UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has noteworthy humanitarian credentials that are not
in dispute. In addition, through his years of UN leadership, he has not been
seen as overly ideological. However, his ideology does come through in many of
his speeches and policy positions. Guterres was formerly the Prime Minister of
Portugal and before he became UN leader was the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees, where he oversaw the management of Syrian War refugees. He was
also Secretary General of the Spanish Socialist Party and President of the
Socialist International, a global association of political parties that seeks
to establish democratic socialism, for six years. Even with his far-left-wing
credentials, he was elected to a second term as UN Secretary-General.
In 2021 Aaron Rhodes
argued that Guterres, while not overly radical as Prime Minister, has been more
ideological than his predecessors at the UN, Ban Ki Moon, and Kofi Annan, both diplomats. During
the pandemic, he was accused of promoting global-scale economic redistribution.
He unfairly criticized free markets and privatized health care as inadequate. He
did little to help the UN’s already tainted reputation for its biases and much
to promote it, one might argue. His seeming disdain for fossil fuel companies
in his speeches and statements about climate change are consistent with an
anti-business approach. Zachary Faria argued in 2020 in the Washington Examiner
that the UN had become irrelevant and counterproductive, noting that it was “at
odds with the values of freedom-loving countries for some time now, pandering
not only to the Chinese Communist Party but also to Russia’s Vladimir Putin and
terrorist regimes such as Iran.” That is a fair argument. Faria goes too
far in suggesting that the U.S. should lower its contributions to the UN as it
is still a vital global organization. Anti-Israel bias has long been noted at
the UN and the presence and participation of nefarious countries with poor human
rights records being overly tolerated and encouraged. The International
Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, the UN Human Rights Council,
and some of the other UN bodies have been strongly criticized as biased as
well.
I was aghast when
I heard Guterres was going to attend the latest BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia
alongside Putin, Xi, Modi, Erdogan, Ramaphosa, Lula (he attended via video because
of an injury), and the others. Putin railed on about de-dollarization and other
ways for Russia to evade and weaken sanctions as he continued his anti-Western
agenda for the group. Perhaps Guterres did help somewhat by saying that Russia
was in violation of the U.N. Charter by invading Ukraine. We are all well aware
of that and it does little to change anything except keep more of the members
and prospective members from openly siding with the Kremlin. I agree with Zelensky
that his attendance at the summit was a slap in the face to Ukraine and a way
of legitimizing Russia’s goals. RBC Ukraine reports: “According to Ukraine's
Permanent Representative to the UN, Serhiy Kyslytsia, Guterres' meeting with
Putin undermined the UN's position on supporting the International Criminal
Court (ICC).”
Even though all BRICS members do not support Russia’s goals, they are certainly more willing to entertain them, and China and India are also willing to profit off of Russian sanctions and in the case of India avoid taking a position by citing their neutrality policy.
Like it or not,
economic sanctions are a means of soft warfare. They can be partially bypassed
and evaded in various ways which contribute to black market economies and open
up new ones. Cheating the system becomes more of a necessity. Without the
ability to apply these sanctions, the alternatives become more militaristic. Our
economic leverage is what little we have to beat back a war of aggression.
Putin’s notion of an alternative economic system with a non-dollar currency may
have some appeal to others in BRICS but that is not likely to manifest anytime
soon. Putin wants a new non-Western world order to counter what he sees as a
system rigged against him. Indeed, it is rigged against him simply because he
has broken just about every rule and norm, by invading countries, killing dissidents,
curbing free speech and human rights, committing war crimes, torture, massive
amounts of global criminal activity, and so much more. The system was designed to
prevent cheaters, and he cheats at everything. However, BRICS members, including sanctions beneficiaries China and India, had a much different take on G7 sanctions that
they put out in a statement:
"We are deeply concerned about the disruptive effect
of unlawful unilateral coercive measures, including illegal sanctions, on the
world economy, international trade, and the achievement of the sustainable
development goals."
It was interesting perhaps that the statement brought up the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs), suggesting that sanctioning Russia was somehow disrupting them. In some ways, such as making emissions rise due to abandoning Russian pipelined gas and oil, it is disrupting them, but in others not so much, Guterres was
quoted by Russian media: “I believe that all summits that bring countries
together are very important, as they address global issues in the world.” I wonder if he would feel the same if it were a
summit of just Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. Oddly, or perhaps not
oddly at all, socialist policy positions about matters pertaining to Russia tend
to align with Kremlin positions much better than non-socialist policy
positions. After the beginning of the Ukraine invasion socialist groups around
the world, including the Democratic Socialists of America proclaimed solidarity
with Putin and the Kremlin’s position that NATO expansionism necessitated the
invasion of Ukraine. Is Guterres a socialist in some kind of limited ideological
solidarity with China (a neo-communist, neo-totalitarian state) and Russia (a former
communist state that is now an authoritarian neo-totalitarian state)?
The summit put out a statement about the need for an
alternative financial system, no doubt at the behest of Russia and Iran in particular:
"We underscore the need to reform the current
international financial architecture to meet the global financial challenges
including global economic governance to make the international financial
architecture more inclusive and just."
In this case, I
would interpret ‘inclusive and just’ to mean without sanctions against Russia
and Iran. The group also put out a statement specifically condemning Israeli
actions in the Middle East in Gaza and Lebanon, without mentioning Hamas,
Hezbollah, or Iran. That was also surprising to me. My guess is that Turkiye
and Iran were most in favor of such a statement. South Africa has also been
vocal at the UN in condemning Israeli actions. In the Israeli case, the
statement called for an immediate ceasing of Israeli hostilities. In the case
of Ukraine, the statement was notably less specific and more neutral, calling
on both parties to adhere to the UN Charter. I am not sure how BRICS statements
get approved, but it is not looking good that the more democratic members of
the club like Brazil, South Africa, and India will be able to rein in the
extremist goals of Russia, Iran, and in some cases China. Meanwhile, Putin and company are looking forward to expanding the club with 30 countries currently
hoping to join.
Russia now has
strong reciprocal military partnerships with pariah countries Iran and North
Korea. It has economic and sanctions evasion partnerships with Iran, Venezuela,
China, India, and Greek and UAE shipping companies. I just read a story today about an Indian company in Mumbai exporting sanctioned Nvidia AI chips to Russia. It has been especially difficult to keep such 'dual-use' technology out of Russia. India and China are the biggest facilitators. Russia and China are developing what may well
become one of the largest economic cooperation groups in the world with BRICS. I
don’t want to live in a world where countries that break common sense
international rules, invade countries and cheat in many endeavors are running
the world’s premier economic and trade systems. I want a world that is free and
fair, not one where human rights and free speech are unprotected and one where criminality
and corruption pervade everything, and you should too.
References:
Antonio
Guterres Gets Another UN Term to Promote Socialism. Aaron Rhodes. Real Clear
Markets. June 23, 2021. Antonio
Guterres Gets Another UN Term to Promote Socialism | RealClearMarkets
UN
boss thinks socialism will fix the world’s problems. He’s wrong. Zachary Faria.
Washington Examiner. UN
boss thinks socialism will fix the world’s problems. He’s wrong - Washington
Examiner
Guterres
praises BRICS summit in Russia, captivated by Kazan Kremlin. Vladyslava
Kovalenko. RBC Ukraine. October 27, 2024. Guterres
praises BRICS summit in Russia, captivated by Kazan Kremlin
BRICS
summit: Key takeaways from the Kazan declaration. Reuters. October 24, 2024. BRICS
summit: Key takeaways from the Kazan declaration | Reuters
What
happened at the BRICS summit? Reuters. October 24, 2024. What
happened at the BRICS summit? | Reuters
How a
Mumbai Drugmaker Is Helping Putin Get Nvidia AI Chips. Andy Lin (News), Shruti
Srivastava, Advait Palepu and Viktoria Dendrinou. Bloomberg, October 7, 2024. How
a Mumbai Drugmaker Is Helping Putin Get Nvidia AI Chips
No comments:
Post a Comment