highly responsible, and professional work.
I myself once, while studying at the Law Faculty of Leningrad University, undertook an internship at the transport prosecutor’s office, where I was assigned to an investigator handling such cases. I understand what this entails, you see. It is extremely painstaking, seemingly tedious work where mistakes cannot be permitted.
But in the end, we accomplished this. We agreed with Mr Aliyev that we would do everything to ensure this investigation was conducted objectively, including by the International Aviation Committee (IAC), which carried out its inquiry using all the materials provided to it.
The investigation is now nearing completion, and overall, the situation is clear. There may still be some details or nuances that specialists need to document properly. I discussed this yesterday with the President of Azerbaijan.
I sincerely hope that we have turned this page, that we will move forward, and that we will continue to develop our contacts without complications, implementing the major, truly large-scale plans that both our countries share in logistics, industrial cooperation, and, I would add, in the cultural and humanitarian sphere as well.
Let me remind you that Azerbaijan is largely a Russian-speaking country: Russian is studied practically everywhere there. This also reflects the country’s deep and enduring commitment to developing relations with Russia. I very much hope this will remain so in the future.
Emotions are inevitable, but it is always better to keep them under control so that they do not interfere with our work or hinder progress. I believe all of this is now behind us.
Please.
Yelena Shiryaeva: Thank you.
Yelena Shiryaeva, Mir TV Channel.
Back to the topic of the summit. Today, during the meeting, an agreement was reached to create a new format, CIS+. Is there an understanding which international partners are ready to join the organisation in this format, under what conditions, and, most importantly, what benefits will it bring to the people of our countries?
Vladimir Putin: Thank you for the question.
This is indeed an important decision, as it marks the organisation’s transformation from what was essentially a family gathering into a full-fledged international structure. There are many countries interested in participating in our work, in developing cooperation, finding shared interests, and addressing common challenges.
We have agreed to establish this CIS+ format, and we also decided to invite representatives of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation as observers. I believe these are very sound and timely decisions. They will undoubtedly strengthen both the CIS’s capacity and standing as an organisation. I have no doubt that we will soon see the benefits of this decision.
Thank you very much.
Please.
Andrei Kolesnikov: Good afternoon, Andrei Kolesnikov, Kommersant daily.
Prior to your visit to Dushanbe, one of the Deputy Foreign Ministers of Russia said that the potential of Anchorage has been exhausted. Do you agree with this assertion? Is that the end of the matter?
One more question, if I may. It has just been announced that Donald Trump did not receive the Nobel Peace Prize. In your opinion: should he have received it, did he deserve it, was he worthy of it?
Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: Regarding the first part of your question. What exactly would you like to hear?
Andrei Kolesnikov: I can say, yes. I would like to hear that it has not, in fact, been exhausted.
Vladimir Putin: Do you understand the issue? We did not fully disclose what was discussed in Anchorage. We simply stated that, in general, there is an understanding – both on the part of the United States and the Russian Federation – of where we should move and what we should strive for in order to end this conflict, and by peaceful means at that. These are not simple matters.
We agreed with Donald that I, too, would need to consider the matter in Moscow and discuss it with our colleagues, as well as consult our allies. He told me the same.
These are complex issues requiring further elaboration. But we remain grounded in the discussions that took place in Anchorage. We are not changing our position on this and believe that some additional work is needed on both sides. However, overall, we remain within the framework of the Alaska agreements.
Now, regarding Trump. You know, it is not for me to decide who should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. First of all, I doubt anyone here – among you, your viewers, or your listeners – would object. Let me clarify what I mean.
There have been cases where the committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to individuals who had done nothing for peace. In my view, these decisions inflicted enormous damage on the prize’s prestige. A person comes along – good or bad – and within a month or two, boom. For what? They had done absolutely nothing. Is that how it should work? It ought to be awarded for actual merits. Consequently, I believe, its prestige has been significantly undermined. But that is neither here nor there – it is not for me to judge.
Whether or not the incumbent President of the United States deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, I do not know. But he has genuinely done much to resolve complex crises that have persisted for years, if not decades.
I have said this before – I know for certain: regarding the crisis in Ukraine, he sincerely strives for a resolution. Some things have worked out, others have not. Perhaps much more can still be achieved based on the agreements and discussions in Anchorage. But he is certainly making an effort, certainly working on these issues – issues of achieving peace and resolving complex international situations.
[Note: The language used by Russia is straight out of diplomacy. They refer to the discussions at Anchorage as the guiding principle because it was the last summit between presidents and set the tone for relationships. This is what diplomatic relations are all about. But, we see each time when Russian diplomats visit this topic, the language refers to Trump’s ‘sincerity’ in wanting the Ukraine war to end and to play a part in it. Never do they recognize progress or success. The words used would always be ‘striving’, ‘trying’, ‘sincerity’, ‘hopes’, or other forward-looking and clearly emotional terms. Good Buddy 10:4, 10:4. We received your message, over and out. Take a look at the next statement and confirm. If there is progress and a positive result, then it would be historic. Anyone who supposedly ‘decodifies’ Putin-speak should be aware of the straight diplomat-speak.]
The most striking example is the situation in the Middle East. If everything Donald has sought to accomplish, everything he has spoken about and attempted to achieve, is brought to fruition – it would be a historic event, truly a historic event.
If you noticed, I spoke yesterday with the Prime Minister of Iraq [Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani], who currently chairs the Arab League. We agreed with him that we would even postpone our meeting – between Russia and the Arab League. This was my initiative. I did this precisely because I did not wish to interfere with the process that has now, as we hope, been set in motion – incidentally, at the initiative and with the direct involvement of Trump – in the Middle East. Is that not an achievement? It is an achievement.
But I repeat, it is not for me to decide whether he deserves this prize or not, and whether the prize itself is worthy of such accomplishments.
Sargon Hadaya: Could you clarify something about Gaza?
Vladimir Putin: Yes, please.
Sargon Hadaya: Good afternoon, Mr President. Sargon Hadaya, Russia Today.
You have said that you will continue to cooperate with Arab colleagues on the Gaza issue. May I know in what format? And will Russia take part in various working groups, which will be set up on monitoring, on humanitarian issues – everything related to settlement and recognition of the Palestinian state?
Vladimir Putin: We have a very high level of trust with our Arab friends and with Palestine. I said it from the very beginning when I spoke at the Valdai Club meeting that we support the US, President Trump’s initiatives in this area at this track.
[Note: For those who are expecting Russia to flare up into anger, you will wait a long time. Mr. Lavrov noted: Trump’s Peace Plan is the best that is on the table currently.]
Still, the question of establishing a Palestinian state is one of the key issues. And, of course, this is the question for the future. As far as I understand – I haven’t yet looked closely at all the proposals – there is a question related to the transfer of power in the enclave to the Palestinian Authority after some time, its formation, there are questions related to ensuring security and the creation of local police.
You know, given the level of trust existing between Russia and our Arab, including and above all our Palestinian friends, of course, I think that our participation may be required. If our friends think it might help, of course, we will always be ready to take part in this process.
And we participated in it for decades. I think Russia has something to say and propose for resolving the issues, which will certainly arise in implementing the agreements achieved.
Welcome.
Pavel Zarubin: Good evening,
Pavel Zarubin, Rossiya TV Channel. Happy belated birthday to you.
Vladimir Putin: Thank you.
Pavel Zarubin: On that day, we were again wondering where you were and what you were doing, because normally nobody ever sees how you celebrate your birthday. In the evening, we saw you with the military at the Peter and Paul Cathedral in St Petersburg, in the sepulchre with the tombs of Russian emperors, beginning with Peter the Great. Why there? And why with the military at that?
Vladimir Putin: I think it is clear why I was with the military. Because Russia’s fate is largely, is always exclusively in the hands of the Russian people. And right now, our military are in the foreground, on the frontline – in the literal and figurative sense of the word. They are resolving the tasks fateful for our country – both the men at the front, on the line of engagement, and their commanders, of course.
As you have noticed, I met with the commanders of all our groups of forces that are active on the line of engagement. I invited them to the Peter and Paul Cathedral, the cathedral of the Peter and Paul Fortress, namely, to the sepulchre of our sovereigns, our tsars. And indeed, we first laid flowers at the tomb of Peter I.
Why? I think it is also clear. Because it was Peter I who laid the essential foundations of the contemporary Russian state, whatever you call it – the Russian Empire or the Soviet Union, but the basic essential foundations were laid exactly by Peter I.
Meanwhile, our military in general – both commanders, soldiers and officers on the ground – are, in fact, defending what Peter I created and what his successors continued to strengthen.
Russia’s fate has evolved differently throughout history – it has grown larger or became smaller in size at different times. Under Catherine II – her tomb is actually next to Peter I’s – Russia made the greatest acquisitions of territory, as you know. That is, on that day we paid tribute to those persons who had made a unique, fundamental contribution to the establishment of our state.
And then we just had a briefing with the military colleagues. They reported to me on the situation at each section of the front, the sections they were personally responsible for. Following the meeting, we had a luncheon together, while, in fact, continued the same conversation informally.
Pavel Zarubin: Traditionally, people come to someone’s birthday with gifts. Did they give you a birthday present?
Vladimir Putin: They did, indeed. There were different military-themed presents – figurines and books. Yet two of them are of special value. One of the commanders gave me two icons our soldiers had on them, and those icons saved their lives. The icons were indented by bullets, and the soldiers sent them to me as a present. I am very grateful to them. I will make sure to find them and talk to them.
Even now, taking this opportunity, I would like to convey to them, via the media, my most sincere words of gratitude. And may the Lord protect them as he did before.
Pardon, what? About which Tomahawks?
Stanislav Ivashchenko: The American ones.
Vladimir Putin: Go ahead.
Stanislav Ivashchenko: Stanislav Ivashchenko, Zvezda TV channel.
In Kiev, Zelensky threatens to strike Russia with Tomahawks, even targeting the Kremlin itself. There is even talk that this constitutes a form of posturing… blackmail against Russia.
Vladimir Putin: You did not misspeak – posturing as well. There is certainly an element of showing off here.
Stanislav Ivashchenko: In this context, a question. The Americans say that whether they will transfer the Tomahawks or not depends entirely on Russia’s negotiating position regarding Ukraine. If our negotiating position does not suit them, they will proceed with the transfer. Is our response to this ready?
Vladimir Putin: Our response is the strengthening of the Russian Federation’s air defence systems.
Konstantin Kokoveshnikov: May I ask about START?
Vladimir Putin: Go ahead.
Konstantin Kokoveshnikov: Good afternoon.
Konstantin Kokoveshnikov. Thank you for the opportunity to ask a question.
As is already known, you have proposed extending the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expires very soon, in February 2026. Judging by initial statements from Washington, Trump appears not to oppose this.
Are there any signals through closed channels, perhaps, that Washington is indeed prepared to hold such consultations? Will four months be sufficient to complete this process? Am I correct in understanding that a new personal meeting between you and your American counterpart will be required?
Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: We maintain contacts through the Foreign Ministry and the Department of State. Will these few months be enough to reach a decision on extension? I believe it will suffice if there is goodwill to prolong these agreements. Should the American side deem this unnecessary, it is totally not critical for us – everything in this regard is proceeding according to plan.
I have spoken about this before, and it is no secret: the novelty of our nuclear deterrent systems surpasses that of any other nuclear state, and we are advancing this very actively. What I mentioned in previous years is all being developed. We are refining these systems, and I believe we will soon be able to announce new weapons that were previously unveiled. They are materialising and undergoing successful tests.
Regarding the intercontinental components at sea and in the air, I reiterate: the novelty and modernity of our systems, as military experts say, are at a very high level, which we maintain. We are prepared to negotiate if this proves acceptable and beneficial for the American side.
If not – then so be it. It would be regrettable, as nothing would then remain in terms of strategic offensive arms control.
Please.
Anna Sedykh: Good afternoon.
My name is Anna Sedykh, Interfax news agency.
My question follows up on the Nobel Peace Prize topic. Zelensky stated that he would support Trump’s candidacy if he supplied Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine: essentially, a peace prize in exchange for weapons. How would you assess this “businesslike approach”?
Vladimir Putin: I do not think the Nobel Committee was interested in the opinion of the current Kiev regime’s leader when making its decision. This is the first point.
Second, linking the Nobel Peace Prize to arms supplies is absurd. It simply speaks volumes about the current Kiev regime’s level.
Thank you very much.
Anything else?
Olga Matveyeva: Olga Matveyeva, Mayak and Vesti FM radio stations.
At the Valdai Club meeting, you mentioned that one country is preparing to test nuclear weapons. Could you please clarify whether that country is the United States? If, as you said, Russia responds in kind and also conducts a nuclear test, wouldn’t that throw our countries and all of humanity back to the 1990s, when the entire world refused to test nuclear weapons? And wouldn’t this provoke a new nuclear arms race between Moscow and Washington?
Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: I think that, frankly speaking, a certain arms race is underway. Whether it will be a throwback or not is hard to say.
However, I never said the United States is preparing for such tests. I said that some countries are preparing. This is well known to specialists, because there is always a temptation to test the effectiveness of the combat fuel that has been stored in missiles for many, many years.
All of this is currently simulated on computers. Specialists believe this is sufficient, but some of those same experts think that full-scale tests should still be conducted. As far as we know, some countries are considering this and even making preparations. So I said that if they do it, we will do the same.
Is that good or bad? From the standpoint of ensuring security, it is good; from the overall perspective of deterrence and efforts aimed at – if not reducing, then at least containing – the arms race, it is probably not bad either.
But our proposal to extend the New START Treaty for at least one year is in the same context. Let everyone think about it.
Goodbye, thank you very much. All the best.
We have Trump’s comments and then more tariffs of 100% on top of existing ones against China announced yesterday. There is much more on Trump’s TruthSocial, but this is the outcome:
Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
It has just been learned that China has taken an extraordinarily aggressive position on Trade in sending an extremely hostile letter to the World, stating that they were going to, effective November 1st, 2025, impose large-scale Export Controls on virtually every product they make, and some not even made by them. This affects ALL Countries, without exception, and was obviously a plan devised by them years ago. It is absolutely unheard of in International Trade, and a moral disgrace in dealing with other Nations.
Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position, and speaking only for the U.S.A., and not other Nations who were similarly threatened, starting November 1st, 2025 (or sooner, depending on any further actions or changes taken by China), the United States of America will impose a Tariff of 100% on China, over and above any Tariff that they are currently paying. Also, on November 1st, we will impose Export Controls on any and all critical software.
It is impossible to believe that China would have taken such an action, but they have, and the rest is History. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
DONALD J. TRUMP
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
So, on average, we’re looking at a tariff rate for the US from China at 130% (though some products will have different rates). In light of China’s actions, this becomes a minor and tangential issue and will not change reality in any material way. For example, the cost of imported shoes (and they are all imported) may rise many percentage points, but it will be a small drop in an ocean of pain. Trump is rolling the dice blindly.
But what did China do?
What is Trump bloviating about?
China lost strategic trade and economic patience. It kicked the can of modern industrial life right over. China does not want to play chess with the pigeons any longer, so they kicked the chessboard right off the table themselves. The last thing we heard is that China first applied its new policy to India to ensure that India does not re-export rare earths. This was clearly signalled during the Indian negotiations, and we mentioned these in the Daily Chronicles. So if we here on our site took notice of what was happening, why is it coming as a surprise to the US? To be true, China was patient for a long time. If I had to negotiate with a person like Bessent, I would have kicked him in the can long before now.
To begin understanding this, here are comments from a US-based physicist. ” Weaponized” is a strong word to use; nevertheless, this is what it feels like for people in the industry in the US. Let’s mention that there has been ample ‘false flag’ purchasing of rare earths. A group from anywhere would appear to buy rare earths, acting simply as a proxy for the US. China has not kept this secret, but many warnings were given. China does not sell dual-purpose goods, and all of these rare earths are amply used in the weapons industry for one. (My sneaky thought is, what rare earths are used in those Tomahawk missiles that we’ve all been talking about?)
Our expert in the industry says:
CHINA JUST WEAPONIZED THE ENTIRE RARE EARTH SUPPLY CHAIN
Get used to reading Chinese MOFCOM bulletins because they’re writing American industrial policy now.
Announced today: Any product containing >0.1% Chinese rare earth materials needs Beijing’s approval before re-export to third countries.
It does not matter if you manufactured it in Taiwan, Vietnam, or Texas.
Chinese dysprosium in your magnet? Chinese gallium in your chip? Beijing gets veto power over the sale.
This is the nuclear option.
The US spent 3 years trying to deny China access to advanced chipmaking tools. China just responded with a chokehold on literally every semiconductor fab, AI data center, defense contractor, and EV manufacturer on earth. Everything runs on Chinese rare earths. Building alternative supply chains takes a minimum of 5-10 years.
We don’t have 5-10 years, as this is effective December 1st. The AI boom just hit a hard ceiling, and we’re still pretending we can offshore our way to prosperity. It is time to reindustrialize like our lives depend on it, because they do.
I followed the expert’s suggestion and went to read the MOFCON Bulletins. They spell utter pain, even devastation, for the industrial and technological development of those on our planet who are not playing a clean game. Let me say it differently – this new policy could have been a part of the Chinese military parade in Beijing just a few weeks ago. They could have had a truck in this parade with a big sign: New Rare Earth Policy.
Let’s take a look: (Don’t glaze over, just scan it) https://www.mofcom.gov.cn/zwgk/zcfb/art/2025/art_7fc9bff0fb4546ecb02f66ee77d0e5f6.html
In order to safeguard national security and interests, in accordance with the relevant provisions of laws and regulations such as the Export Control Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on Export Control of Dual-Use Items, the State Council of China has decided to take the following export control measures:
Overseas organizations and individuals (hereinafter referred to as “foreign specific export operators”) must obtain export licenses for dual-use items issued by the Ministry of Commerce of China before exporting the following items to other countries and regions other than China:
(a) containing, integrating or mixing items originating in China in Part I of this Announcement manufactured overseas in Part I of this Announcement, and the items listed in Part I of Annex 1 of this Announcement account for 0.1% or more of the value of the items listed in Part II of Annex 1 manufactured abroad;
(B) the use of rare earth mining, smelting separation, metal smelting, magnet manufacturing, rare earth secondary resource recycling technology in China production in the overseas production of items listed in annex 1;
(3) Items listed in Annex 1 of this Proclamation originating in China.
Applications for exports to overseas military users, as well as to importers and end-users listed on the Export Control and Concern List (including subsidiaries, branches and other branches holding 50% or more of which they hold, shall not be licensed in principle.
An export application for or possibly for the following end-uses shall not be licensed in principle:
(a) design, develop, produce and use weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery;
(b) the purpose of terrorism;
(3) military use or enhance military potential.
The end use is the research and development, production of 14 nanometers and below logic chips or 256 layers and above memory chips, as well as the manufacture of the above-mentioned process semiconductor production equipment, test equipment and materials, or the development of artificial intelligence for potential military purposes of export applications, on a case-by-case basis.
The end-use is an export application for emergency medical care, responding to public health emergencies, natural disaster relief and other humanitarian relief, and overseas export operators do not need to apply for an export license for dual-use items, but they should report to the Chinese Ministry of Commerce by email (jingwaibaogao@mofcom.gov.cn) no later than 10 working days after export, and promise that the relevant items will not be used for purposes that endanger China’s national security and interests.
The application for export authorization of dual-use items by a specific overseas export operator shall submit the relevant documents in accordance with Article 16 of the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on the Export Control of Dual-Use Items and the requirements of the export authorization approval system of the Ministry of Commerce of China, which shall be based on Chinese. The approval system is available at http://ecomp.mofcom.gov.cn.
Specific overseas export operators can directly submit application documents, and can also entrust enterprises, intermediary service agencies, chambers of commerce, associations, etc. located in China. The relevant intermediary service agencies or chambers of commerce or associations shall be independent legal persons or illegal organizations that can independently bear legal responsibility.
The specific export operator abroad cannot determine whether the items to be exported belong to the items that should apply for export authorization in accordance with the provisions of this announcement, and can be consulted by e-mail (jingwaizuxun@mofcom.gov.cn).
The export by a domestic export operator to the dual-use items listed in the first part of Annex 1 of this announcement shall, at the time of export declaration, fill in the final destination country or region in accordance with the requirements, and issue a “compliance notice” to the overseas importer and end-user in accordance with the compliance guidelines attached to this announcement.
The overseas export operator shall, in accordance with the compliance guidelines annexed to this announcement, issue a Notice of Compliance to the next recipient when transferring or exporting the items controlled by this announcement.
The “I (I)” and “I (II)” sections of this announcement shall be implemented as of December 1, 2025. This part of the “I (III)” section of this announcement shall be implemented from the date of promulgation.
Annex:
The list of items for us non-chemistry folks, reads a little double-dutch but it illustrates. Some of us will understand what the rare-earths are meant for. I quote only one of them and you can find the rest on the list of items link just above.
In reality, the expert was right. Read the MOFCON notices if you are interested on a deeper technical level.
[Issuer] Bureau of Industry, Security, Import and Export Control
[Issuance Document Number] Announcement No.18 of 2025 of the Ministry of Commerce and the General Administration of Customs of the People’s Republic of China
[Date of Issuance] April 4, 2025
According to the relevant provisions of the Export Control Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Foreign Trade Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Customs Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on Export Control of Dual-Use Items of the People’s Republic of China, in order to safeguard national security and interests and fulfill international obligations such as non-proliferation, with the approval of the State Council, a decision is made to implement export control on the following items:
I．Samarium related items
(1) 1C902.a Samarium metal, samarium-containing alloys and related products:
1．Samarium metal (Reference customs code: 2805301910).
2．Samarium-containing alloys:
a．Samarium-cobalt alloy;
b．Samarium-iron alloy;
c．Samarium-nickel alloy;
d．Samarium-aluminum alloy;
e．Samarium-magnesium alloy.
3．Samarium-containing targets (Reference customs codes: 3824999922, 8486909110):
a．Samarium target;
b．Samarium-cobalt alloy target;
c．Samarium-iron alloy target.
4．Samarium cobalt permanent magnet materials.
(2) 1C902.b Samarium oxide and its mixtures (Reference customs codes: 2846901940, 2846901993, 3824999922).
(3) 1C902.c Samarium-containing compounds and their mixtures (Reference customs codes: 2846902810, 2846902910, 2846903910, 2846904820, 2846904910, 2846909920, 3824999922).
Notes:
1. Alloys controlled under items 1C902.a.2, 1C903.a.2, 1C904.a.2, 1C905.a.2, 1C906.a.2, 1C907.a.2, and 1C908.a.2 include forms such as ingots, lumps, bars, wires, sheets, rods, plates, tubes, granules, and powders.
2. Targets controlled under items 1C902.a.3, 1C903.a.3, 1C904.a.3, 1C905.a.3, 1C906.a.3, 1C907.a.3, and 1C908.a.3 include forms such as plates and tubes.
3. Permanent magnet materials controlled under items 1C902.a.4, 1C904.a.4, and 1C905.a.4 include magnets or magnetic powders.
4. Oxides, compounds, and mixtures controlled under items 1C902.b, 1C902.c, 1C903.b, 1C903.c, 1C904.b, 1C904.c, 1C905.b, 1C905.c, 1C906.b, 1C906.c, 1C907.b, 1C907.c, 1C908.b, and 1C908.c include but are not limited to, forms such as powders.
To export the above- described items, the exporter shall apply for the license from the competent commercial authority of the State Council in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Export Control Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on Export Control of Dual-Use Items of the People’s Republic of China.
The exporter shall identify the items and indicate in the Remarks section whether the goods for export are controlled items when making customs declarations. For controlled items, its dual-use item control number shall be specified. For any doubt about the declared information, the customs authorities will question it in accordance with the law, and the goods for export will not be released during the questioning period.
This announcement shall come into effect on the date of issuance. The Export Control List of Dual-Use Items of the People’s Republic of China is updated accordingly.
Ministry of Commerce, General Administration of Customs, April 4, 2025
Well, there you have it. This is what China did. I cannot say they did not consistently warn and caution the US to stop playing the game of extending the concept of national security in terms of trade. Will even the trains run in the US? Think of modern drones. The rest of the world that Trump talks about will be fine, as they will buy their rare earths with no problems. The underlying message here is something like: If Iran cannot have nukes (whereas Iran has a fatwa against weapons of mass destruction, but no matter, the cry continues), neither can you, you empirical barbarian!
The expert conversation that I quoted first continued with a desperate outreach to find anyone in the industry, anyone that has a source, or even a suggested source. They’re calling for cooperatives, for anything that may make this better. As we all may have learned, it is not the material that is the major problem, it is the mining and processing of that material, which is dirty, hard and raw work with many proximate problems. As the expert said, building alternative supply chains takes a minimum of 5-10 years and this cycle starts once the raw material is mined.
This is devastating, and not a shot across the bows but a shot right into the engine room of the ship. This is not a trade war, which China has warned about too many times to count. This is technological decapitation. The tariffs are a reflex action that, as we say for Ukraine, will not change the conditions on this battlefield.
“Nobody has ever seen anything like this”
Nothing at all like Trump at Quantico
[Notes on two conversations and sketching a backdrop to this essay from Karl Sanchez:
Just recently, Radhika Desai made a fascinating statement. She says:
“I don’t think multipolarity is an ideology. It’s a development.”
She is correct. We are inclined to focus on the ideological aspects, while the developmental path remains unexplored to the depth it deserves. This conceptual vision will form part of future discussions on the Geopolitical Economy track. ]
In that conversation and others, I mentioned that the message of “Putin must go,” promoted by Doctorow and others, is tired nonsense. Putin will go when he must go, and the decisions will be carefully measured, designed, and aligned. While we know that there are always conversations in Russia, some suggest that the Siloviki and the Moderates have differences. This is normal and not untoward.
At the same time, I had a conversation with another group questioning the Doctorow work and the fire that was lit because of it. I mentioned the following:
With gratitude to karlof1’s Geopolitical Gymnasium
Featured Image: Peter and Paul Cathedral in St. Petersburg.
President Putin spent his 73rd birthday in his hometown, met with the Security Council via video then shared some time with his generals, “the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the General Staff, as well as the commanders of the military groups in the special military operation zone.” What sets Putin’s meeting apart from that held by President Trump isn’t just the setting and content but the ceremony Putin and his generals jointly participated in, which is only told via the photos taken at the time—no media report I saw made any mention of what I consider to be a very singular and very Russian event. The short six-minute video address shared by Putin and General Gerasimov and broadcast to all Russians was a terse report on the SMO’s situation that was unsurprising to anyone closely following what’s happening in Ukraine. The venue for the ceremony is pictured at the header, the Peter and Paul Cathedral in St. Petersburg. As Putin greets his team, note what they have held in their left hands:
Yes, it’s a taper, the type of ceremonial candle used in Orthodox Church ceremonies. I have no clue as to the nature of the ceremony since I’m not Orthodox. IMO, the next several photos don’t need any explanation, although it should be noted that Putin is the central figure.
In the middle photo, you can see the white boxes with the gold appliques behind the wrought iron fencing. And then we see everyone crossing themselves. These men are more than all together.
In the Peter and Paul Cathedral, the President laid flowers at the coffin of Peter I.
The symbolism is off the charts—Putin and his generals hold a convocation of sorts at the foot of Peter the Great’s tomb. There must be a video, which would likely reveal the close comradery between those present. Some of that clearly spilled over into the meeting as the next photo shows:
Yet, all are attentive as Putin gives his short talk to the nation:
And there wasn’t much to say since Putin gave an excellent recap just a few days prior during his Valdai Club performance:
V. Putin: Dear comrades!
Let me remind you that just recently, on September 30, we celebrated the day of reunification of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions with the Russian Federation. The residents of these regions overwhelmingly voted for their future as part of Russia, confirming that the decisions made in February 2022 were correct and timely.
At the moment, the strategic initiative is entirely in the hands of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. This year, we have liberated almost 5,000 square kilometers of territory – 4,900 – and 212 settlements. The decisive role in this is undoubtedly played by our soldiers and officers, who demonstrate the best qualities of the Russian military, such as selfless dedication and love for their homeland, a high sense of duty, camaraderie, and brotherhood in arms. Please convey my sincere gratitude to all the personnel for the courage and heroism they display on a daily basis.
I would also like to highlight the crucial role of the country’s military-industrial complex in ensuring the successful operations of the Russian Armed Forces. The defense industry enterprises fully meet the needs of the Armed Forces for high-precision weapons, missiles, ammunition, armaments, and military equipment. In addition to the planned deliveries, the development of the latest weapons and their supply to the troops are progressing at an accelerated pace.
Despite their attempts at stubborn resistance, the enemy is retreating along the entire line of contact. In this context, the Kiev regime, seeking to demonstrate some success to its Western sponsors, is attempting to strike deep into Russian territory, targeting peaceful civilian facilities. However, this will not help them. Our goal is to ensure the safety of Russian citizens, strategic facilities, and civilian infrastructure, including the energy sector.
At today’s meeting, we will review the current situation in the special military operation zone, listen to reports from the commanders of the military groups on the progress of your tasks, and discuss current issues related to the provision of troops and plans for the near future.
Let’s move on to the reports.
Please, Valery Vasilyevich.
V. Gerasimov: Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief!
The troops of the Joint Group continue to engage in active combat operations, advancing in almost all directions. The enemy has focused its main efforts on stabilizing the situation in the critical sectors of the front in order to slow down our offensive.
The Northern Group of Forces is operating in the border area and continues to carry out tasks related to creating a security zone in the Kharkiv and Sumy regions of Ukraine. Its units are also successfully advancing in the southern part of Volchansk.
The Zapad group is completing the defeat of the enemy in the southern districts of Kupyansk and is successfully advancing in the Krasnolimansk direction. The liberation of the village of Yampol continues, with most of it under the control of our troops.
Troops of the Southern Group, despite the stubborn resistance of the enemy, are advancing with fighting in the cities of Seversk and Konstantinovka. The destruction of the blocked enemy formations in the area south of the Kleban-Byksky reservoir was completed yesterday.
The most active fighting is taking place in the area of responsibility of the Center group of troops, in the Krasnoarmeysk and Dnepropetrovsk directions. In an attempt to stop our advance, the Ukrainian command has transferred the most combat-ready units from other sectors, including those from the strategic reserves, to these areas. Despite this, the units and military formations of the Center group are continuing their offensive, overcoming the enemy’s resistance. Our assault units are advancing in the southern areas of Krasnoarmeysk. The settlement to the north of Krasnoarmeysk, Rodinskoye, is surrounded and is currently being cleared of Ukrainian Armed Forces units.
The Vostok military group continues to advance deep into the enemy’s defenses in the Dnipropetrovsk and Zaporizhzhia regions. Since September 1, more than 200 square kilometers of territory have come under our control in this area.
The troops of the Dnipro group are advancing towards the city of Zaporozhye. The fighting is currently taking place for the control of the settlements of Primorskoye and Stepnogorsk. In addition, according to the General Staff’s plan, targeted and massive strikes are being carried out against military facilities and those of Ukraine’s military-industrial complex. The priority is to destroy enterprises that produce missile systems and long-range unmanned aerial vehicles.
Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief, the formations and military units of the Joint Group of Forces will continue to conduct offensive operations in accordance with the approved plan. The commander of the group of forces will report on the current situation in more detail.
The report is finished.
V. Putin: Dear comrades!
Our common goal remains the same–-we must ensure that all the objectives set for the troops during the special military operation are achieved. Let’s get started and see how we are progressing towards this goal.
The first report is by Colonel General [Evgeny] Nikiforov, Commander of the Northern Military Group. Please. [My Emphasis]
Now, what might be the “approved plan”? Today a Ukie report emerged that admitted to the Line of Contact (LOC) no longer being a continuous line since its developed gaps in many places because of the lack of infantry, which confirmed the main point Putin made at Valdai. The Ukrainian ability to defend its territory is rapidly eroding, which is a signal that the end is growing nearer.
At Valdai, Putin urged Zelensky to seriously consider surrendering to save what remains of his Army and Ukraine’s manhood. There are also rumors that an election in Ukraine is being planned. Turning the screws by eliminating Ukraine’s last electrical power generating capacity as Winter approaches was a tactic that was urged last year but stopped short yet appears to be approved to go all the way this time. It should be clear by now that Zelensky doesn’t give a whit about the fate the Ukrainian people as he tries to figure out a way to escape with his stolen loot. maybe the Brits will take him.
Meanwhile, the Outlaw US Empire that started the war in 2014 is becoming an anarchic mess as it continues to try and slow its decline—efforts that only seem to result in hastening the downfall. RT reported Ryabkov’s spin on the issue:
Momentum from Trump-Putin Alaska summit exhausted – deputy FM
The impulse to resolve the Ukraine conflict has been extinguished by European supporters of prolonged war, Sergey Ryabkov has said.
As others note, NATO remains the issue, while NATO in reality is the Outlaw US Empire and the Europeans don’t have much military or military industry to mount anything against Russia or to help Ukraine. The dilemma for Trump is that he doesn’t want to declare defeat because that also admits the Empire started the war and is liable for the consequences of that act, regardless of what he thinks of International Law. So, like Netanyahu, it appears Trump needs to start another war that the Empire might win so the defeat can simply be forgotten.
Today, Putin is in Dushanbe for a state visit that began with his paying respects and laying a wreath at the foot of this monument:
Monument to Ismoil Somoni on Dusti (Friendship) Square in Dushanbe.
Another look:
—
The Theme of this year’s Valdai Club annual meeting is: The Polycentric World: Instructions for Use.
Let’s start with Mr Putin’s first instruction, mainly to Europe:
Calm down. Sleep quiet, and try to get to grips with YOUR problems’.
As an analytical framework and contextualization, I extracted and organized all the paragraphs and sub-paragraphs that directly address the concepts of multipolarity, polycentrism, and the end of Western hegemony, but in President Putin’s own words. For this exercise, paragraphs purely about Ukraine or other tangential topics were left out, unless they directly reference the multipolarity theme. The goal is to give us a sharply focused dataset to work with.
The Speech:
• frames the shift to multipolarity as an irreversible, objective historical process.
• contrasts the new era (stable, just, based on sovereignty and equality) with the old one (unstable, dictatorial, based on Western hegemony).
• points to BRICS and the SCO as the concrete, attractive embodiments of this new order.
• issues a prescriptive, but implied, call to action for nations to join this alternative system and adopt its principles.
• uses a dual-toned strategy: rallying and calming for the “Global Majority” while not hiding the reasons for the shift, i.e., western hegemony.
The Irreversible Historical Shift to Multipolarity
The core argument is that the unipolar model is over, and a new, multipolar world is emerging.
The global situation is changing dynamically and is moving towards the formation of a truly multipolar world order. This is an objective process; there is no stopping it, and it means that the world is becoming more stable and secure, of course, provided that all participants in international communication act responsibly.
The formation of a multipolar world order is irreversible. The attempts of the so-called golden billion to retain its dominance and hegemony at any cost are leading to a sharp increase in conflict potential in the world.
The era of the unipolar world order, the era of dictatorship, of one hegemony, is receding into the past. A multipolar world is taking its place. This is an objective, natural process, because the concentration of the entire world politics and economy in the hands of one country, or a group of countries that are close in spirit, is no longer possible.
The formation of a multipolar international order is irreversible. The attempts of the so-called golden billion to retain its dominance and hegemony at any cost are leading to a sharp increase in conflict potential in the world.
The “Golden Billion” and Western Hegemony as the Cause of Instability
Here, Putin defines the old system as one of exploitation and dictatorship by the “golden billion,” which he contrasts with the more just multipolar model.
The so-called golden billion, led by the United States, continues to cling to the dogmas of its exclusivity, provoking chaos, ethnic and religious strife, and suppressing the identity and traditional values of other peoples. This is the real nature of the neo-colonialists.
The outgoing hegemony acts as a dictator and uses the entire range of means – from a forged financial and economic system to brute military force – the so-called hard power. We all see this. We see how they are trying to replace international law and universal norms with some kind of “rules-based order,” which are invented on the go and are used exclusively in the interests of one side, to punish those who are undesirable and to keep the whole world in check.
The outgoing hegemony acts as a dictator and uses the entire range of means – from a forged financial and economic system to brute military force – the so-called hard power.
We see how they are trying to replace international law and universal norms with some kind of “rules-based order,” which are invented on the go and are used exclusively in the interests of one side, to punish those who are undesirable and to keep the whole world in check.
BRICS and the SCO as Pillars of the New Multipolar Order
Putin points to the successful and attractive alternatives to Western-dominated structures.
On BRICS:
The attractiveness of the new global political and economic centres is also evidenced by the expansion of such associations as BRICS and the SCO. They are based on the principles of equality, solidarity, and respect for each other’s interests.
Dozens of states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America are ready to work on this constructive agenda. And the growing authority of BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and other associations, which are now being joined by many countries, is convincing evidence of this.
On the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO):
The attractiveness of the new global political and economic centres is also evidenced by the expansion of such associations as BRICS and the SCO. They are based on the principles of equality, solidarity, and respect for each other’s interests.
Dozens of states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America are ready to work on this constructive agenda. And the growing authority of BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and other associations, which are now being joined by many countries, is convincing evidence of this.
The Role of New Centers of Power and Sovereign Development
This section highlights the rise of new, non-Western centers of power and the importance of national sovereignty in the new multipolar system.
New, much more dynamic and promising centers of power are being formed, primarily in the Asia-Pacific region. The majority of the international community, including the countries of Latin America, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, are striving to pursue an independent, sovereign, independent policy, based on their own national interests, on their identity, on the traditions and culture of their peoples.
The majority of the international community, including the countries of Latin America, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, are striving to pursue an independent, sovereign, independent policy, based on their own national interests, on their identity, on the traditions and culture of their peoples.
It is with them, with these countries, with these peoples, that we are building relations – relations of a new type, based on the principles of equality, mutual benefit, respect for each other’s interests, and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs.
Russia as a Sovereign Pole and Partner in the New World
Putin positions Russia as a key sovereign pole in this new world and a reliable partner for other nations seeking independence.
Russia has withstood the pressure of the collective West, has not broken down, and has demonstrated that it is capable of defending its national interests and its sovereignty.
It is with them, with these countries, with these peoples, that we are building relations – relations of a new type, based on the principles of equality, mutual benefit, respect for each other’s interests, and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs.
We are open to the widest possible cooperation with all states and associations that are ready for joint work. We are convinced that the future of the world order should be based on the principles of justice, on the recognition of the right of every nation and civilization to their own path of development.
We are convinced that the future of the world order should be based on the principles of justice, on the recognition of the right of every nation and civilization to their own path of development.
As you can see, Putin explicitly links the expansion and growing authority of BRICS and the SCO to the attractiveness of the multipolar model, using them as primary evidence that the world is moving in this new direction.
The Positive Aspects of the Shift to a Multipolar World
1. Enhanced Global Stability and Security
“The situation in the world is changing dynamically and is moving towards the formation of a truly multipolar world order. This is an objective process, there is no stopping it, and it means that the world is becoming more stable and secure, of course, provided that all participants in international communication act responsibly.”
2. A More Just and Equitable Foundation for International Relations
“We are convinced that the future of the world order should be based on the principles of justice, on the recognition of the right of every nation and civilization to its own path of development.”
3. The Rise of Dynamic and Promising New Centers of Global Growth
“New, much more dynamic and promising centers of power are being formed, primarily in the Asia-Pacific region.”
4. The Triumph of National Sovereignty and Independent Development
“The majority of the international community, including the countries of Latin America, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, are striving to pursue an independent, sovereign, independent policy, based on their own national interests, on their identity, on the traditions and culture of their peoples.”
5. The Emergence of Relationships Based on Equality and Mutual Respect
“It is with them, with these countries, with these peoples, that we are building relations – relations of a new type, based on the principles of equality, mutual benefit, respect for each other’s interests, and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs.”
6. The Attractiveness of New Associations and Models of Cooperation
“The attractiveness of the new global political and economic centres is also evidenced by the expansion of such associations as BRICS and the SCO. They are based on the principles of equality, solidarity, and respect for each other’s interests.”
“Dozens of states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America are ready to work on this constructive agenda. And the growing authority of BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and other associations… is convincing evidence of this.”
In essence, the speech posits that the multipolar shift is not a neutral event, but a positive one, leading to a world that is more stable, just, dynamic, sovereign, cooperative, and respectful of civilizational diversity.
The Russian formal transcript on Vladimir Putin’s Valdai speech (4 hours including questions), is proceeding apace and we will hopefully see the transcript complete today. Again, every Tom, Dick and Harry are in the process of announcing what Putin said, do their own translations, and sometimes I know full well that in cases, he never said what is already appearing on sloganeering. The other problem is that people take the pieces that they are interested in only, and they lose the context. The context was How to do this Mulitpolar world thing and where are we? I intend to pull that out of the massive speech over the next day or two, for this very important context.
As Prof. Marandi’s question was a very important one, let’s take a look at it, from the formal transcript.
We need to note that Mr Putin was not fully briefed. As usual, his perspective is very carefully presented and he said he is not up to date with certain information.
Professor Marandi, Iran.
Seyed Mohammad Marandi: Thank you very much for the opportunity, Mr President, and I thank Valdai as well, this excellent conference.
We are all saddened because during the last two years we’ve seen genocide in Gaza, and the pain and suffering of women and children being torn apart day and night. Recently we saw President Trump gave a peace proposal that looked more like a submission and capitulation. And especially introducing someone like Blair with his history is insult to injury. I was wondering what do you think the Russian Federation can do to bring an end to this misery, which has really darkened the days of everyone? Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: The situation in Gaza is one of the most tragic events in recent history. It is also well known that the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has publicly admitted – and he often reflects Western views – that Gaza has become the largest children’s cemetery in the world. What could be more tragic? What could be more painful?
Now, regarding President Trump’s proposal on Gaza – you may find this surprising, but Russia is overall ready to support it. Provided, of course, that it truly leads to the ultimate goal we have always spoken about. We must thoroughly examine the proposals made.
Since 1948 – and later in 1974, when the relevant UN Security Council resolution was adopted – Russia has consistently supported the creation of two states: Israel and a Palestinian state. I believe this is the only key to a final, lasting solution to the Palestinian–Israeli conflict.
As far as I understand – I have not looked through the proposal carefully yet – it suggests creating an international administration to govern Palestine for some time, or more precisely, the Gaza Strip. It is proposed that Mr Blair would head it. Now, he is not known as a great peacemaker. But I know him personally. I have even visited him at his home, spent the night there, and in the morning, over coffee in our pyjamas, we spoke at length. Yes, this is true.
Fyodor Lukyanov: Was the coffee good?
Vladimir Putin: Yes, quite good.
But what would I like to add? He is a man with strong personal views, but he is also an experienced politician. Overall, if his knowledge and experience are directed towards peace, then yes, of course, he could play a positive role.
However, several questions naturally arise.
First: how long would this international administration operate? How, and to whom, would power then be transferred? As I understand it, this plan foresees the possibility of eventually transferring power to a Palestinian administration.
I believe it would be best to transfer control directly to President Abbas and the current Palestinian administration. Perhaps they may face difficulties in addressing security matters. But as I heard from colleagues today, this plan also envisages that the power transfer may involve local militia groups in order to ensure security. Is that bad? In my opinion, this could be a good solution.
Let me repeat: we must understand how long this international administration will be in force. What is the timeframe for the transfer of civilian authority? No less important are security issues. I believe that this deserves support.
On one hand, we are talking about the release of all hostages held by Hamas, and on the other – the release of a significant number of Palestinians from Israeli prisons. It must also be made clear: how many Palestinians, who exactly, and in what timeframe this exchange would take place.
And, of course, the most important issue: how does Palestine itself view this proposal? This is absolutely essential.
Here, the opinion of the region and the entire Islamic world matters, but most of all Palestine itself and the Palestinians, including Hamas. There are different attitudes toward Hamas, and we also have our own position and contacts with them. It is important for us that both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority support such an initiative.
All these questions require thorough and careful study. But if this plan is implemented, it would indeed represent a significant step towards settling the conflict. Still, I want to stress once again: the conflict can only be fundamentally resolved through the creation of a Palestinian state.
Of course, Israel’s position will be crucial here. We do not yet know how it has reacted. Frankly, I have not seen any public statements yet; I simply have not had time to look. But what really matters is not public rhetoric, but how the Israeli leadership reacts to this and whether it is ready to implement what is being proposed by the US President.
There are many questions here. But overall, if all these positive elements I have mentioned come together, it could become a real breakthrough. Such a breakthrough would be very positive.
Let me repeat this for the third time: the creation of a Palestinian state is the cornerstone of any comprehensive settlement.
—
Take a look at all those ‘ifs’ and ‘provided that such and such is in place’ type answers. None of that is in place.
[Note: For most of this year, the Valdai Club seemed to be flailing around with very little direction and very little work of consequence, almost similar to the UN. With the current annual meeting I find better content and crisper thinking. I hope you like this one. Mr Putin’s presentation will revolve around the Polycentric World).
Discussion: The Valdai Club
Western global hegemony and the rules-based international order are over.
The world is entering a post-Western era not only because of the rise of China, India, and other powers, but also because of the disintegration of the Western community itself, writes Gabor Stier for the 22nd Annual meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club.
President Donald Trump’s second term has accelerated the rift between the United States and its key allies, completely undermining the trust that has underpinned the international system of governance since World War II.
The global order, especially during periods of transition and before a new equilibrium is established, could become more chaotic and dangerous, opening the way to a multitude of disparate alliances and the inevitable growing uncertainty that follows.
Where can the Western bloc find its place in this world? Is the West ready for change?
During the Cold War, the West emerged as a coherent geopolitical entity, opposing the Soviet Union and its proxies. In this historical context, the doctrine of containment created the geopolitical West that exists to this day. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, it increasingly felt without a rival, intoxicated by “victory,” and its decline accelerated. However, in the 1990s, this community had not yet fragmented into competing blocs and did not seek to undermine American hegemony. On the contrary, it was widely believed, albeit naively, that the community of market democracies—that is, the West—would expand uncontrollably. Instead of the universalisation of the West, other great powers and regional powers emerged, increasingly demanding not only a voice in global affairs but sometimes even questioning the very principles of the world order built around the West.
Meanwhile, the West became increasingly fragmented, trust in transatlantic and other alliances weakened, and this community noticeably shifted from geopolitical and ideological solidarity to a civilisational concept.
The question is becoming increasingly pressing: can we speak of a united or collective West today?
Periodic disagreements and tensions have tested Western solidarity from time to time, but none has posed such a serious challenge to Western unity as Donald Trump’s return to the White House. Trump’s return to power in the United States shocked America’s closest partners, and in the spring of 2025, only 28% of European respondents considered the United States a reliable ally, compared to more than 75% a year earlier.
“The West as we knew it no longer exists,” Ursula von der Leyen declared in April of this year, and the standpoint of the European Commission President is now widely shared. The liberal ideals that underpin the geopolitical West have been devalued, freedom is increasingly restricted, authoritarian tendencies have increased, censorship and the exclusion of dissent have become rampant, and even the integrity of elections is often in question. European Union leaders, grappling with an ever-deepening crisis, often fail to even create a semblance of democracy, and these trends will likely accelerate the rise of illiberal multilateralism.
The exploitative model of capitalism is also in crisis.
The West was able to maintain an exploitative structure for nearly five hundred years, but it was unprepared for what would happen if the prey chosen for exploitation refused to surrender. What would happen if the slave rebelled and went on the move? The pressure to grow requires violence, and wars require force, and the Western bloc, especially Europe, is becoming increasingly weak. Beyond external circumstances and the development of global power relations, the West’s internal transformation has also significantly contributed to the current state. One need only recall the ill-conceived “greening,” the “rainbow” model, or even generational degradation. There are fewer and fewer charismatic politicians and more and more vassals. It is therefore unsurprising that the lack of strategic vision is becoming increasingly noticeable in the Western political space.
Meanwhile, the escalating cultural war within the Western bloc, the contrast between the progressive ideology and conservatives rooted in traditional values, is not only eroding internal cohesion and forcing people to choose sides, but also weakening the “soft power” considered the West’s strength.
Technological superiority is also waning. For example, in artificial intelligence (AI), America and China are already neck and neck. Moreover, Chinese products are cheaper. However, dogmas such as the absolutisation of free competition and a reluctance to strengthen the role of the state more decisively also hinder the development of competitiveness. A striking example of this is the military-industrial complex, which is focused on profit and serves its own financial goals rather than national interests.
One could list other causes of the crisis in the West, but the essence is that the liberal internationalist world order, based on Washington’s global leadership, the spread of democracy, free trade, and the primacy of international institutions (the UN, WTO, NATO), is a thing of the past.
The strategic model it founded has become unsustainable and really counterproductive. Paradoxically, it has strengthened the main rivals to American hegemony, primarily China, while simultaneously ensuring Western Europe an exceptionally comfortable existence under American security guarantees. The comfortable post-Cold War era of hegemony has ended, and its place has been taken by a far more complex techno-industrial rivalry, in which the real measure of power is no longer military might, but production capacity and technological sovereignty.
The world will disintegrate into tightly knit technological and economic regions, but also different political and military ones.
As for the West, the current situation is such that it has itself split into two.
One cannot speak of a unified West. On one side are the sovereigntist realists, who prefer a policy based on national interests, led by Trump’s America. Israel and Argentina can be included in this group, and in Europe, Hungary, Serbia, and Georgia. On the other side are the globalists, stuck in their ideological worldview, who lost their main support after the defeat of the Democrats in the US and turned their attention to the European Union, awaiting Trump’s downfall.
The West’s place in the world after the loss of its hegemony will fundamentally be determined by how quickly it can come to terms with the loss of absolute dominance and how realistically it assesses the new balance of power, the driving forces driving the transformation of the world order.
Above all, a shift in consciousness and perspective is necessary. It is necessary to acknowledge that competition exists, and the West can no longer do what it pleases. It is necessary to end the lectures and demands for Western superiority and, taking reality into account, come back down to earth. A break with power, rationality and balance, and shared interests must be placed at the centre of thinking. The sooner the West recognises this fact, the less painful it will be to accept the new reality. It is not enough to simply transform foreign policy by prioritizing national interests, targeted alliances, and future technologies. The West must also rethink its image. However, it is not yet fully ready for this.
Donald Trump’s America has already realised that the world is changing and is trying to slow this process and turn this trend to its advantage. At the same time, the assumption that the United States president can ‘lead the free world’ is mistaken. Trump’s personality itself is an obstacle, but, more importantly, America’s internal divisions and indebtedness… The weakness of the United States manifests in its inability to rally even its allies around it—in the case of Ukraine, this pertains to the “coalition of the willing,” and in the case of Israel, it means the Middle East. America’s authority within the bloc has been undermined, despite the fact that Europe is in an even more vulnerable position than before.
Europe is in a worse position than the United States: its current ruling elite can’t shake the feeling that the world has revolved around it for centuries. Looking at recent decades, it’s also stuck in an old, now outdated worldview. As if all this weren’t enough, it’s also captive to the Ukrainian conflict, which holds it in its grip. While Europe can’t let go of this hopeless war, it’s also divided on the issue. It lacks power, but acting as a kind of substitute, its voice becomes even louder. It’s rushing forward, being hostage to previously unrealistic promises. The fact that it took on the financing of the conflict as Trump’s proxy only exacerbates the situation. Now, under pressure to deliver on its promises, it’s frantically rushing forward, towards escalation.
Europe as a whole, including on this issue, has misjudged the situation and is therefore moving in the wrong direction. For example, it sees the continent’s security not in cooperation, but in strength, despite its weak military potential. Its competitiveness has been destroyed by America’s effective participation, and it lacks the energy sources, raw materials, or labour force to restore its defences, making it extremely vulnerable and in need of Washington’s increasingly costly goodwill. Without America, Europe currently lacks a viable operating model, and its dependence—for example, on energy—is only growing. Despite this, it refuses to understand that Donald Trump’s return is, in essence, an opportunity for it to obtain strategic autonomy. Creating this autonomy is no longer a matter of choice, but a guarantee of survival in a world where America’s attention and resources are inevitably focused on Asia.
There is a serious danger that the European Union, if it escapes disintegration, will become irrelevant in this situation. It will only accelerate this process if it unites and finally takes on all of Ukraine’s problems. While the current over-ideologised EU is suited to escalating the military situation, it lacks the pragmatism needed after a settlement. However, sooner or later, rationality and self-interest will prevail, and in the future, a division will emerge within the European part of the Western bloc between the Anglo-Saxon line, with the Germans and British interfering in EU affairs from the outside; the abstainers—the Scandinavians and Mediterranean countries; and, somewhere in the counterpart to these two groups of interest —Central and Eastern Europe, with Polish leadership and strong American influence. The question is how well these three groups of forces can cooperate and how much influence America will exert on the EU.
The West, led by Washington, must first decide whether to isolate itself or acknowledge the impossibility of maintaining even partial hegemony in the long term and join a new world order alongside poles such as China, India, or even Russia. In the next stage, it will face two difficult paths: leading a narrower, interest-driven coalition and acting as a ruthless realist, or renewing its broader, rules-based alliance system. However, American hegemony has ended, or, more accurately, it will be limited to the Anglo-Saxon world and North America, and in this space, the dollar may remain the universal currency.
The history of the Hague Group is included in the statement below. During the 80th UNGA, the Hague Group stated that they would have a meeting on the sidelines, at the time of Bibi Netanyahu’s speech. To my surprise, there was no press, and I could not find much about what they are doing and what they are involved in. We saw the activism in New York of President Petro of Colombia who had his visa revoked because of it. The Colombian president, Gustavo Petro, has dismissed the US decision to revoke his visa and accused Washington of violating international law over his criticism of Israel’s war in Gaza.
“I no longer have a visa to travel to the United States. I don’t care. I don’t need a visa … because I’m not only a Colombian citizen but a European citizen, and I truly consider myself a free person in the world,” Petro said on social media on Saturday.
“Revoking it for denouncing genocide shows the US no longer respects international law,” he added in a post on X. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/28/i-dont-care-colombia-president-petro-hits-back-after-us-revokes-his-visa
Still, I saw no press but eventually found one group reporting: Progressive International. https://x.com/ProgIntl
Let’s go to the Statement, and then I will make a final comment:
Co-Chairs’ Statement: The Hague Group High-level Meeting to Halt the Gaza Genocide — New York, 26 September 2025
One year ago, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution A/RES/ES-10/24, demanding that the State of Israel comply with the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion of July 2024, giving the State of Israel twelve months to cease without delay its “unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”
That deadline has now passed. Israel has defied the General Assembly, ignored the Court, and intensified its crimes. The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel has now concluded that Israel’s actions constitute a genocide. In the face of this grave reality, the international community must commit — not to rhetoric, but to action.
That is why The Hague Group was first established in January — to rally against complicity and end impunity — by collectively enforcing international law. Over the past year, states across the world have enforced concrete measures through national legislation and executive policies: halting arms transfers, blocking weapons shipments, suspending procurement from Israeli firms, ceasing energy exports and ensuring accountability through national and international courts.
Today, on the sidelines of the 80th UN General Assembly, The Hague Group convened more than thirty governments to consolidate these measures into a coordinated global strategy to halt the Gaza genocide. We affirm:
That accountability as a principle cannot be forsaken
That Israel cannot be permitted to continue its crimes with impunity;
That every state has obligations to prevent genocide and implement international law;
That coordinated enforcement — through our courts, ports, contracts, factories, and financial systems — an unavoidable path to justice for the people of Palestine.
Such coordination strengthens the global response to Israel’s ongoing crimes, setting a model for all states to immediately fulfil their legal obligations, and creating robust mechanisms for accountability at the national, regional, and international levels.
Colombia and South Africa, as co-chairs of The Hague Group, reaffirm our shared commitment to this mission. We stand together, not only for Palestine, but for the integrity of international law itself. The choice before every government is clear: complicity or compliance.
History will judge us not by the speeches we delivered, but by the actions we took. Together, we call on all states to join us in cutting ties of complicity across arms, finance, and energy — and in ensuring that justice is not delayed, but delivered.
The people of Palestine cannot wait — and The Hague Group will not rest until it has rallied the world to defend the international laws that protect them.
Rosa Villavicencio
Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Colombia
Ronald Lamola
Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of the Republic of South Africa
—
Despite the enthusiasm initially with the first meeting in January of this year, and then a further meeting around mid-year, the silence was deafening. So far, this is a talk shop that has accomplished nothing of what they set out to do.
Kudos to Petro, who stood up and said what needed to be said. History will judge us not by the speeches we delivered, but by the actions we took. The rest is a depiction of Global Governance that has no agency.
The strategy of empire, thus far, has been the denial of world development through chaos creation, and it is unravelling. Nevertheless, imperialist aspirations still endure and the fight is going to be until the bitter end. The pattern has shifted toward attempts to utilize dwindling economic rights as a wedge for military intervention to expand the hegemonic stake through unrestricted warfare across all domains.
The pretense of peace lies irrevocably torn asunder, its remnants eclipsed by the unrelenting tide of violence that reigns without pause.
Balance is being restored, oh so slowly. The central Sovereign Civilizational States have now reached a clear definition: the magnificent duo China and Russia, the plucky DPRK (North Korea), and meritorious Iran. We stand at a unique nexus point, a pivotal moment in our planet’s history. Other Sovereign States developing and becoming, willingly contribute and participate in the Great Endeavor: the definitive and definite end of the Western colonial/neo-colonial order.
The enemy is the system that needs an enemy, and even that —the existence of an enemy —is now being denied to the empire, in economic, military, and civilizational terms. Viva! The ongoing and resolute resistance exists in places like GlobalSouth.co and those we feature.
Despite our victories, we face an increasingly complex form of warfare, sometimes referred to as 5th Generation War. In the 1999 book Unrestricted Warfare, by colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui of the People’s Liberation Army, they noted that in the years since the 1991 Gulf War, conventional military violence had decreased, which correlated to an increase in “political, economic, and technological violence”, which they argued could be more devastating than a conventional war.
We face an “omnipresent battlefield” with a mixture of kinetic and non-kinetic force.
The non-kinetic, or 5G Warfare:
This book outlines the concept of Fifth Generation Warfare (5GW) and demonstrates its relevance for understanding contemporary conflicts.
Non-kinetic modes of attack and war waged by groups or non-state actors at the societal level has been termed 5GW. This book discusses the theory of generational warfare and explores the key ideas of 5GW, such as secrecy, the manipulation of proxies, the manipulation of identity and culture (including disinformation and big data), and the use of psychological warfare.
These techniques are used to achieve strategic objectives, such as inducing desired behaviour and controlling human terrain, without resorting to overt war or overt violence.
The text expands the debate on 5GW by exploring emerging technologies and how they could be used for maliciously shaping human society and even for maliciously changing the genetic makeup of a population for the purpose of unprecedented social control. The work closes with comments on the possibility of a Sixth Generation of Warfare, which targets technical systems to possibly collapse a society through strategic sabotage. Overall, the book demonstrates the relevance of 5GW for understanding contemporary conflicts, from the Arab Spring to the war in Ukraine, in terms of the need for dominating the human domain.
This book will be of interest to students of security and technology, defence studies and International Relations.
https://www.routledge.com/Fifth-Generation-Warfare-Dominating-the-Human-Domain/Krishnan/p/book/9781032501208?srsltid=AfmBOopOVYxa87lcAfYriV8grirVxnEMO3BQRLwiuFlQfky2trIk7_zt
The United Nations is not U.S. property to be used and abused to satisfy unilateral political or personal whims.
Editorial from Strategic Culture
The Trump administration’s ban on Palestinian delegates attending the United Nations General Assembly this week clearly shows that the United States has forfeited the privilege to host the world body.
Donald Trump’s chaotic presidency is bringing the U.S. and the UN into total disrepute. The blocking of the Palestinian delegation is just the latest in a series of wanton acts by the Trump administration upending international norms and peace, all of which show that the United States has openly devolved into a rogue state.
Trump’s ordering of extrajudicial killings by blowing up civilian boats in the Caribbean without any evidence, his aggression towards Venezuela, and putting a $50 million bounty on that country’s president, his bombing of Iran, and his slapping of illegal, unilateral economic sanctions on scores of nations – all demonstrate that the United States under Trump is out of control, beyond law and order and the UN Charter. For such a state to claim the right to host the United Nations – supposedly the highest international authority – is a travesty.
The flagrant hypocrisy of the United States is beyond bearable. The Trump administration announced that it was denying a visa to the State of Palestine’s President Mahmoud Abbas and his aides, preventing them from traveling to the U.S. to address the UN’s annual General Assembly. The reason given was that the Palestinians are allegedly supporting terrorism and constitute a “national security threat” to the United States.
This is while the U.S. is supporting a genocide against Palestinians committed by the Israeli regime. The Trump administration (like the Biden one before it) has thwarted every diplomatic initiative for a ceasefire in Gaza and to end the horrific suffering of civilians. Children are starving to death because of the Israeli blockade on food and humanitarian aid to Gaza, a blockade fully supported by the United States government. Israel’s psychopathic leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, is permitted to address the UN General Assembly and spout his vile justifications for slaughtering 63,000 men, women, and children. Afterwards, Netanyahu will be warmly welcomed at the White House by Trump. Last year, while he was addressing the General Assembly, Netanyahu gave orders for Israeli warplanes to assassinate Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut on September 27, 2024.
Trump is enabling genocide and shielding the Israeli regime with impunity. Such a diabolical fiasco brings the United States and the UN into disrepute.
The American leader’s narcissism raises questions about his sanity. When he addressed the General Assembly earlier this week, Trump lashed out over a failing escalator and teleprompter, claiming that unknown people at the UN were trying to disrupt his attendance and make him look stupid. It turned out that the technical glitches were reportedly caused by Trump’s own entourage, but that didn’t stop him from demanding the arrest of UN staff. This is in keeping with Trump’s threats to shut down American news media outlets that are critical of his presidency.
The ban on Palestinian officials was no doubt in retaliation for several Western states declaring their recognition of the State of Palestine. Britain, Belgium, Canada, France, Luxembourg, Portugal, and others have now joined with Russia, China, and over 80 percent of the total UN members to declare formal recognition of Palestine. Netanyahu and other extremist Israeli politicians have vowed to destroy the last vestige of Palestinian territory, and the United States is sponsoring this criminal attrition. The United States is isolated and held in contempt globally. Out of loyalty to Israel and perhaps blackmail by Mossad over his friendship with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, Trump exacted petty revenge by blocking the Palestinians from attending the General Assembly – thereby preventing further pressure for an end to the genocide.
Trump’s disgrace is by no means the first time that the United States’ position of hosting the UN has been called into question. Over the past 80 years, since the UN was founded in 1945, the relentless warmongering and genocidal conduct of the United States (Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Iraq, to name only a few) have made it wholly unfit to facilitate a body supposedly charged with upholding international peace and respect for nations. However, the blatant rogue-state conduct under Trump is making the incontestable case that the U.S. has finally forfeited any presumption of privileges.
The U.S. role of providing the headquarters of the United Nations in New York City was always a privilege, not a prerogative. Given the historic victory by the Soviet Union and China over fascism, the UN’s HQ could well have been in Moscow or Beijing. But such a concept is probably too challenging for consumers of Western news media.
In any case, a UN international treaty (1947) stipulates that the United States must grant unrestricted travel to the General Assembly for all member nations, including permanent observers (the current status of the Palestinian State), regardless of relations with the U.S. government. The UN headquarters has extraterritorial rights similar to foreign embassies.
Even during the height of the Cold War, the United States did not dare to block the attendance of Soviet or Chinese officials. Indeed, such a move would have been inconceivable due to its illegality. One recalls, too, how over the years, staunch critics of U.S. imperialism were free to address the General Assembly. Cuba’s Fidel Castro did so and berated the United States while President George HW Bush Sr was in the audience, even though the U.S. had sanctions on Cuba as a “terrorist state.” Another memorable, coruscating speech was that of Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez, who mocked George W Bush Jr for leaving a malignant odor at the speaker’s podium.
Trump’s ban on Palestinian attendees is a gross violation of the 1947 treaty to which the United States is legally bound. It is an unprecedented breach of UN rules and international law.
Given the lawlessness of the United States under Trump, and his narcissistic disorder, it can be expected that he will abuse the role of the U.S. to ban other leaders, who become labelled arbitrarily as national security threats. Will Trump ban leaders from Iran, Venezuela, Brazil, India, China, and Russia out of his egotistical petulance?
The United Nations is not U.S. property to be used and abused to satisfy unilateral political or personal whims. Its historic role of hosting the UN is anachronistic in a world of equal nations and with the shift of geopolitical power to Eurasia and the Global South. The five-member Security Council with its veto powers is another anachronism that should be replaced. The UN body should be located in a place where its founding noble principles and Charter are respected. The United States is not such a place.
This is the stream for today, if you’d like to pick up a speech or two. We start with Israel, then Pakistan and China is third today.
More than half the delegates leave the room when Netanyahu starts speaking.
The zionist-israeli press: “By order of the Prime Minister’s Office: Giant loudspeakers will broadcast Netanyahu’s UN speech to the residents of Gaza.”
There may be some speeches that you may want to pick up. Today’s full lineup is here:
And for older speeches, they can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/@unitednations/videos
This will be the last post that is dedicated to General Speeches. There are more as the proceedings continue through Saturday, 27 September, and conclude on Monday, 29 September 2025.
A MAJOR WALKOUT when Netanyahu takes the podium. Delegations from more than 100 countries walked out.
Netanyahu, your time is up!
While the State of Israel takes the floor of the UN General Assembly, the Hague Group holds a simultaneous Ministerial Meeting of 34 states to deliberate a joint action plan to halt the Gaza genocide. I have not heard much about this meeting.
The only address of significance that we are currently waiting for is Mr. Lavrov’s speech. The Chinese envoy was very muted.
Delegates are now exercising their rights of reply.
Overall, there is no change to my original assessment that most addresses from world leaders can be divided into four categories:
– The war against the Palestinians has to stop, as well as the other wars in Africa, and the immeasurable damage that Netanyahu’s wars are causing to the region as a whole is acknowledged. Every single speech (excepting Netanyahu, who spoke to an empty room) expressed outrage against the war on the Palestinians and the sheer horror. Most condemned Israel, and some in strong terms.
– For Russia against Ukraine: This is muted, and we would not have had much interest if it were not for NATO and the EU trying to make a case that Russia is encroaching on airspace here and there. The overall effect was moderate, and it was clear that this idea was a manufactured construct. It did not even reverberate. The only reverb that there was was Trump’s comment to shoot down these ‘offending’ Russian aircraft.
– For Ukraine (the NATO and EU contingent) against Russia: Again, this was relatively muted. The same old shouts that Ukraine must be supported from the same old voices are heard, and fatigue has set in. What is not so muted is that Europe is arming itself again, led by Germany.
– Climate change was often mentioned as an issue, specifically from the African countries and the small island states. Women’s empowerment was discussed, but at a much lower profile than climate change. Surprisingly, the world economy did not have a great profile, except for Lula da Silva’s initial speech.
As expected, this UNGA was materially different from the previous one. The influence of multipolarity is evident, and some speeches acknowledged that we are now in a multipolar world. Compared to the previous year, that was never even mentioned. Multilateralism came up more frequently than multipolarity. I do like the Prime Minister of Barbados, who always makes sense. The rules-based order she speaks about is not the Western rules-based order, but rather the rules-based order for organizations such as the WTO, which is still not fully functional. Many disputes between WTO members remain unresolved as the U.S. continues to block appointments to the body responsible for reviewing appeals, resulting in a lack of a quorum. The US, against which most disputes are lodged, cannot be judged.
The Western members of the Security Council vetoed a Russia/China resolution on the Iranian snapback (i.e., sanctions) regime.
Votes in favor:
China, Russia, Pakistan, and Algeria
Votes against:
France, UK, USA, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Denmark, Panama, Somalia, and Greece
Abstentions:
Guyana and South Korea
It was a non-complicated resolution for buying time. Russia/China stated in a joint statement that this snapback is illegal and unjust, and they will not implement sanctions against Iran. This is a remarkable departure from the norm, suggesting that the US and Western countries are losing their relevance.
When I watch these great meetings striving for Global Governance where appropriate, and Local Sovereignty, I always end up disappointed at the level of ability of the leaders to govern. This time, I observe changes. With a BRICS meeting on the sidelines and several other meetings underway, the growth of what Mr. Lavrov now refers to as the majority population has become visible. The changes we were expecting from BRICS, SCO, and other new world organizations are clearly visible. What is also visible is that the West has declared a fight on all cylinders and is utilizing all methods to stave off the process of its own irrelevance. The fallout of this will become clearer in the next few months. The West is now suffering the word NO, more and more frequently.
On Gaza and the Palestinians, there is a 17-point agreement that was reached between the US and the Gulf States. We don’t have that agreement yet, except in zionist-israeli press, and I prefer to wait for more reliable coverage. So far, from all the sources, a few elements are missing. There were no Palestinians there, so, at the outset, it would be imposed. It is the old cry, Hamas must go. I am not entirely sure about it, but it appears that the West is attempting to maintain its influence in West Asia, and its proxy, Netanyahu, has just failed. All that remains for him is to continue his killing spree, and he is doing precisely that.
So far, so good while slogging through a snodrift. These leaders are fearful of the overall state of the world. The citizenry is up in arms, demanding their rights and pressuring their governments, and we will no doubt see more “Charlie Kirk”- style events, as well as color revolution-style events.
At least we can enjoy Mia Amor Mottley, Prime Minister, Minister for National Security and the Public Service, and Minister for Finance, Economic Affairs and Investment of Barbados, who even quoted a little Bob Marley.
tomorrow, 27ᵗʰ September 2025, the 2015 JCPOA “snap-back” sanctions will come into force. With disavowal from China and Russia, it will become a milestone day in the disintegration of the post-WW2 UN system.
with appreciation to Dr. Karl at karlof1’s Geopolitical Gymnasium.
One Major FM statement and two by main UN Representative Vassily Nebenzia
On 20 September, Russia’s Foreign Ministry issued a major statement about its views on the snap-back sanctions issue which was followed by two separate statements by Mr. Vassily Nebenzia that were made to the assembled UN Security Council. It should be noted that China, Algeria and Pakistan all hold similar positions as they expressed orally and via their vote. When this move was announced back in August, Russia published a paper expressing why this move is illegal and violates the JCPOA that I reported on in full. We’ll begin with the MFA Statement then go to the two statements by Mr. Nebenzia.
On September 19, the UN Security Council voted on a draft resolution submitted by the Republic of Korea as President of the UN Security Council as a follow-up to the August 28 appeal by the United Kingdom, Germany and France regarding Iran’s alleged material failure to comply with its obligations under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
The Russian side has repeatedly pointed out the provocative and illegal nature of the actions of the European countries participating in the JCPOA and the South Korean chairmanship of the UN Security Council, which is under their influence. These actions have nothing to do with diplomacy and only lead to a further escalation of tensions around the Iranian nuclear program. Until the last moment, we explained in detail and in a well-reasoned manner the reasons why the above-mentioned European appeal cannot be considered a notification within the meaning of paragraph 11 of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which the British and the European Two are trying to shamelessly manipulate. Accordingly, the presidential draft put to a vote in the Security Council does not meet the requirements of Resolution 2231 and a priori cannot lead to the restoration of the previously lifted UN sanctions against Iran.
During a meeting of the UN Security Council on September 19, Russia, together with China, Algeria and Pakistan, strongly supported the preservation of the regime for the lifting of previous sanctions resolutions on the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). Predictably, the European instigators of the current growing crisis around the Iranian nuclear programme, as well as the United States, which together exerted unprecedented pressure on the non-permanent members of the Security Council, forcing them to show solidarity with their unsuitable position, spoke out against this. As a result, those who succumbed to blackmail and threats have not been able to clearly explain the essence of their objections to the fact that the restrictions that have long lost their relevance and were in effect before the conclusion of the JCPOA remain lifted.
The position of the Republic of Korea, which abstained on its own draft resolution, is noteworthy in this context. We perceive this as self-exposure and a sign that Seoul is well aware of the legal and procedural nullity of its initiative, as well as the inconsistency of European claims on snapback. Apparently, the chairmanship is aware of the likely disastrous consequences of the political campaign unleashed against Iran, which threatens to negate constructive cooperation between Tehran and the IAEA and push the Iranian leadership to take tough retaliatory decisions.
The results of the vote on the South Korean resolution only indicate that this document did not find support and was removed from the agenda. This fact does not impose any obligations on other states to revive past restrictions against Iran. The notorious “snapback” cannot be considered to have taken place. Claims by the Western camp to the contrary mean that these countries are desperately seeking to legitimize their earlier gross violations of Resolution 2231 and to subordinate the rest of the world to their confrontational and fundamentally flawed policies. Their diktat and their legal nihilism in international affairs must be resolutely rebuffed, and attempts to use the authority and powers of the UN Security Council to settle political scores with Tehran must be rejected.
For the United States and European countries, the moment of truth has come. They will finally have to answer the question with certainty whether they are seeking a political and diplomatic settlement or are they once again preparing for the “dirty work” of plunging the Middle East into a new tragedy, similar to the one that took place in June, when the nuclear facilities in Iran under IAEA control were the target of missile and bomb strikes by Israel and the United States.
The Russian-Chinese draft UN Security Council resolution on a technical postponement of the implementation of the JCPOA and Resolution 2231 for six months, which is on the table, provides a real opportunity to rectify the situation, create conditions for the effective implementation of the agreements reached between Iran and the IAEA in Cairo on September 9, and provide space for a vigorous search for negotiated solutions that will make it possible to remove any suspicions and prejudices regarding Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy with due reliance on international law and consideration of the legitimate interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. [My Emphasis]
Here’s the first Nebenzia statement:
Mr. President,
We have to take the floor on a point of order, because we do not see any legal, political or procedural grounds for any steps to develop the European claims to launch the snapback mechanism, including voting on the draft resolution submitted by the South Korean presidency.
We have repeatedly explained at various venues that the European parties to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) simply have no right to launch the mechanism provided for by OP11 of UN Security Council Resolution 2231. The United Kingdom, France and Germany themselves have chronically violated UNSC Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA, including by imposing illegal unilateral sanctions against Iran to replace the restrictions that expired in accordance with the Plan. These countries also grossly violated the procedure for considering disputes provided for by the JCPOA, in particular, they did not launch the Dispute Settlement Mechanism in accordance with the prescribed procedure at the Vienna platform.
We would like to remind you that Resolution 2231 is an integral document and does not allow for a gap between it and the JCPOA, which has been and remains an integral part of it. Attempts by European countries to present the situation as if they have the right to use the “punitive” provisions of the resolution without fulfilling their part of the obligations are hypocritical and untenable from both a legal and political point of view. That is why we do not recognise the complaint submitted by Berlin, London and Paris to the Council within the meaning of UNSC Resolution 2231.
In this regard, we do not see any need for the Chairman-in-Office to take any steps, including the introduction of a draft resolution. The hasty putting of it to a vote by the South Korean chairmanship, although there is still more than a week before the expiration of 30 days, is also perplexing. We regret that the Republic of Korea has chosen the path of playing along with Western destructive approaches, to the detriment of its duties as an impartial chairman.
On the whole, what is happening today evokes the feeling of a clumsy spectacle aimed at creating a false “parallel reality” that has nothing to do with the political and legal foundations of the work of the Security Council. After all, it is no secret that the United Kingdom, France and Germany do not care at all about the fate of the JCPOA or the authority of the UN Security Council. Their only goal now is to use the Council as a tool in their unscrupulous game, as a lever of pressure on an undesirable state that defends its sovereign interests.
Here is a clear illustration of the fact that our European colleagues reject diplomacy at the root, preferring the language of blackmail and threats. Last week in Vienna, we officially proposed holding a meeting of all the original participants in the JCPOA in order to discuss, so to speak, “in the family circle” ways out of the current crisis. Great Britain, France, Germany and the United States responded to our proposal with a refusal.
Therefore, in other circumstances, we would not even take part in such a shameful spectacle in the Security Council, which is now unfolding at their behest. We are doing this today only because the content of the submitted document implies the preservation of the regime for lifting sanctions against Iran, which is in line with our long-standing principled position. However, this does not lend an ounce of legitimacy to either the European statements about the launch of the snapback, or the actions of the presidency to develop them. I ask you to record this in the minutes of the meeting.
Thank you. [My Emphasis]
And here’s the second:
Mr. President,
Today we have already stated our principled position of rejection of either the attempts of European states to launch a snapback or the actions of the presidency to develop them, including the introduction of this resolution. Our position on this matter remains unchanged. The fact that the Russian Federation voted in favour of the draft should not be interpreted as a change to it.
We supported the draft for only one reason: its only operative paragraph was on maintaining the lifting of UN sanctions against Iran. This is the only correct, politically and legally justified decision, which we have been talking about for all these years. The logic laid down in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) assumed the gradual lifting of all restrictions on Iran, and we are firmly convinced that there is no reason why they should not expire on October 18 of this year. and we have all witnessed how Iran fell victim to the aggressive actions of Israel and the United States in June of this year, and then trying to “crush” it with UN sanctions is immoral, unfair and illegal.
However, this is exactly what our Western colleagues are now trying to do. We would like to remind you that everything, including Iran’s interaction with the IAEA, was going according to plan exactly until the United States took a destructive path in 2018 and officially withdrew from the deal. This was the “trigger” of the crisis around the JCPOA, the consequences of which the Council has to deal with now, but Western delegations are diligently hushing up this fact. Despite Washington’s illegal and brutal actions, Tehran showed restraint at that time and continued to comply with its obligations in good faith for more than a year – I emphasise that for more than a year. Only after another round of pressure on it, Tehran took retaliatory steps, while regularly noting that these actions were reversible. Unfortunately, our European colleagues were not interested in returning to diplomacy even then and did not follow the path of a normal conversation, which was a chance in 2022, when the parameters for restoring the JCPOA were discussed.
Violations by the United Kingdom, France and Germany of their obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA have long become chronic. We are talking about their inability to comply with their obligations to ensure economic returns for Iran from the lifting of EU sanctions that were in effect until 2015, and their illegal decision to resume unilateral sanctions pressure after the JCPOA Transition Day on October 18, 2023.
Our country has repeatedly brought to the attention of the members of the Security Council its position that the United Kingdom, France and Germany do not have the right to use the procedure for restoring the UN Security Council sanctions regime against Iran, as provided for in paragraph 11 of the operative part of UNSC Resolution 2231. A party that fails to comply with its obligations under any contract or agreement deprives itself of the right to use the tools provided for therein. This is clearly evidenced by the so-called “clean hands doctrine”, the principle of pacta sunt servanda, and the advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice.
Against this background, the so-called “notification” of the “European Three” about the launch of the “snapback”, distributed in the Council on August 28, has no legal and procedural force. It cannot serve as a basis for any decisions or actions of the Security Council. This position is set out in detail in the joint letter of the Foreign Ministers of Russia, China and Iran dated August 28, which was circulated in the Council.
Let us emphasize once again: from our point of view, there is no launch of the snapback procedure. The introduction of the draft considered today is a direct violation of Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA, which is an integral part of it. For this reason, the Russian Federation does not recognize either the alleged steps taken or any further steps in this context.
We would like to remind you that there is a real alternative to the lawlessness taking place today in the Security Council hall. This is the Russian-Chinese draft resolution, which is in the blue, which provides for the technical extension of Resolution 2231 for six months while demanding that all original participants in the JCPOA immediately resume negotiations in order to find a diplomatic solution. We call on all sensible members of the Security Council to support it when we put it to a vote.
Thank you. [My Emphasis]
Seems pretty basic: The E3 violated basic contract law and thus voided their ability to do anything, almost as if they had dropped out like their Outlaw US Empire Master. I haven’t read anything by China, Pakistan or Algeria, but do know that they echoed Russia’s position meaning Russia wasn’t the only nation pointing to the illegality of the E3’s actions and the unseemly behavior by the South Korean UNSC Chair. Maybe Trump should have attacked some more Korean factories so they’s know where they stand in his racist eyes.
The Cairo Agreement between Iran and IAEA has already been annulled by Iran as a result of the illegal UNSC happenings. Here’s the key quote from RT’s report:
“The ill-considered actions of three European countries regarding the Iranian nuclear issue… will effectively suspend the path of cooperation with the Agency,” Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said in a statement cited by state news agency IRNA. [Emphasis Original]
The UNSC action is very powerful proof that Law and Justice are absent within the world and need to be made reality via another institution; otherwise, what we’ll have in the law of the garden, which in reality is the jungle. As I have suggested, a UN Charter 2.0 is now needed more than ever with modifications made to the Security Council eliminating the veto and other past mistakes in its organization. Obtaining consensus can remain provided all UNSC members are not in current or past violation of the UN Charter—some form of strict disciplinary measures must be added to the Charter for those members who violate it.
It’s become very clear that Iran’s nuclear program isn’t the issue. It’s Iran’s government and the fact it remains independent despite 46 years of attempts to destroy it led by the Outlaw US Empire and its Zionist proxy. The only weapons not used against Iran are nuclear—chemical and biological weapons were used at the behest of the Empire by Iraq during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War who covered up their use by Iraq. The longstanding crime spree that was begun by the Outlaw US Empire and UK proxy in 1953-4 so Iran’s hydrocarbon riches could be controlled by the Empire continues. When the Shah was in power, the Empire, nor any of its proxies had any trouble with Iran having a nuclear program because the Empire controlled the Shah. That all changed when Iranians revolted and regained their independence, and all signs today are they relish it greatly and will not cede it under any circumstances. And to defend their independence, Iran has developed very sophisticated high-tech missile and drone capabilities that have shocked the Empire and its Zionist proxy, although they lie about everything about Iran. Today’s Iran isn’t that of 2015—it has very powerful allies and is much better economically. Plus, as the 12-Day War showed, Iran’s populace came together in mass solidarity with the government and military against what are called the Two Satans—Big and Small.
The Genocidal Don and Bibi will again attack Iran with the big question being will either use nukes to attain their goal. And the other big question is, did Iran obtain a considerable upgrade to its AD suite? For if Iran can kill the planes and/or missiles bringing the nukes, it will save itself and much more—but if it does so, how will we know nukes were used? Obviously, in a properly governed world, this crisis wouldn’t exist. If Humanity survives the next war on Iran, global governance will need to be altered whether some nations like it or not.
And as an ending by-note, Venezuela has held talks with Russia on what the MFA called, “Russian-Venezuelan consultations on international legal issues.” Here’s the important portion of the Press Release:
We discussed in detail the issues of coordination at the relevant platforms of international organisations and practical steps to combat the practice of illegal unilateral restrictive measures (sanctions). The issues of the functioning of international justice bodies, including criminal justice, are considered separately. Specific mechanisms and tools for the implementation of common positions have been outlined.
The consultations confirmed the parties’ firm conviction of the need to strengthen the rule of international law. Illegitimate sanctions were condemned, and rejection of the politicisation of international justice was expressed. The Russian side reaffirmed its full support for Caracas in its efforts to protect its sovereignty in light of current threats. [My Emphasis]
Trump has now blown up three boats and killed several dozen which merely adds to his bloody total—Genocide Don and Killer of Ukrainians. He had no business being at the Charlie Kirk funeral.
Today, we turn our attention to global geopolitics. As we have said several times in this blog, the Western world has squandered its five-hundred-year run of global dominance. Drunk on plunder, sustained by oceans of blood, and blinded by insatiable greed, gluttonous avarice, and stupendous arrogance of exceptionalism, Westerners could not imagine a world where they would no longer call the shots. Their racial arrogance engendered by stupendous ignorance would not allow that.
While the cretinous collective West with all its hubris continues to play empire with its decaying NATO toys and its hollow chants of “rules-based order,” the real tectonic plates of power are shifting under its feet. Anyone with eyes could see that global geopolitics is being remolded in real-time.
Recently, China’s President Xi Jinping quietly but decisively unveiled a vision that may be remembered as the funeral dirge of Western hegemony—the Global Governance Initiative (GGI). It rests on five cornerstones:
Although the stenographers who parrot official talking points as journalists in the West pretended that they did not hear, and, on the surface, President Xi’s words may sound like platitudes for a world summit brochure, we should not be deceived.
In geopolitical terms, Xi’s declaration is a bombshell, a paradigm shift, a rewriting of the global architecture born after the Second World War.
The Chinese president, in effect, announced the birth of a post-Western world order.
For decades, I have cried that the West needed to change gear. It needed to stop behaving like a bloated aristocrat living on stolen inheritance and squandering it with reckless abandon, fighting useless wars for example. I cautioned Westerners that it was necessary to rein in their greed and learn to live in a world where other civilizations also have a right to exist and prosper.
Of course, drunk on hubris, they would not listen to me. Still inebriated from their self-generated triumphalistic hurrahs over the collapse of the Soviet Union, they continue with their sanctions, more bombs, and more lectures about “human rights” given by people whose history is a museum of crimes against humanity – witness the genocide in Palestine.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, the West had its chance to build a truly inclusive world. Instead, it went berserk with insane triumphalism. NATO expanded like a metastatic cancer, gobbling countries eastward in direct violation of solemn promises. The twin evil organizations the West set up to rape the world (IMF and World Bank) continued their economic banditry (what else to call it?) in Africa and Latin America.
Washington, London, Paris, and Brussels strutted the world like schoolyard bullies, throwing threats and insults around. They gave themselves the authority to determine who must rule one country or the order. Their cries of “Assad must go!” “Gaddafi must go!” rent the air. The arrogance!
The crowning insult was the hubris of the so-called “unipolar moment”—the fantasy that the United States could reign supreme forever. Analysts with foresight like my favorite military strategy guru, Russian-born Andrei Martyanov, wrote four books and numerous blog posts to warn his adopted country, the US, that it was losing the military to the Russians. Of course, US Army Generals with their chests puffing with medals won from “victories” over inferior third-world armies paid no attention.
That arrogance has now detonated in their faces over their misadventure in Ukraine where Russia, single-handedly, handed a humiliating defeat to the Collective West and its expeditionary force, NATO.
President Xi’s first principle—sovereign equality—is a direct slap across the face of the West. For five centuries, Western powers operated on the doctrine that some nations are more “sovereign” than others. Britain could dictate to Africa. France could decree the terms of “Francafrique.” The United States could overthrow governments at will—from Iran in 1953 to Chile in 1973 to Libya in 2011, plus the countless in the Americas.
President Xi declared that the age of selective sovereignty is over. No country, however powerful, has the right to decide the destiny of another.
We already see that this is no longer a theory. Russia, China, and India refused to bend to Western diktats over Ukraine. Saudi Arabia, Iran, and even tiny Gulf monarchies now tell Washington “no” with increasing frequency. The Saudis recently wisely perched themselves under Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella.
The balance has shifted. The West no longer has a monopoly on coercive power.
The second cornerstone—abiding by international law—is another blow to Western pretensions. When Western leaders prattle about a “rules-based order,” they mean, “Rules we make, you obey.” When it suits Washington, international law is invoked like scripture; when it doesn’t, it is tossed aside like a soiled rag. More importantly, Westerners refused to share the book containing the rules with the rest of us.
Who illegally invaded Iraq in 2003? Who bombed Yugoslavia in 1999 without UN authorization? Who tore Libya to shreds in 2011 under the grotesque pretense of “humanitarian intervention”? It was these shameless paragons of “rules-based order.”
President Xi’s insistence on international law strips away this hypocrisy. What the Chinese president told us, in his calm voice, was that law is law, not a buffet where the West picks what it likes. It is apparent that the age of Western impunity, if not altogether over, is fast fading. It is being by replaced by a multipolar enforcement reality—where Moscow, Beijing, Delhi, and even Ankara or Tehran can say: enough.
Third, multilateralism. Westerners hear this word and immediately sneer, for in their dictionary, “multilateralism” meant a system where the US led and its vassals echoed. President Xi is not talking about the G7 club, where Europe still imagines itself relevant. He is talking about BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Eurasian integration, and an economic and political architecture that dwarfs anything the West can muster.
As they say, numbers do not lie. BRICS+ now represents more than 45% of the world’s population and nearly a third of global GDP—surpassing the G7 in purchasing power parity. Militarily, Russia alone has outclassed NATO, exposing it as an overrated relic. Add China’s industrial juggernaut and India’s demographic momentum, and the Western bloc looks like an aging rock band still touring on nostalgia.
Unfortunately, one only needs to listen to them to know that Westerners continue to live in a parallel universe.
Under President Xi’s vision, multilateralism means no more monopolies, unilateral sanctions, or economic chokeholds by Washington or Brussels. The new geometry of power has multiple centers, not one imperial metropolis.
President Xi’s fourth cornerstone—a people-centered approach—is almost alien to Western governance and culture. The West’s system is built not on people but on profit. For five centuries, from the slave trade to colonialism to modern neoliberalism, Western governance has meant the systematic robbery of the many to enrich the few. The West remains a plutocracy masquerading as a democracy.
Whatever its flaws, China has lifted 800 million people out of poverty in four decades—something the World Bank and IMF could never dream of. When the Chinese president says “people-centered,” he means development that puts food on tables, roofs over heads, and education in children’s hands. Not endless wars that fatten Lockheed Martin and Raytheon shareholders while millions of human beings starve.
This is not merely a moral difference—it is a civilization contrast. One system views human beings as expendable resources for profit; the other sees them as ends in themselves.
Finally, focusing on real actions, President Xi effectively skewers the West’s favorite sport: rhetoric without responsibility. Western leaders are masters of grand rhetorical speeches—Paris climate accords, Millennium Development Goals, Structural Adjustment Policy, endless summits with glossy communiqués. But what are the results? More carbon emissions, more inequality, more wars, more poverty.
China, by contrast, builds. It builds roads in Africa, ports in Asia, and railways from Asia to Europe. The Belt and Road Initiative may be controversial, but it is concrete, not a PowerPoint display. The West offers PowerPoints and bombs; China offers railways and trade. Free to choose, most countries will prefer President Xi’s Model.
Except for the purblind, everyone could see that there is no longer any doubt that the baton of global leadership has shifted. It is no longer Washington or Brussels that sets the tune. The new triumvirate—Russia, China, India—more than dwarfs the G7 in industrial and military firepower.
Together, these three form the backbone of a multipolar world. The G7, meanwhile, resembles a geriatric ward clinging to past glories with the narcissistic buffoon ordering everyone around.
And here comes the tragedy that stabs the heart. As this new global architecture is being built, where is Africa? Where are the voices of Lagos, Addis Ababa, Nairobi, or Johannesburg? Where are our technocrats, our economists, our philosophers? Tragically, the voice is missing. Our reprobate misrulers are missing in action when the world is being shaped.
It is Berlin 1884 all over again. Then, the Western powers carved Africa like a roast at dinner, without a single African at the table. Today, as Xi, Putin, and Modi redraw the map of power, Africa is again a spectator, not a participant.
The plantation managers we call presidents seem content to administer poverty while the real game of nations is played elsewhere.
Who will wake up our slumbering leaders and tell them that if Africa does not assert itself now, it will once again be written into the footnotes of history as an object, not a subject. That is the bitter lesson of Berlin 1884 and must not be repeated.
Africa cannot afford another century of irrelevance. Our technocrats must wake up from their slumber, shake off their colonial hangovers, and insist on a seat at the table—not as beggars with begging bowls but partners wielding the continent’s vast resources and human potential.
President Xi’s Global Governance Initiative signals the end of Western domination. But unless Africa asserts itself, we will again be the raw-material quarry of the new world order, just as we were for the old one.
—
©️ Fẹ̀mi Akọ̀mọ̀làfẹ̀ (1st Dan)
(Farmer, Writer, Published Author, Essayist, Satirist, Social Commentator, Polemicist-General of the Pan-African Republic)
My Mission: Stultitia Delenda Est – Stupidity Must be Destroyed!
I am an unapologetic Pan-Africanist who is unconditionally opposed to any form or manifestation of racism, fascism, and discrimination.
I thank you for reading my articles and watching my podcasts. I will continue to make them free, and I will not accept advertisements.
Your support is invaluable. If you enjoy my articles and podcasts, I would greatly appreciate it if you subscribe
This is the stream for today, if you’d like to pick up a speech or two. My update from yesterday is below.
There may be some speeches that you may want to pick up. Today’s lineup is here:
I can think of Palestine (State of), Yemen, Bolivia at least.
UPDATE NOTES FROM YESTERDAY.
What a very interesting day. We saw the President of Panama offering a recognition regime with Ukraine for example. The work of the work was not in the speeches in the main, but on the sidelines. Trump had a meeting with the Gulf States and promised he would not allow Israel to annex the West Bank. Mr Lavrov had continual meetings and he spoke to as much of the world as could be squeezed into one day. The Russian MFA Telegram Channel lists these. The awaited meeting with Rubio is here.
The joke of the day was Zelenski, who spoke to an empty hall, and then the AI critical care doctor was called in to make it look like a full hall:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s flight to New York had to bypass the airspace of most European countries due to the ICC warrant for his arrest. An article from the zionist press indicates that many European countries have made it clear that if Netanyahu’s “Wings of Zion” plane flies over their territory, they will arrest him in accordance with the ICC warrant for war crimes in the Gaza Strip. The pressure on zionist-israel is enormous, but it is still genociding Gazans as we speak.
As I mentioned yesterday, at UNGA, most discussions and speeches have elements of the following:
– war against the Palestinians that has to stop as well as the other wars and Netanyahu’s immeasurable damage against the region as a whole
– for Russia against Ukraine
– for Ukraine against Russia
– climate change
As expected, this has not changed, though the UN itself is blowing up the climate change issue to attempt to make it the major theme.
At #UNGA Climate Summit,
Tells world leaders that #ClimateAction is imperative. “The science demands action. The law commands it. The economics compel it. And people are calling for it.”
—
Everything, valid or not valid, flies in the face of the US presentation. The differences cannot be more stark. So Trump is covering by blaming the UN for a ‘triple sabotage’: an elevator that stopped, a teleprompter that did not work initially, and for the sound in the hall. Be clear, he is covering as the message is through that he was ignored by everyone, even the so-called allies.
My initial sense that this UNGA will at least show us if change from BRICS and SCO and multipolarity is real, and if it is percolating throughout the world community.
Yes, it is. It is both real and percolating throughout. Xi Jinping’s Global Governance baseline is being used. There are two of these, and the second is Global Governance that the western US proxies dreamily talk about. Don’t get confused between the two.
In the next year, we will see more action. The fight to take our world back from barbarism still has a few battles to go into the future. I do take it from this UNGA that we gather more soldiers day by day. People are also standing up and demanding better leadership and governance. This is a learning curve and we will gain some, and lose some. Some leaders will lose their heads. This change cycle will be somewhat of a learning curve and the alternative community is doing well by educating.
The main shock of the proceedings is this one:
A segue:
Let’s apply some realpolitik. Zelenski does not have a long future and will disappear from our screens. Jolani, however, was trained by the Brits specifically to take power. He is a terrorist. Let me remind you that Nelson Mandela was also a terrorist, not only in name, but in action. There is much belly-aching in the spheres of commentary about West Asia on the sequence of Syrian events, and yes, it is heartwrenching to have ‘lost’ Syria. But we may have Jolani with us for some time. As Nelson Mandela became a beloved figure to the world, Jolani may, in his sphere, be groomed to take a similar position. You may not like this commentary, but it is a strong possibility. In South Africa, to this day, we see minorities being disadvantaged and attacked. In Syria, we see minorities being brutally attacked.
In South Africa, up to today, we see two streams of media: One for external distribution, and RT regularly distributes that, and one for internal distribution, where the current authorities, hanging by their fingernails, are trying to depict the period of apartheid similar to the holocaust, which is now an industry. In Syria, if one follows the state media, it is the same, where a false reality is being disseminated. There are many similarities in such freedom movements. In Syria, we see, of course, a brutal colonialism reasserting itself. Please refer to previous writings on what colonialism currently looks like. In South Africa and for the last 31+ years, neo-colonialism has been very actively followed. Syria will not change from what it is now until zionist-israel receives its just desserts.
We will see if with this UNGA, zionist-israel starts receiving its just desserts. Judging by the speeches and meetings on the sidelines, as well as the pressure on the entity, we may be witnessing the beginning of this process. Military vessels from Spain and Italy have joined the Freedom Flotilla, which is quite large, with over 40 boats.
A little more pressure has arrived for the entity: No more playing games: UEFA and FIFA are in talks to BAN Israel from sports competitions, and the Trump admin is working overtime to prevent this. These organizations are business-oriented, and they are reading the UNGA room! They are acting as sponsorships are beginning to disappear, and audiences and sports watchers are openly in dissent.
With the changes in our world, with the adoption of a multipolar approach in reality, we will see more of these freedom movements being nabbed by neo-barbarism. It will require strong leaders and strong countries, and we are in for a period of uncertainty, where the less strong will not know how or where to turn.
We will see hopeless ‘you kick me, I kick you’ type actions, such as this: ‘Israel to recognise Argentina’s claims over the Falkland Islands following British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer’s recognition of Palestine as a state’. Let’s remain happy if the late-stage barbaric hordes fight the late-stage barbaric hordes.
Just in, we have this:
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered hundreds of U.S. military generals and admirals to gather on short notice at a Marine Corps base in Virginia next week.
The highly unusual directive was sent to virtually all of the military’s top commanders worldwide, according to more than a dozen people familiar with the matter. – WSJ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/09/25/hegseth-generals-quantico-meeting/)
There are approximately 800 generals and admirals stationed across the United States and in dozens of other countries and time zones. Hegseth’s order, applies to all senior officers with the rank of brigadier general or above, or their Navy equivalent, serving in command positions and their top enlisted advisers. Typically, these officers each oversee hundreds or thousands of rank-and-file troops.
As a backdrop, Putin opened the World Atomic Week forum (an event timed to coincide with the 80th anniversary of the foundation of Russia’s nuclear industry). He said that Russia is the only country with complete mastery of all aspects and complete delivery chains of the nuclear industry.
End of Segue
Remarks by H.E. Xi Jinping
President of the People’s Republic of China
At the United Nations Climate Summit
September 24, 2025
Your Excellency Secretary General António Guterres,
Your Excellency President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva,
Colleagues,
This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement, a pivotal year for countries to submit their new Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Global climate governance is entering a key stage. I wish to share with you three points.
First, we must firm up confidence. Green and low-carbon transition is the trend of our time. While some country is acting against it, the international community should stay focused on the right direction, remain unwavering in confidence, unremitting in actions and unrelenting in intensity, and push for formulation and delivery on NDCs, with a view to providing more positive energy to the cooperation on global climate governance.
Second, we must live up to responsibilities. In the course of global green transition, fairness and equity should be upheld and the right to development of developing countries fully respected. The transition should serve to narrow rather than widen the North-South gap. Countries need to honor the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, whereby developed countries should take the lead in fulfilling emission reduction obligations and provide more financial and technological support to developing countries.
Third, we must deepen cooperation. The world now faces a huge demand for green development. It is important that countries strengthen international coordination in green technologies and industries to address the shortfall in green production capacity and ensure free flow of quality green products globally, so that the benefits of green development can reach all corners of the world.
Colleagues,
Let me take this opportunity to announce China’s new NDCs as follows: China will, by 2035, reduce economy-wide net greenhouse gas emissions by 7% to 10% from peak levels, striving to do better; increase the share of non-fossil fuels in total energy consumption to over 30%; expand the installed capacity of wind and solar power to over six times the 2020 levels, striving to bring the total to 3,600 gigawatts; scale up the total forest stock volume to over 24 billion cubic meters; make new energy vehicles the mainstream in the sales of new vehicles; expand the National Carbon Emissions Trading Market to cover major high-emission sectors; and basically establish a climate adaptive society.
These targets represent China’s best efforts based on the requirements of the Paris Agreement. Meeting these targets requires both painstaking efforts by China itself and a supportive and open international environment. We have the resolve and confidence to deliver on our commitments.
Colleagues,
Great visions require concrete actions. Climate response is an urgent yet long-term task. Let’s all step up our actions to realize the beautiful vision of harmony between man and nature, and preserve planet Earth—the place we call home.
Thank you.
This is the stream for today, if you’d like to pick up a speech or two. At this moment, I don’t see the sequence of speakers – perhaps they will update it soon.
Update from Day 1
Shifting – first UNGA day
We have a few things that are moving. So far at the UNGA meeting, everyone says that the zionist-israeli war againt the Palestinians cannot be tolerated any longer. Everyone knows that action is now required.
At UNGA, most discussions and speeches have elements of the following:
– war against the Palestinians that has to stop as well as the other wars and Netanyahu’s immeasurable damage against the region as a whole
– for Russia against Ukraine
– for Ukraine against Russia
– climate change
There is no indication that this will change as the presentations at UNGA continue.
The “Be Better” slogan is generally ignored. If I compare it with last year, it is a much more serious gathering, and so far, speakers seem to understand that the UN itself is in the process of losing influence, and the wars in the world cannot continue. Last year, everyone was delivering flowery speeches about the conference theme, which primarily centered on the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Summit of the Future. I critiqued it at the time as relatively worthless.
The Hague Group — a global bloc of states committed to “coordinated legal and diplomatic measures” in defense of international law and solidarity with the people of Palestine are engaged in a multilateral effort to rescue the system of international law from the risk of impunity for the crimes committed during Israel’s 700-day assault on Gaza. On 26 September — while Benjamin Netanyahu, representing the State of Israel, takes the floor of the General Assembly — The Hague Group will hold a Ministerial meeting to present collective and coordinated measures being implemented at national and international levels.
The results of and commentary on Trump’s stream-of-consciousness speech are incredibly negative. A few hours after his speech, this appeared on Truth Social: (I added paragraphs and sentence breaks as it was one long wall of text, and bolding is mine),
Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
After getting to know and fully understand the Ukraine/Russia Military and Economic situation and, after seeing the Economic trouble it is causing Russia, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form.
With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option. Why not?
Russia has been fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a War that should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win. This is not distinguishing Russia. In fact, it is very much making them look like “a paper tiger.”
When the people living in Moscow, and all of the Great Cities, Towns, and Districts all throughout Russia, find out what is really going on with this War, the fact that it’s almost impossible for them to get Gasoline through the long lines that are being formed, and all of the other things that are taking place in their War Economy, where most of their money is being spent on fighting Ukraine, which has Great Spirit, and only getting better, Ukraine would be able to take back their Country in its original form and, who knows, maybe even go further than that!
Putin and Russia are in BIG Economic trouble, and this is the time for Ukraine to act. In any event, I wish both Countries well. We will continue to supply weapons to NATO for NATO to do what they want with them. Good luck to all!
DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA —-
Our Smoothie was quick to comment: “Russian economy is in terrible shape and that is why combined NATO shits its pants while thinking about why it is outproduced by order magnitude, especially in terms of SMART high-precision weaponry. ”
Francesca Albanese commented: “We must recognise Pres. Trump for his visionary speech: unmatched imagination, pure stream-of-consciousness, the rare gift of saying whatever comes to mind, on anything, to anyone. A masterclass for sociology, international relations, and political science. Just hardly any law in it.”
It is difficult to discern what Trump is saying in this Truth Social Post, and even more challenging to decide whether to believe him or not. The negative consequences of his dictatorial-trying to be-humorous speech, first roasting the UN and then roasting everyone else, playing King of the world and he knows everything, praising himself, making peace in seven wars, deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize, and the litany of his so-called wins in his administration so far, evidently became too much for people to swallow. It was vintage Trump, but the ending was too much. If the rest of the world works with the US, everyone will have the successes of the US, I kid you not. Everyone was warned that they will fail and their countries will fail if they do not partner with the US. The fact that he streamed self-congratulatory consciousness for roughly four times the recommended 15-minute time limit just irritated people. Trump says he came to the UNGA to offer “the hand of American leadership and friendship” to any nation ready to partner with the US in creating a safer, more prosperous, and ultimately happier world, declaring that “dramatically better futures are within our reach.” He is also going to work on biological weapons and sort those out with AI, and solve nuclear weapons. He also called for an end to the War on Gaza and said he will still do it; he will end that one. He concluded with a call to defend national borders, cultural traditions, and Christianity, and to build a better, more prosperous world jointly. I think he also threatened to sanction Russia. As we say, he did not read the room, and after LULA’s passionate presentation, this was all gaslighting from start to finish. Opinions about climate change are outdated, and he knows nothing about China’s complex power structures, which are carefully designed to utilize multiple systems appropriate for the region. He only knows Green is Bad and cannot differentiate between the scam and the reality of climate change.
Yes, as I suspected, we are seeing changes toward multipolarity in the speeches of the delegates. How it will present during the rest of the week is an open question. Will the efforts for the Palestinians bear fruit? Globally zionist-isreal and the wars are now rejected.
With this truth social post, he may be stepping outside of the Russian-Ukraine war, but evidently still rooting for Ukraine while roasting Russia. He has angered the Global South, the Civilizational Countries, BRICS, SCO, and the rest of the world, which he has not angered yet.
His announced meeting with LULA da Silva next week fell flat. The requirements for this meeting were that the press had to be present, and LULA’s people were angered. They rejected the meeting on the basis that they or LULA would not be treated in the same manner as people Trump has treated during his supposed open negotiations. They made it clear that they are not interested in being mocked by Trump and his press.
Rubio jumped in and tried to restate:
Speaking on NBC’s Today Show on Tuesday, Rubio replied that it is “not up to us to end the war” when asked why the conflict continues despite Trump’s repeated promises to end it “on day one” of his new administration. “The Russians have to stop the war and the Ukrainians have to agree to a peace deal,” he added.
Ending the conflict is still a “priority” for the Trump administration, Rubio maintained. When asked about Washington’s alleged reluctance to impose new sanctions on Russia, the secretary of state said the US would like to retain the role of a “broker” in the conflict for as long as possible.
There was a continuance of this, saying that Trump may supply Ukraine with offensive weapons, but classify them as defensive.
A few comments from across the world, and they are rough:
I’ve always said that Trump is a shuddering asshole, and I’m still shocked. I’ve said it before, he believes the last thing that he heard the most.
Feces dripping from his mouth.
Trump says the UN is creating new problems for the US to “solve”. He also says they fund illegal aliens to enter the US.
He turned off the PlayStation.
So Trump urges shit, he said nothing, this is just the norm.
Trump encourages Ukraine to keep fighting, but seems content to sit back and watch. Keep betraying your base, you walking talking meme.
Trump reckons Ukraine can ‘take back their country…and maybe even GO FURTHER’. Remember how Kursk went…
Here is a Zelensky one: Trump trusted Putin for information. ‘Now he trusts me…and my intelligence’.
Trump turns full neocon: ‘Ukraine can win back all territory’
In a sudden shift, Trump declares on Truth Social that Ukraine — with EU/NATO support — should fight to restore its original borders and “maybe even go further.”
The Trump part is over now. If he wanted to speak first to set a tone, he failed. Now we wait for serious speakers.
The Global Times reported:
The US president’s return to the UN rostrum coincides with multiple media coverage of the US’ substantial unpaid dues. As The Washington Post highlighted in a report on Monday, “Trump starves [the] UN of funding, as global body faces cash crunch.” Similarly, a Bloomberg report was headlined “Trump heads to UN gathering facing billions in unpaid dues.” The report said the US has accrued over $3 billion in arrears.
Bloomberg noted that if the US continues to refuse payment, the country could lose its vote at the UNGA. The UN charter stipulates such a punishment for countries whose arrears exceed the amount they were supposed to pay in the previous two years.
Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan
For centuries, the seas have been the lifeblood of global commerce. From the ancient spice routes to the oil tankers of today, shipping lanes have shaped the prosperity and power of nations. Among them, a handful of chokepoints — the Strait of Malacca, the Red Sea, the Suez Canal, and the Cape of Good Hope — have become indispensable arteries for world trade. Yet in the 21st century, these very chokepoints have also become liabilities. Increasingly unsafe, costly, and politically unstable, they pose risks not only to cargo but to global economic stability itself.
At the same time, the world is experiencing shifting geopolitics at breathtaking speed. Events that once took decades now unfold in months. Strategic rivalries, trade wars, climate change, and technological disruption all converge to rewrite the rules of global trade. Against this backdrop, China’s pioneering launch of the China–Europe Arctic Express Route from Ningbo-Zhoushan Port stands as a historic breakthrough — one that may redefine the future of international shipping.
Troubled Waters of Traditional Routes
Consider the Strait of Malacca, one of the busiest waterways on Earth. Stretching between Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia, it carries a quarter of global trade. Yet its narrowness makes it a prime target for piracy and an easy choke point during conflict. Energy-hungry economies, especially in East Asia, constantly worry about the so-called “Malacca Dilemma”: a single disruption could strangle their fuel supplies and industrial output.
Then there is the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb Strait, gateway to the Suez Canal. Here, piracy off the Somali coast once flourished, and more recently, instability in Yemen and regional tensions have raised alarms. Ships transiting this route must factor in heightened insurance premiums and military escorts — costs that trickle down to global consumers.
The Suez Canal itself, hailed as one of humanity’s greatest engineering feats, is no longer a guarantee of smooth passage. In March 2021, the world learned this lesson dramatically when the container ship Ever Given ran aground, blocking the canal for six days. Global trade losses were estimated at $9.6 billion per day, with hundreds of ships stranded and supply chains paralyzed. This single accident exposed the fragility of over-reliance on a few strategic chokepoints.
And then there’s the Cape of Good Hope, the fallback option when Suez is blocked. Longer and storm-prone, it adds thousands of nautical miles to a voyage, inflating both costs and carbon emissions. In an era of climate commitments, burning more fuel is a step backward.
The truth is plain: traditional shipping routes are no longer fit for the needs of a fast-moving, interconnected, and fragile world. They are costly in time, money, and security, and they leave global trade vulnerable to every geopolitical tremor.
The Arctic Breakthrough
This is where China’s Arctic Express Route offers a revolutionary alternative. The route, launched in September 2025, connects Zhoushan Port in East China to Europe’s Felixstowe in just 18 days. Compared to the Suez Canal’s 25 days or the Cape of Good Hope’s 30-plus, the savings are striking.
The advantages are more than numerical. By navigating the Northeast Arctic Passage, ships bypass volatile regions like the Middle East, the Horn of Africa, and Southeast Asia. Piracy, blockades, and political flare-ups become less of a concern. Shipping firms gain predictability, a precious commodity in an age of uncertainty.
The Arctic route also consumes less fuel, lowering costs and emissions. For industries pressured by both profit margins and sustainability targets, this is a game-changer. Shorter voyages mean fresher goods, lower logistics costs, and enhanced competitiveness.
Crucially, the Arctic corridor is less vulnerable to deliberate geopolitical manipulation. Unlike Suez or Malacca, it is not subject to disputes over sovereignty or competing military deployments. While climate change has opened this passage, it also demands that it be developed responsibly. China’s Arctic vision emphasizes cooperation, infrastructure, and green practices, making the route not just economically viable but also ethically forward-looking.
The Polar Silk Road
The Arctic Express is not an isolated event; it is part of a broader vision known as the Polar Silk Road. First articulated in China’s 2018 Arctic Policy, this initiative envisions the Arctic as a new frontier of international cooperation. Just as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) revitalized ancient trade corridors across Asia, Europe, and Africa, the Polar Silk Road aims to create a new northward artery for global commerce.
Already, there are discussions of joint ventures with countries like Russia, Japan, and South Korea, demonstrating China’s commitment to making the Arctic a shared space rather than an exclusive domain. Investments in Arctic ports, navigation systems, and environmental safeguards are underway, creating a long-term framework that benefits not only China but the world.
This is leadership by contribution — offering global public goods at a time when trust in multilateral institutions is declining. Where traditional powers once dominated sea lanes with naval might, China is building trust by creating safer, shorter, and greener alternatives.
Trump’s Tariffs and the Shifting Trade Map
The urgency of such alternatives is amplified by the disruptive impact of Trump’s tariffs. Since his return to office in 2025, tariffs on European cars, Chinese technology, and a host of other goods have upended global supply chains. Traditional trade patterns are breaking apart. Companies are re-routing supply lines, seeking new partners, and recalculating logistics.
For Asia and Europe, this has created both a challenge and an opportunity. Old dependencies are being questioned, and diversification is now the mantra. The Arctic route fits perfectly into this moment: it offers a fresh corridor that reduces reliance on politically sensitive chokepoints and aligns with the need for greater resilience.
If tariffs are walls, then the Arctic is a bridge. By cutting transit times and reducing costs, it makes cross-continental trade more attractive even in the face of protectionism. For businesses squeezed by tariffs, every saved dollar in shipping costs becomes a lifeline.
Lessons from Uncertainty
One of the defining features of today’s world is unpredictability. Wars in one corner of the globe ripple across supply chains thousands of miles away. A pandemic in one country halts factories in another. A political decision in Washington can reshape markets in Asia or Africa overnight.
In such a climate, reliance on vulnerable chokepoints is no longer a wise strategy. The Arctic route represents a conscious adaptation to uncertainty. It is not just about saving time and money, but about building resilience into the global trading system.
China’s initiative reminds us that leadership in the 21st century will not come solely from military power or economic might, but from the ability to innovate in ways that serve global needs. The Arctic Express is a model of such leadership — practical, forward-looking, and inclusive.
A Shared Future at Sea
Skeptics may argue that Arctic shipping faces challenges: ice conditions, environmental risks, and the need for specialized vessels. These concerns are real, but they are not insurmountable. Technological advances in ice-class ships, satellite navigation, and green propulsion are already addressing them. Moreover, international cooperation on Arctic governance can ensure that the route develops sustainably.
What matters is the principle: in a world of rising division, here is a project that embodies shared benefit. Developing countries gain access to faster trade routes. Global consumers pay less for goods. The planet benefits from reduced emissions. And global trade becomes less hostage to political shocks.
The broader message is clear: China does not seek to dominate the seas but to democratize them. By opening new routes, investing in infrastructure, and sharing the gains, it offers a vision of global leadership rooted in cooperation, not coercion.
A Compass for the Future
The story of the seas has always been a story of power and progress. From the Portuguese explorers of the 15th century to the British Empire of the 19th, control of shipping lanes has defined global influence. In the 21st century, however, the paradigm is shifting. The future will belong not to those who guard chokepoints with warships, but to those who open new pathways for humanity.
China’s Arctic Express is precisely such a pathway. It challenges the inefficiencies of the past, responds to the disruptions of the present, and points toward a future of safer, faster, and fairer global trade. In an era where uncertainty reigns, it offers a compass of stability.
The world may be unpredictable, but one fact is increasingly clear: with vision, innovation, and cooperation, China is charting the course that others will follow.
—
Author: Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan, Founding Chair GSRRA, Sinologist, Diplomat, Editor, Analyst, Advisor, Consultant, Researcher at Global South Economic and Trade Cooperation Research Center, and Non-Resident Fellow of CCG. (E-mail: awanzamir@yahoo.com).
For those who want to pick up a speech or two, this is the stream. António Guterres is speaking now. He surprised me, calling genocide and calling for the opinions of the ICJ to be implemented for Gaza immediately and in general stated clearly what is needed. He also refers to the other wars – surprising. (For once I would suggest to listen to him – afterward it is Ms.360 degrees in her purple dress, and I would suggest you just skip it!).
You may wonder why I am paying attention. I am expecting changes toward real, effective and appropriate global governance.
Next is:
1. Brazil His Excellency Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva President of the Federative Republic of Brazil
2.United States of America His Excellency Donald Trump President of the United States of America
The sequence for the day is on the video description.
Trump’s policies are destroying key elements of U.S. economic prosperity
Trump has created a crisis for U.S. agriculture with his Cold War weaponization of foreign trade with China and Russia, for manufacturing as a result of his steel and aluminum tariffs, for consumer price inflation mainly from his tariffs, and for affordable housing with his tax cuts that have kept long-term interest rates high for mortgages, auto and equipment purchases, and deregulation of markets giving a free hand to monopoly pricing.
Trump has created a perfect storm for U.S. agriculture, first in his Cold War policy that has closed off China as a soybean market against Russia, second in his tariff policy blocking imports and thus raising prices for farm equipment and other inputs, and third in his inflationary budget deficits that are keeping interest rates high for housing and farm mortgage loans and equipment financing – while keeping farmland prices low.
The most notorious example is soybeans, America’s major farm export to China. Trump’s weaponization of U.S. foreign trade treats exports and imports as tools to deprive foreign countries dependent on access to U.S. markets for their exports, and on U.S.-controlled exports of essential commodities such as food and oil (and most recently, high technology for computer chips and equipment). After Mao’s revolution in 1945, the U.S. imposed sanctions on U.S. grain and other food exports to China, hoping to starve out the new Communist government. Canada broke this food blockade – but it has now become an arm of U.S. NATO foreign policy.
Trump’s weaponizing of foreign trade – keeping open a constant U.S. threat to cut off exports on which other countries have come to depend – has led China to totally stop its advance purchases from this year’s U.S. soybean crop. China understandably seeks to avoid being threatened by a food blockade again, and has imposed 34% tariffs on U.S. soybean imports. The result has been a shift in its imports to Brazil, with zero purchases in the United States so far in 2025. This is traumatic for U.S. farmers, because four decades of soybean exports to China have resulted in half of U.S. soybean production normally being exported to China; in North Dakota the proportion is 70%.
China’s shift in its soybean purchases to Brazil is irreversible, as that country’s farmers have adjusted their planting decisions accordingly. As a member of BRICS, especially under President Lula’s leadership, Brazil promises to be much a more reliable supplier than the United States, whose foreign policy has designated China as an existential enemy. There is little chance of China responding to a U.S. promise to restore normal trade by shifting its imports away from Brazil, because that would be traumatic for Brazilian agriculture and would make China an unreliable a trade partner.
So the question is, what is to become of the enormous amount of U.S. farmland that has been devoted to soybean production? Unable to find foreign markets to replace China, farmers are reported to suffer a loss on their soybean production, which is piling up in excess of existing crop storage capacity. The result is a threat of farm foreclosures and bankruptcy, which would lower prices for farmland. As interest rates remain high for long-term loans such as mortgages, this deters small farmers from acquiring troubled properties. The result is to accelerate the concentration of farmland in the hands of large absentee financial funds and the wealthy.
This shift is irreversible. Despite the Supreme Court ruling that Trump’s tariffs are unconstitutional and therefore illegal, it seems likely that Trump could simply have the bipartisan anti-China Congress and Senate impose these tariffs. In any case, Trump’s policy represents a sea change, a quantum leap into U.S. coercive trade aggression.
There is zero chance of U.S. China trade in soybeans or other basic Chinese needs being revived. Neither it nor other countries threatened by U.S. trade aggression can take the risk of depending on the U.S. market.
America’s agricultural cost and income squeeze goes far beyond soybean sales. Production costs are also rising as a result of Trump’s tariffs, especially on farm machinery, fertilizer and credit tightness as the risk of farm debt arrears increase.
Trump’s tariff anarchy also is causing losses and layoffs of two thousand employees for John Deere and Company, with demand also falling for other manufacturers of farm equipment. The most serious problem is that harvesting equipment, like automobiles and all other machinery, is made out of steel, along with aluminum. Trump has broken the basic logic for tariffs – to promote the competitiveness of high-profit capital-intensive industry (especially for established monopolies), largely by minimizing the cost of raw materials. Steel and aluminum are basic raw materials.
These tariffs have hit John Deere in two ways. For its domestic production, sales are low because of the depression of farm income cited above. Yields have soared this year for corn as well as soybean, leading their prices and farm income to decline. That limits the ability of farmers to buy new machinery.
Deere imports about 25 percent of the components of its products, whose cost is increased as a result of Trump’s tariffs. Deere’s manufacturing facilities in Germany have been especially hard hit. Trump surprised Deere by ruling that over and above his 15% EU import tariffs, he is imposing a 50% tax on the steel and aluminum content of these imports.
That also hits foreign producers of farm equipment, leading to new complaints by EU about Trump’s constant “surprises” in adding to his demand for “givebacks” in exchange for not raising tariffs on imports from the EU even further.
Opposing any alleviation to global warming, Trump has withdrawn from the Paris agreement and has cancelled subsidies for wind power, and also for public transportation. This is the effect of lobbying by the oil industry. Not only is U.S. foreign policy dominated by the demand to control oil as the key to weaponizing foreign trade sanctions, but also U.S. domestic economic policy. Soon after World War II ended, Los Angeles tore up its streetcars, forcing its inhabitants to join the automobile economy. Dwight Eisenhower initiated the interstate highway program to favor auto transportation – and with it the consumption of oil.
Also plaguing U.S. agriculture is a deepening water shortage for crops and destruction caused by flooding, drought and other extreme weather. One cause is the extreme weather resulting from global warming, which Trump denies as part of his policy to support U.S. oil and coal while actively fighting against wind and solar energy production. He has withdrawn U.S. support for the Paris Agreement with other nations to de-carbonize world production.
Insurance costs are rising to unaffordable levels for many areas most prone to storms and flooding, much as the annual cost of housing has soared in Miami and other Florida cities and the southern border states threatened by hurricanes.
A parallel disruption is the rising electricity price as well as a water shortage caused by the rising demand to cool the computers needed for Trump’s support of artificial intelligence and quantum computing. The increasing demand for electricity is far beyond the investment plans by power utilities to increase their production. Such planning takes many years – and utilities are happy to see the shortages push demand far above supply, enabling prices for electricity to be one of the major contributors to inflating the cost of production.
In sum, we see the US economy moving away from policy based on economic objectives, however unsound they appear, and towards one where raw power and vindictiveness are distractive tools intent on rewarding campaign contributors.
Xi Jinping talks about strategic guidance, importance of history, values and future process.
Donald Trump talks about drugs and TikTok.
The Chinese Readout
President Xi Jinping Speaks with US President Donald J. Trump on the Phone
On the evening of September 19, 2025, President Xi Jinping spoke with US President Donald J. Trump on the phone. The two presidents had a candid and in-depth exchange of views on the current state of China-US relations and other issues of mutual interest, and provided strategic guidance for the steady development of China-US relations going forward. The conversation was pragmatic, positive and constructive.
President Xi pointed out that China and the United States were allies who fought shoulder to shoulder during WWII. Recently, China solemnly commemorated the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War, and invited the families of American Flying Tigers to watch the parade on the Tian’anmen Rostrum. The Chinese people will not forget the valuable support from the US and other anti-fascist Allied nations for China’s War of Resistance. Honoring fallen heroes and remembering history is essential for cherishing peace and creating a better future.
President Xi stressed the vital importance of China-US relations. China and the United States are fully capable of helping each other succeed and prosper together for the good of the two countries and the whole world. For that vision to materialize, both sides need to work hard and in the same direction, so as to realize mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation. The recent consultation between Chinese and US officials reflected the spirit of equality, respect, and mutual benefit. They can continue to adequately address the outstanding issues in bilateral relations and strive for mutually beneficial outcomes.
The US side should refrain from imposing unilateral trade restrictions so as not to disrupt the outcomes of multiple rounds of consultation between the two sides. China’s position on the TikTok issue is clear: The Chinese government respects the wishes of the company in question, and would be happy to see productive commercial negotiations in keeping with market rules lead to a solution that complies with China’s laws and regulations and takes into account the interests of both sides. The US side needs to provide an open, fair, and non-discriminatory environment for Chinese investors.
President Trump said that China’s recent parade was phenomenal and beautiful. The US-China relationship is the most important bilateral relationship. The two countries working together can get many great things done that are good for peace and stability of the world. The US would like to have a long-term, big and great relationship with China. The US will work with China on the economy and trade, and support their teams in reaching a proper deal on TikTok through consultation. The US will also work with China for world peace.
Trump’s Readout
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
I just completed a very productive call with President Xi of China. We made progress on many very important issues including Trade, Fentanyl, the need to bring the War between Russia and Ukraine to an end, and the approval of the TikTok Deal. I also agreed with President Xi that we would meet at the APEC Summit in South Korea, that I would go to China in the early part of next year, and that President Xi would, likewise, come to the United States at an appropriate time. The call was a very good one, we will be speaking again by phone, appreciate the TikTok approval, and both look forward to meeting at APEC!
A big Picture Discussion. The big Moment is in. What’s happening is a geopolitical realignment … and the whole theme of this meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was global governance.
GLENN DIESEN: Hi everyone and welcome back. We are joined today by Michael Hudson, one of the world’s great political economists, to discuss the development of a multipolar international economic system indeed being built as we speak in China. So welcome back to the program.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, thanks for having me. So many things are happening right now.
GLENN DIESEN: Yeah, it’s incredible how fast the developments are coming. If you want to see how extraordinary this is in a relatively short period of time, look over the past three decades.
You remember, at the end of the Cold War, the main foreign policy objective of Russia was to integrate with the West to have a common European home or greater Europe. Then, of course, over the past few decades, NATO expansionism began to push Russia closer and closer to China instead. And after 2014, it really abandoned Greater Europe in favor of what it calls Greater Eurasia.
Trump, when he came to power, seemed to recognize this mistake. Almost paraphrasing Henry Kissinger, he said that this was a huge mistake to push Russia into the arms of China. However, then we’ve seen that colossal foreign policy mistake being done: all these threats, tariffs and secondary sanctions against India, now pushing India also towards not just China but Russia.
So we now see that we’re all meeting in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting in China and forming new partnerships. So it’s really extraordinary. I was wondering how you read this whole situation.
MICHAEL HUDSON: The interesting thing is that Trump has represented really the deep state in declaring war against the whole rest of the world. The only war that he’s really won is against his own allies, against Europe, Korea, and Japan. He’s driven the rest of the world together. It is this actual neocon warlike belligerence that has somehow unified the rest of the world to take the steps that they’re taking right now, just about a half year after Trump took power.
What’s happening is a geopolitical realignment, as you pointed out. And the whole theme of this meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was global governance. That is what President Xi was saying. And it’s not just the governance of the SCO countries. It’s for all of the countries that have been driven out of the U.S. orbit.
The catalyst for all this that set the stage was Trump’s tariffs against India. India’s Prime Minister Modi spent an hour riding in a limousine with President Trump and discussing relations between India and Russia. And Trump basically told India, we’re going to block off the American market for you, and that’s going to create chaos in your economy if you don’t stop importing oil and energy from Russia.
Well, what Modi said and explained to the audience was that India’s trade in oil is much more important for its economy than its trade with the United States. Getting oil to power its industry, its whole economy, and to make money in trading with the balance of payments is more important than producing low-wage textile labor and other labor. The labor that the United States companies had hoped to use India as a counterweight to China, whereby they say, we don’t need Chinese labor to make iPhones and other products; we can use Indian labor. All of that is ended.
Right after the SCO meetings, we’re going to be leading right into the bigger meetings of BRICS. And the Indian Prime Minister Modi is going to be the head of BRICS for the next year because it’s India’s turn to become the host of BRICS, and they’ll be meeting in India.
Just a month before these meetings, everybody was worrying that India was the weak part of, the weak link in, BRICS because it was, in a way, very much like Turkey. It was trying to play both the U.S. world and the China-BRICS world both ways.
Trump has closed off the option of siding with the United States, despite the fact that so many Indian billionaires or wealthy businesses are tied to the United States. Modi has realized that the future of India’s economy lies with Russia, China, Iran, and the rest of the BRICS region. All of that was sort of the setting for all of this.
And what was made clear, the whole theme of the speeches by Putin and Xi and the others is that we are now 80 years since World War II ended, and the United States had pretty much a free hand in designing the international economic order, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, and the Cold War, all on its own terms. These terms promised to be multilateral, and they promised to be the terms that underlay the United Nations Charter. Above all, multipolarity, equal treatment of other countries, not selective tariffs, not sanctions against some countries being told who you can trade with, who you can invest with, and what you have to do. And all of this has been violated at an accelerating rate by the United States neocons in their Cold War.
President Xi was the host of these meetings, then they moved to Beijing for the big military parade, I guess, later today in China. This is them saying, we are now going to pick up where 1945 was supposed to lead to an alternative to fascism or Nazism or the militarism of Japan. President Xi was pointing to China’s role in defeating Japan, Russia’s role in defeating Germany and the Axis, and the great sacrifices they made.
Despite the fact that, in their [China’s etc.] narrative, they really won the war against the Axis powers, it was the United States that designed the post-war world. The United States, which hired as many Nazi scientists and Nazi politicians as they could in Operation Paperclip – hired them to fight communism in Latin America, in Europe, and other countries – hired their scientists, Wernher von Braun, et cetera, for the U.S. space program. It was the United States that somehow didn’t really end World War II.
Now you have in Germany, Chancellor Merz saying, we’re going to re-fight World War II. And this time, the German army is going to beat the Russian army. This is really the setting that has consolidated the BRICS countries.
The result is that there is a global fracture that’s occurring, but it’s different from all of the attempts to do that really for the last 70 years.
In 1954, the non-aligned nations got together in Bandung, Indonesia, and said: We need a fairer and more equitable order that lets us develop and doesn’t stifle our development with foreign debt, with free trade, with preventing us from protecting and subsidizing our own industry. But they really couldn’t do anything about it because they were too small acting by themselves. The non-aligned nations could not go it alone, even together, because they didn’t have the critical mass.
What’s changed all this since the 1990s, obviously, has been China. Now China can be the core of this critical mass, largely because of its financial policies, its foreign exchange reserves, its economic power, its export power, and its technological power. And this has enabled, for the first time, countries outside of the U.S. and European orbit – I think we’ve discussed this before – to create an alternative.
These meetings at the SCO that are going to be followed by the BRICS meetings in a week or so are all about spelling out exactly how they’re going to restructure this new economic order. And they’re powerful enough to do it this time.
It’s obvious that trade is going to be a key in this. The United States is trying to weaponize foreign trade by saying we can force you to follow our political directives, like isolating Russia and China and joining the U.S. Cold War against them by blocking off your access to the United States market. Well, that’s weaponizing it; it’s saying, we can cause chaos to you if you don’t follow our advice.
The alternative to this, as I think all of the speakers spelled out in Tianjin, was to trade among each other. If we don’t trade with the United States, we’ll give up the U.S. market. In fact, India has no choice but to give up the U.S. market if Trump’s tariffs are allowed to stand against India. They’ll trade with themselves.
That’s what’s become the underlying frame for discussing all of the economic and financial and related changes. It’s a civilizational fight to restructure the whole means of foreign trade and finance. It’s going to de-dollarize that.
President Putin pointed out how much more efficient China’s means of trading among themselves in their own domestic currency was than having Russia buy dollars to pay China, for China then to convert the dollars back into its own currency. All of this foreign exchange and the charges for it no longer have to be borne, quite apart from the fact that the United States has weaponized international finance by expelling Russia, China and other countries from SWIFT, the bank clearing operation.
Everything that Trump has done to isolate other countries financially, commercially, in trade, and militarily, has had just the opposite effect. It’s driven them together.
All that the SCO and BRICS countries and global majority had to do was: well, if we’re going to act together as a unit, how are we going to set the rules of trade, the rules of finance, so that it’s something that will be multilateral, a word that kept coming up, and fair? How do we de-dollarize so that the United States can’t grab our foreign exchange, as it grabbed Russia’s $300 billion, or gold, as the Bank of England grabbed Venezuela’s gold supply or others?
You’re having this global fracture spelled out in the way of saying, well, it’s not so much that we’re creating a new type of civilization. We’re picking up civilization, where it was interrupted by the United States Cold War that has transformed finance and trade, in violation of all of the United Nations principles that we were promised at the end of World War II would be subsidized and supported by the United States. That’s basically the framework that has occurred.
GLENN DIESEN: I just read that this morning China and Russia signed an agreement finally on the Power of Siberia 2 massive gas pipeline. Now, it is not gas from the gas fields in the Asian parts of Russia which is being exported. This is from the Yamal Peninsula in the Russian Arctic. And this is a massive amount of gas which will go to China.
This was previously intended to be exported to Europe through primarily the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 pipelines to Germany. As we know, these pipelines were destroyed. They initially tried to blame the Russians, but then they had to walk this back. Now they’re trying to blame the Ukrainians. But I think most people would assume that the US had something to do with this.
But this is just a huge, huge development because it really cements Russia’s pivot from Europe, which it has dreamed of since Gorbachev’s concept of a common European home, all the way to 2014. And then, in 2022, it began to abandon it completely.
But now, all of this gas, which was supposed to fuel all these European industries for decades to come, will now instead go to China.
I’m just wondering what future historians will say, because the Europeans are still celebrating that they liberated themselves from Russian gas. They don’t have any alternatives, except much, much more, many times more expensive American gas, which might not even be available in the future. It is amazing to see what is happening.
MICHAEL HUDSON: But anyway, there’s no really reversing this because it’s irreversible. Once you make a huge investment like this, you’re not going to say, oh, you know, we wanted at one point to be a European nation.
We thought of ourselves as European, but we’re not going to somehow tear down this pipeline and build a new one to Europe.
Putin has made it clear that the break with Europe and especially Germany is going to take many decades to be restored. Russia has come to terms with the fact that probably there’s not going to be a reopening of the Nord Stream pipeline to Europe. There could be, but it’s up to Europe. And Europe has really been locked into the U.S. orbit. It’s as if the whole effect of this [new] Cold War, the whole Trump strategy against Russia and China has been to lock Europe into dependence on the United States for liquefied natural gas and especially for one of the bases of its balance of payments, military arms sales.
Modi had complained that actually Trump had announced that he had brought pressure on India to buy more American arms. And he’d criticized India for buying Russian weapons. And I don’t think Modi came right out and said, well, our weapons work and your weapons don’t, as we’ve been watching the war in Ukraine unfold. He didn’t say anything, but it’s obvious the fact that the United States has lost India as a major purchaser of its very expensive aircraft and missiles and other military and industrial complex arms.
This is a blow to the United States, but it’s locked in Europe to American arms purchases. And the whole Trump tariff deals with Europe have just created such a surrender of the European economy to the United States, locking itself in, denying itself the choice of trading with the BRICS countries, that the Asian countries that are the most rapidly growing economies in the world. You’re having political revolution in Europe, saying, we’ve got to get rid of the ruling parties. We’ve got to have nationalist parties.
As you and I have discussed here before, it’s amazing that all of this is still occurring almost entirely on the right wing of the spectrum, not the left wing of the spectrum for nationalism. But at a certain point, Sahra Wagenknecht’s party in Germany and other parties in Britain are going to replace the neocon U.S. parties.
But as you said, the irreversible break has already occurred. There’s nothing really that can happen to Europe.
The whole identity and structure of how the world is going, most of the world is going to be following the rules decided by China, Russia, India, the BRICS, and the global majority. And they’re going to leave not only the United States isolated, but Europe isolated with it. And in view of the fact that, in the last few days, von der Leyen and Germany and the EU have announced their intent to supply missiles to Ukraine and attack Russia… This is just locking in the irreversibility of isolating Western Europe from the rest of Eurasia.
GLENN DIESEN: I want to ask about the treatment of India because it just seems to be so out of place.
Just for context, for me, the critical point was a decade ago. Indeed, I wrote a book a decade ago called Russia’s Geoeconomic Strategy for Greater Eurasia, because 2014 was such a pivotal year. That is, we saw the same time as the West backed this coup in Ukraine, which killed Russia’s hope for a common Europe.
This happened around the same time as the Chinese were launching their Belt and Road Initiative by land and sea, the same time that the Chinese were launching this Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the same time they were launching China 2025 to develop leadership in key technologies. So you saw the format for new technologies, industries, transportation corridors, banks, and different currencies all coming out at the same time in China as they [the west] toppled this government in Ukraine.
For me, it was just amazing because for the first time you had a country like China, which had both the capabilities and the preparedness to challenge the US-centric economic system. And this was the time to kill Russia’s dream of being able to integrate with the West. I mean it was… it was kind of extraordinary. If you wanted to sabotage yourself, this is kind of what you would do. And which is why I think the past decade was kind of predictable in many ways.
We’ve seen Russia and China kind of leading this Eurasian front in order to develop an alternative economic system. But India was always the wild card because they have a bit of a difficult relationship with China. And of course, they can – not always, but it’s possible that they can – be used by the United States. Indeed, whenever there are some tensions between China and India, there’s a little bit of excitement in the media, that now maybe they will fall in line and join the anti-China bloc.
But these kinds of threats against India, I just can’t understand. And it doesn’t appear that Washington’s walking it back. Only today I was watching Navarro make some speeches telling India: you’re not allowed to buy Russian energy or you shouldn’t buy Russian arms. And, you know, we like Modi, but this is unacceptable.
I’ve been on several Indian TV shows about politics. And they’re all just amazed. Some think it’s hilarious; others are angry. It’s just, they can’t believe this is real. Why should Washington dictate to India whom it can trade with? It seems absurd, but when you listen to people like Navarro, it’s like the most natural thing.
How do you explain this treatment of India? Because this could have been America’s best friend. It’s quite extraordinary.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, you use the word unacceptable, and that’s what’s so ironic. It shows that the United States didn’t have any accurate calculation of the costs and benefits of what it was doing.
Think of what the word unacceptable meant. (When the United States says, we won’t accept it.) George Bernard Shaw had a story that he was at a party, and some woman came up to him, who was, I think, a yogi. She returned from India and said to him very proudly, I accept the world. And George Bernard Shaw said to her, well, madame, you don’t really have a choice, do you? Well, that’s the situation with the United States. When it says it won’t accept the inevitable, this doesn’t have much effect on reality at all. It’s like King Canute trying to stop the ocean and stop the tides from coming in. It has no effect at all.
Most policymakers – in, I think, all of the statements from the beginning of NATO’s war in Ukraine to this week or even today – say that Trump’s strength and his power over the other countries that’s enabled him to announce his Liberation Day tariffs is that other countries need the American market because the disruption is going to be so great that the alternative to joining as allies with the United States is chaos.
Well, obviously, in Beijing and Moscow and now New Delhi, they’ve decided: it turns out that our ability to accept a disruption in trade is much better than America’s and Europe’s ability to accept it. That it’s not that hard to replace the American market for these countries.
China has already shifted its soybean demand away from the United States 100% to Brazil. The result is that soybean prices are now collapsing in the United States. The agricultural sector, which has been a key political sector in the United States ever since the 1930s, is really suffering as a result of the losing the Chinese market and now other countries that are allied with the BRICS.
China, Russia, India, and other countries of the global majority are able to restructure trade among themselves. There’s obviously going to be a short-term cost. There are going to be layoffs. I’m sure that there are many textile companies in India that all of a sudden have had to stop. It may be that today’s ruling by the Supreme Court that Trump’s tariffs are illegal may give hope that, gee, maybe these tariffs will have to be canceled. That’s not going to have any effect at all because you have both the Republicans and the Democrats in Congress completely supporting what Trump is doing. They’ve supported the war against China.
So this is not going to lead other countries to say, now we can open our factories again and begin exporting to the U.S. because it’ll all be over once there’s a vote in Congress. Does Congress support America’s war against China? They all do. Certainly, the politicians support it.
The American public doesn’t. The polls that are taken show the public wants the same things that President Xi wants and that President Putin wants. They want peace, they want normal trade and prosperity. That’s not what the senators and representatives in Congress of the U.S. want. They want the Cold War, they want poverty, they want inflation, they want a declining dollar. It’s the politicians that are destroying the economy, not either the voters or the business community that’s going to be losing from all this.
That’s what’s so amazing in all of this, that the United States is not really acting in its own self-interest. And, apparently, it’s because the CIA and the National Security Council and the Council of Economic Advisors and all of the economists in the government have miscalculated the costs and benefits that are at stake in restructuring this world order.
They cannot acknowledge for ideological reasons why China and its allied countries are pulling ahead. They can’t acknowledge that a socialist market economy works better than a financialized belligerent economy that’s running a chronic balance of payments deficit and a government debt as a result of its Cold War. They can’t acknowledge that.
GLENN DIESEN: Well, a lot of the deals which are being made, are primarily economic.
I keep making the point that India wouldn’t want to join anything that would be seen as a group against America because their main idea is they want to be able to diversify their ties and trade with everyone. So it’s not a grouping against America, but it’s a grouping protecting themselves from America. That is, if Washington weren’t going against India, India would be much more cautious.
But now, what can they really do? I don’t think they would have ever subordinated themselves or capitulated to the demands of Washington. But even if they would, what would have been the rewards? We’ve seen the Europeans do it. They signed any deal Trump put in front of them. Even though the EU said it was a horrible trade deal, they signed it nonetheless.
They sat like good schoolboys in front of his desk. They did everything that was asked, hoping that obedience would be rewarded, but it wasn’t. All they did was cut themselves off from Russia, China, Iran, and now possibly India in the future, too. And it’s not actually rewarded. It just makes them more dependent on the U.S., which then weakens their hand even more.
So, you know, it would be a kind of foolish assumption to believe that the Indians will go down the same path.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, neither President Xi nor President Putin in their speeches made any reference to the United States at all. There was no reference. They’re not expressly describing what they’re doing as opposing the United States in Europe. They’re simply ignoring it. They’re supporting each other.
What they’re talking about is: let’s revive the principles that underlay the United Nations: multipolarity, treatment of equals, and no interference in other countries’ affairs. Let’s decide what is an ideal world order that we can all join as part of a win-win situation and not permit any of our member countries to weaponize foreign trade, to weaponize international finance, and to settle our differences on the battlefield instead of by negotiation. They’ve simply ignored the United States.
So it’s not that India or any other country that’s joining it is aligning itself against the United States. They’re saying we’re following the basic principles that we think are the principles of civilization itself. And these principles of civilization that have not only been written into United Nations law, but the whole Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 of equality among nations, non-interference with other countries, internal affairs, no regime change or covert assassinations of heads of state, none of this.
All they’re talking about is what a wonderful world we’re trying to create. And if other countries don’t want to join it – obviously, the United States and Europe won’t want to join it – they’re just part of another world. They’re outside of civilization, outside of the rule of law. And again and again, President Xi and President Putin talked about an international law binding all against the U.S. rules-based order. They use that fairly often. And these rules that sort of capped the United States efforts in all this.
You can just see what the United States has become a model of what the global majority is going to avoid. This global confrontation: Trump’s demand that European companies, Japanese and Korean companies, relocate their automobiles and computers and other major industries to the United States, or they permit U.S. companies to control their leading emerging technologies without having to declare taxable income, without having to pay taxes, such as even the European countries were trying to prevent American companies from doing. The United States foreign policy is based on how we can cause chaos in other countries and hurt their economies so that they’ll have to side with us.
Normally, if you’re going to injure and fight against another country, that’s not a way to get them to depend upon you unless you’re ruling by fear and by compulsion. And the whole framing of the future of the SCO and BRICS, as their speakers have announced, is going to be that it’s voluntary because people want mutual gain, not the zero-sum game that Donald Trump sees. U.S. relations will have to be bilateral, country by country, and America has to be the winner, other countries have to be the loser. He said that in his speeches and writings on the internet again and again and again.
So, in a way, Trump has spelled out exactly everything that Asia and the global majority want to avoid. And this helps them write up the rules that are going to prevent any country who’s a member of them from being able to do again [what the US does].
In that sense, maybe he should win the Nobel Prize. He’s accelerated and catalyzed this creation of a fair and ideal peaceful world. It just doesn’t apply to the United States and Europe.
GLENN DIESEN: Yeah, the same thought struck me, though, that there might be some peace prize, an unintentional one awarded for bringing together all these countries. For example, India and China, who have all these tensions, are now seeing the need to overcome some of these problems in order to create new economic alternatives.
What I find fascinating, though, is a lot of this could have been predicted. Indeed, it was predicted in good time. For example, in the scholarly work of people like John Ruggie, who wrote back in the 1980s how you would expect the international economic system to develop.
He was making the point back then that when there is a huge amount of economic power concentrated in the hegemon, such as the United States, it would have the ability to act as a benign hegemon because simply because it would be in its incentive to deliver a collective good for the international system, that is, to have the rest of the international system trusting its administrative control over the international economy.
So, the United States would be able to say, here is your access to key technologies and industries, which are reliable. You have access to transportation corridors under the US Navy’s control, which won’t be disrupted. You have access to the reserve currency, we can all trade with the dollar, your access to global finance, and all of this architecture is under US control. It’s an incentive for the US to keep this open and liberal so the rest of the world can access it. This kind of would be the foundation of an international economic system, which would be considered a benign hegemon. Other countries would trust it; they would be more or less comfortable under US leadership.
However, he also made the point then that when the hegemon is in decline, this would no longer work because then the hegemon would likely use its administrative control over the international economy to prevent the rise of rivals.
For example, China: the US cut off its access to technologies and industries. It stops Iranian access to transportation corridors and seizes its tankers. It confiscates gold, bans countries from accessing banks and currencies, and suddenly the whole economic system is weaponized and now trust is gone. This will only amplify the need for alternatives. This is where we now are.
The United States is apparently pursuing some tributary economy where others have to pay tribute or find a way of extracting industrial power or other wealth from other countries. It’s just very short-term and destructive, and so much trust is being lost. But what I want to get to is, a lot of these deals which are being signed now in China are economic in nature. It’s supposed to form a new international system. But what are the key principles and the way you see it in this system? Because it definitely will not be the rules-based international order, which is not international, not rules-based, and not orderly either.
So what are they actually going for?
MICHAEL HUDSON: I’d written what you just described up already in my book, Global Fracture, in 1978. And I think these rules have been spelled out.
You mentioned transport. Russia’s Prime Minister Lavrov has described recently in a speech just last month the need “to establish foreign trade mechanisms that the West will be unable to control, such as transport corridors, alternative payment systems, and supply chains.” As an example, he cited how the United States has paralyzed the World Trade Organization by refusing to permit a third judge so that there can’t be a three-judge panel for all of this.
The United States only has an ability to block other countries from taking moves. For instance, the U.S. veto single-handedly has blocked the United Nations from denouncing Israel. And you can just follow the results of the U.S. veto power. The United States will not join any organization in which it does not have veto power because it says, that’s letting other countries control our economy.
Well, no country is going to have that kind of veto power in the global majority countries. That turns out to have been the Achilles heel of the United Nations, the ability of the U.S. to block things… and simply corruption, the way that it’s corrupted the International Atomic Energy Agency by having Rafael Grossi turn over all of Iran’s atomic energy sites and scientists’ names to Israel to assassinate and to bomb. I mean, Lavrov mentioned a whole bunch of it.
As you just pointed out, the world is not to be governed any longer by the unilateral U.S. rules that are subject to desperation. The U.S. is acting in desperation, trying to stop everything. And President Putin described this already in 2022. He was laying the groundwork for what we’re seeing flowering today. He said Western countries have been saying for centuries that they’re bringing freedom and democracy to other nations, yet the unipolar world is inherently anti-democratic and unfree. It is false and hypocritical through and through.
Well, that’s about as direct a statement as you can have, and you can see how many people outside the United States have said, the last three years from 2022 to today have just borne that out. We’ve got to have an alternative. And that’s really the point.
This is the first time that they’ve been really pushed into spelling out just what the rules of an alternative are. They can’t simply say, we’re going to break from the United States and go it alone. They have to say, what are the rules by which we go it alone? How are we going to set rules to shape how we trade in a fair way with each other and how we finance this foreign trade?
China has announced that it’s going to set up a bank that will be able to extend credit to countries that are running deficits with China or paying for China’s investment in these countries to develop the Belt and Road Initiative and the Transportation Initiative that is going to enable them all to produce for each other’s markets instead of for the U.S. and European markets.
GLENN DIESEN: My last question is, this is a very different economic system. Of course, traditionally we only see liberal economic systems function under the British hegemon in the 19th century, and then the American hegemon in the 20th. That doesn’t mean that there haven’t been any alternatives. It’s not that long since the Industrial Revolution and the introduction of capitalism and all that. But in this multipolar system, what are the opportunities as well as the challenges of creating a stable economic system?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, what’s so ironic is that what China is doing in its socialist market economy is exactly what the classical economists outlined as the development strategy of industrial capitalism in Britain, France, Germany, and other countries in the early 19th century.
It has a mixed economy, which is exactly where the European economies said, we’re going to get rid of all of the monopolies that were created in the feudal Middle Ages to enable kings to raise the money to pay their creditors for the war debts that they took on to fight each other. We’re going to make these public entities so that instead of being monopolies, they can supply basic services, health, education, transportation, and communications, at a subsidized rate to lower the economy’s cost of doing business.
That’s what China’s doing, that it’s following the mixed economy. Where China has gone further than the classical economists of the 19th century went is that it’s really controlled finance as a public utility. The creation of money and credit is run by the People’s Bank of China, and it creates credit for purposes of direct tangible capital investment to increase production and to fund investment that will raise living standards, not to make money financially.
The whole structure that you’re going to see in the SCO, the BRICS countries, and the global majority is going to be to use banking and finance. Not to fund takeovers of property, not to essentially create credit (especially in real estate) and create real estate bubbles or stock market bubbles or run the economy as a Ponzi scheme. Not the creation of financial wealth in the hands of a narrowing financial sector at the very top of the economic pyramid, whose product is debt, getting the rest of the population into debt for itself and getting monopolies that extract interest, monopoly rent, and all the financial overhead that characterizes the West. But to actually use credit creation and the economic surplus to plow back into overall national production.
That’s the way that we’re really moving, into what are described now as the new rules of civilization, but they’re the very rules of civilization that followed naturally from the Industrial Revolution, from the question of how Britain (and European countries) are going to industrialize and make Britain the workshop of the world.
Well, we’re going to lower the cost of production, we’re going to get rid of the rent overhead, we’re going to get rid of the landed aristocracy and its demands for ground rent, we’re going to get rid of the monopolies and make them into public utilities. And we’re going to do what Germany and Central Europe were doing, we’re going to redesign banking so that it’s actually going to finance industry, not just finance war debts and predatory debt without regard for the economy’s ability to pay and to carry these debts.
GLENN DIESEN: I know that, on the face of it, it’s almost obligatory for anyone in the West that we should all interpret these developments as something negative, given that this represents a massive power shift from the West to the East. Of course, there’s something to be said about that.
On the other hand, it has to also be recognized that the system which these countries are seeking to decouple from seems to have reached the end of the line. That is, as you mentioned, our economies have become excessively financialized. They’re simply not that competitive anymore. The debt has grown to such crazy levels, it’s not sustainable. Trust in this economic system is faltering.
The amount of economic inequality has built up, it’s given rise to an oligarchy, which is being very destructive, not just for society, but also for politics, for democracy to function. And as you suggested as well, the addiction to the forever wars. It’s reaching the end of the line, it seems.
So at this point in time, it’s strange to me that we have this almost instinctive hostility towards these alternatives emerging. But again, the alternative to what is being done in places such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is not to go back to the 1990s or the 1950s. This is already exhausted. It’s gone. I’m a bit confused by this hostility. I saw the German media, the Bild wrote this morning that this was the summit of tyranny or the villains, you know, of rogue nations. It’s just a very strange way of framing these massive historical developments taking place now in the present time.
MICHAEL HUDSON: It’s a class war against socialism, it’s a class war against labor, it’s a Thatcherite/Reaganomics demand for privatization.
Just in the last hour that we’ve been talking, Glenn, the US stock market is down. The Treasury bond prices are falling as long-term interest rates are rising. Gold prices have just gone over $3500 an ounce, 100 times their 1971 price.
You’re seeing the fact that what the West calls democracy is an oligarchy. What it’s attacking as autocracy is a society such as China that aims at raising living standards and preventing the kind of economic polarization between the financial class and the rest of the economy, the indebted economy at large that you’re having in the West.
The West for the last century has been following an anti-classical reaction, a fight against the whole ideals of classical economics and of a mixed economy, to essentially fight against government control. It’s a fight by the rentier interests, a fight by the banks backing the landlord class and the monopoly class against all of the reforms that you saw flowering in the 19th century before World War I. All this counter-revolution has now ended up tying the United States and Europe in a knot and blocking its development.
It’s the rest of the countries that are picking up the development and the trajectory that civilization was going in on the eve of World War I before this whole last century as a long detour of U.S. and European dominance under an increasingly unfair, polarized financial oligarchy. That’s the big picture in my view.
GLENN DIESEN: There’s a lot of depth to what’s happening now. I just wish it deserved some proper discourse in the West. I think it’s just depressing to me that the only way they can refer to what’s happening in China now is a summit of dictators who hate the West and hate freedom and democracy. It’s very intellectually bankrupt, but there we are. Anyway, Michael Hudson, thank you so much for your time, and I hope you can come back on soon.
MICHAEL HUDSON: I love these discussions. They’re the big picture. Thank you for having me.
Lateo.net - Flux RSS en pagaille (pour en ajouter : @ moi) 