Category Archives: FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

United Nations International Year of Dialogue as a Guarantee of Peace, 2023 

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

On 27 January 2023, the official launch ceremony of 2023 as the International Year of Dialogue as a Guarantee of Peace took place at the Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan in Ashgabat. This official ceremony brought together over 200 representatives from the UN Member States, UN sister agencies including the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Regional Office for Central Asia, relevant international and regional organizations, and civil society in person and online.

The year 2023 was declared as the International Year of Dialogue as a Guarantee of Peace, according to the resolution 77/32 of the United Nations General Assembly at the initiative of Turkmenistan.

This resolution was adopted by consensus and was co-sponsored by 68 member countries of the Organization, including all countries of Central Asia.

Turkmenistan underlines that the initiative directly correlates with the António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General’s “New Agenda for Peace”, which includes reducing global strategic risks, investing in conflict prevention and peacemaking, and supporting regional preventive measures.

Question for this article:

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

Vepa Hajiyev, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan in his opening remarks noted: “Today we are starting a joint results-oriented work to create conditions for improving and developing international relations, restore trust in the world politics, and establish a respectful dialogue. Currently, these principles and goals are particularly relevant against the background of the existing systemic problems of international relations. In this context, we see a common task in turning the International Year of Dialogue as a Guarantee of Peace into a powerful constructive process designed to provide an incentive for dialogue, cooperation, and mutual understanding”.

Ashita Mittal, UNODC Regional Representative for Central Asia in her speech emphasized: “While the World, and the region, in particular face the triple crisis of conflicts, climate change and COVID, magnifying the impact of the world drug problem, organized crime and terrorism, and deepening vulnerabilities and desperation, we in Central Asia need to join our efforts to strengthen peace, stability, and security in the region, especially through negotiations and dialogue.”

During the event, UN sister agencies, national and international participants presented their initiatives and proposals to observe the International Year of Dialogue as a Guarantee of Peace, shared information on activities aimed at implementation of the International Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace.

“The promotion of the international partnership, which is the basis of the UN Charter and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, is fundamental in preserving peace and security, supporting, developing and ensuring human rights. That’s why the adopted Resolution of the UN General Assembly, which calls for the development of dialogue as a valuable tool for resolving and preventing conflicts, alleviating tensions and settling disputes, is of particular value to us,”- highlighted Dmitry Shlapacheko, UN Resident Coordinator in Turkmenistan in his speech.

Following the official launch ceremony, the high-level participants adopted a Roadmap for the International Year of Dialogue as a Guarantee of Peace.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global, United Nations,

Chinese proposal of principles for a peace settlement of the Ukraine War and reactions around the world

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

A press release from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Peoples Republic of China

(Editor’s note: Here is the proposal of principles for a peace settlement of the Ukraine War as published by the Chinese government, presented by the Chinese President Xi to Russian President Putin during his recent visit, and scheduled to be presented virtually by him to Ukraine President Zelensky. While it lists the principles needed, it does not consider whether Russia must give back some of the territories it has seized during the war.)

China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis
2023-02-24 09:00

1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries. Universally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, must be strictly observed. The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld. All countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community. All parties should jointly uphold the basic norms governing international relations and defend international fairness and justice. Equal and uniform application of international law should be promoted, while double standards must be rejected. 

2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs. The legitimate security interests and concerns of all countries must be taken seriously and addressed properly. There is no simple solution to a complex issue. All parties should, following the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security and bearing in mind the long-term peace and stability of the world, help forge a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture. All parties should oppose the pursuit of one’s own security at the cost of others’ security, prevent bloc confrontation, and work together for peace and stability on the Eurasian Continent.

3. Ceasing hostilities. Conflict and war benefit no one. All parties must stay rational and exercise restraint, avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions, and prevent the crisis from deteriorating further or even spiraling out of control. All parties should support Russia and Ukraine in working in the same direction and resuming direct dialogue as quickly as possible, so as to gradually deescalate the situation and ultimately reach a comprehensive ceasefire. 

4. Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis. All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported. The international community should stay committed to the right approach of promoting talks for peace, help parties to the conflict open the door to a political settlement as soon as possible, and create conditions and platforms for the resumption of negotiation. China will continue to play a constructive role in this regard. 

5. Resolving the humanitarian crisis. All measures conducive to easing the humanitarian crisis must be encouraged and supported. Humanitarian operations should follow the principles of neutrality and impartiality, and humanitarian issues should not be politicized. The safety of civilians must be effectively protected, and humanitarian corridors should be set up for the evacuation of civilians from conflict zones. Efforts are needed to increase humanitarian assistance to relevant areas, improve humanitarian conditions, and provide rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access, with a view to preventing a humanitarian crisis on a larger scale. The UN should be supported in playing a coordinating role in channeling humanitarian aid to conflict zones.

6. Protecting civilians and prisoners of war (POWs). Parties to the conflict should strictly abide by international humanitarian law, avoid attacking civilians or civilian facilities, protect women, children and other victims of the conflict, and respect the basic rights of POWs. China supports the exchange of POWs between Russia and Ukraine, and calls on all parties to create more favorable conditions for this purpose.

7. Keeping nuclear power plants safe. China opposes armed attacks against nuclear power plants or other peaceful nuclear facilities, and calls on all parties to comply with international law including the Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS) and resolutely avoid man-made nuclear accidents. China supports the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in playing a constructive role in promoting the safety and security of peaceful nuclear facilities.

8. Reducing strategic risks. Nuclear weapons must not be used and nuclear wars must not be fought. The threat or use of nuclear weapons should be opposed. Nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided. China opposes the research, development and use of chemical and biological weapons by any country under any circumstances.

9. Facilitating grain exports. All parties need to implement the Black Sea Grain Initiative signed by Russia, Türkiye, Ukraine and the UN fully and effectively in a balanced manner, and support the UN in playing an important role in this regard. The cooperation initiative on global food security proposed by China provides a feasible solution to the global food crisis.

10. Stopping unilateral sanctions. Unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure cannot solve the issue; they only create new problems. China opposes unilateral sanctions unauthorized by the UN Security Council. Relevant countries should stop abusing unilateral sanctions and “long-arm jurisdiction” against other countries, so as to do their share in deescalating the Ukraine crisis and create conditions for developing countries to grow their economies and better the lives of their people.

11. Keeping industrial and supply chains stable. All parties should earnestly maintain the existing world economic system and oppose using the world economy as a tool or weapon for political purposes. Joint efforts are needed to mitigate the spillovers of the crisis and prevent it from disrupting international cooperation in energy, finance, food trade and transportation and undermining the global economic recovery.

12. Promoting post-conflict reconstruction. The international community needs to take measures to support post-conflict reconstruction in conflict zones. China stands ready to provide assistance and play a constructive role in this endeavor.

Questions related to this article:
 
Can the peace movement help stop the war in the Ukraine?

Does China promote a culture of peace?

Reactions around the world

As expected and widely reported, the Chinese proposal was welcomed by Russia and Belarus and rejected by the United States and its NATO allies.

But what about the rest of the world.

The proposal was officially welcomed and supported by President Orban of Hungary and by the Minister of International Relations of South Africa. The support by Hungary was reported as headline news in Cuba and Niger. The South African support was echoed in columns published by the South African news sites Business Live and SABC news.

Writing from Brazzaville, Congo, the journal Adiac reported the remarks of the Chinese ambassador to that country by headlining “China offers ways out of the crisis in Ukraine.”

Many media around the world criticised the fact that the Chinese proposal failed to demand the return of regions seized by Russia, including Arab News published in Saudi Arabia, Jornada of Mexico and Utusan Malaya .

On the other hand, the Mexican commentator Javier Jiménez Olmos welcomed the proposal, saying that the return of regions seized by Russia is implied by the proposal’s recognition of Ukrainian sovereignty and its territorial integrity.

Other media simply said that the plan has no chance of success unless the Americans and NATO change their opposition, for example the Emirates Center for Policies and commentator Jamil Matar from Egypt.

In this regard, the editorial of the Business Standard of Bangladesh said that the American refusal shows that “America is losing influence and prestige globally” and Ahmed Al-Hiyari, writing from Jordan, said, All the items that China put forward in its paper have already been adopted by the Americans and Europeans through their positions towards the war in Ukraine, whether it is respect for the sovereignty of all countries and that all countries are equal, regardless of their size, strength or wealth, or abandoning the imposition of unilateral sanctions and renouncing the Cold War mentality, and stopping Fighting and conflict. . . . Nevertheless, the Americans and Europeans hastened to say that it did not amount to a plan, and at another time by questioning it. . . .The red line is that China is forbidden to succeed in Ukraine.

The Libyan media Tawasul headlined the remarks by the deputy spokesman for the United Nations Secretary-General, Farhan Haq, who said: “It is too early for the international organization to evaluate the Chinese peace proposal to end the war in Ukraine. We will need more details on the proposal in the first place.”

Some voices were more critical of the Chinese proposal.

Writing from India, Ranjit Kumar of the Navbgarat Times said that “The 12-point proposal put forward by China is heavily tilted in favor of Russia. . . Ukraine cannot accept China’s peace offer because the Russian army’s advance will turn into the Russia-Ukraine border if the ceasefire comes into force.

And writing from Indonesia, the news agency Inilah quotes the India-based EurAsian Times that the Chinese plan contradicts their own policy towards Taiwan, since the Chinese do not respect their sovereignty and have imposed sanctions against them.

East Asia, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global,

Mexico: 175 organizations and groups convene a National Peace Conference

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from Artículo 9 (Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 2.5)

Mexico City March 15, 2023.- Counteracting the different types of violence that the country is experiencing, 175 organizations and groups are convening a National Peace Conference. We believe that fighting against the causes of violence is a shared responsibility: as long as it continues to be believed that it should only be the task of the government, there will be no peace. It is urgent to stop the violence, all of it, at all levels of our lives.

We see with concern that, despite all the attacks that accumulate day by day, we do not yet have a national consensus to build a culture of peace from all possible fronts. Instead, we observe that the various forms of violence are being used more and more to deepen the differences that are separating us. If we do nothing, the year 2024 could be even worse.

That is why we have decided to convene a National Peace Conference, bringing together all the voices and all the groups that have experienced violence firsthand, as well as those of us who have dedicated a fundamental part of our lives to building a culture of peace.

We want to talk to each other, listen to each other, understand each other, support each other. We want to imagine and build all possible safeguards to face violence and find all the paths to peace.

(Click here for the original article in Spanish.)

Questions related to this article:

Is there progress towards a culture of peace in Mexico?

The Conference will take place at the Museum of Memory and Tolerance in Mexico City on March 22, 23 and 24, from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

We will listen to and share the proposals of people and groups that have experienced violence and those who are threatened by different forms of violence. The first day we will talk about femicides, forced disappearance, violence against girls, boys and adolescents, indigenous peoples, day laborers, migrants and defenders of the territory. The second day, of the groups that live under different modalities of threat, such as journalists, patients without medication, the LGTBQ+ community, academics and students, sex workers, domestic workers, delivery men, as well as people in social reintegration, homeless and consumers. of drugs. During the third day we will listen to the organizations that have worked in defense of these groups and in the construction of peace.

The Peace Conference will also be broadcast on March 22, 23 and 24 from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. live on Facebook Live at @NosotrxsMX and on YouTube at Nosotrxs Movimiento.

More information and list of convening organizations here

We would love for you to join the number of convening organizations! If you are interested in joining your organization, please fill out the following form.

Promoting Organizations

Acción Ciudadana Frente a la Pobreza 
Artículo 19
EDUCA-Oaxaca
Fondo Semillas
Fundación Friedrich Ebert
IBERO- Ciudad de México
Incide Social
MUCD
Nosotrxs
RENACE San Luis Potosí
Revista Proceso
Red VIRAL
World Justice Project

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, Latin America

The Global South refuses pressure to side with the West on Russia

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by  by Vijay Prashad in Peoples Dispatch

Europe and the US ignore Africa, Latin America, and Asia’s calls to find a solution that ends the war in Ukraine—and, as Namibia’s prime minister put it, redirect funds spent on weapons toward solving global issues.


Francia Márquez Vice President, Republic of Colombia speaking at the Munich Security Conference next to Namibia’s Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila, Enrique Manalo (Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Republic of the Philippines) and Mauro Luiz Iecker Vieira (Minister of Foreign Affairs, Federative Republic of Brazil). Photo: MSC/Baier

At the G20 meeting in Bengaluru, India, the United States arrived with a simple brief. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said at the February 2023 summit that the G20 countries must condemn Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and they must adhere to US sanctions against Russia. However, it became clear that India, the chair of the G20, was not willing to conform to the US agenda. Indian officials said that the G20 is not a political meeting, but a meeting to discuss economic issues. They contested the use of the word “war” to describe the invasion, preferring to describe it as a “crisis” and a “challenge.” France  and Germany  have rejected this draft if it does not condemn Russia.

At the G20 meeting in Bengaluru, India, the United States arrived with a simple brief. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said at the February 2023 summit that the G20 countries must condemn Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and they must adhere to US sanctions against Russia. However, it became clear that India, the chair of the G20, was not willing to conform to the US agenda. Indian officials said that the G20 is not a political meeting, but a meeting to discuss economic issues. They contested the use of the word “war” to describe the invasion, preferring to describe it as a “crisis” and a “challenge.” France and Germany have rejected this draft if it does not condemn Russia.

Just as in Indonesia during the previous year’s summit, the 2023 G20 leaders are once again ignoring the pressure from the West to isolate Russia, with the large developing countries (Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa) unwilling to budge from their practical view that isolation of Russia is endangering the world.

The next two G20 summits will be in Brazil (2024) and South Africa (2025), which would indicate to the West that the platform of the G20 will not be easily subordinated to the Western view of world affairs.

Most of the leaders of the G20 countries went to Bengaluru straight from Germany, where they had attended the Munich Security Conference. On the first day of the Munich conference, France’s President Emmanuel Macron said  that he was “shocked by how much credibility we are losing in the Global South.” The “we” in Macron’s statement was the Western states, led by the United States.

What is the evidence for this loss of credibility? Few of the states in the Global South have been willing to participate in the isolation of Russia, including voting  on Western resolutions in the United Nations General Assembly. Not all of the states that have refused to join the West are “anti-Western” in a political sense. Many of them—including the government in India—are driven by practical considerations, such as Russia’s discounted energy prices and the assets being sold at a lowered price by Western companies that are departing from Russia’s lucrative energy sector. Whether they are fed up with being pushed around by the West or they see economic opportunities in their relationship with Russia, increasingly, countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America have avoided the pressure coming from Washington to break ties with Russia. It is this refusal and avoidance that drove Macron to make his strong statement about being “shocked” by the loss of Western credibility.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Question related to this article:
 
Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

At a panel discussion  on February 18 at the Munich Security Conference, three leaders from Africa and Asia developed the argument about why they are unhappy with the war in Ukraine and the pressure campaign upon them to break ties with Russia. Brazil’s Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira—who later that day condemned  the Russian invasion of Ukraine in a tweet — called  upon the various parties to the conflict to “build the possibility of a solution. We cannot keep on talking only of war.”

Billions of dollars of arms have been sent by the Western states to Ukraine to prolong a war that needs to be ended before it escalates out of control. The West has blocked  negotiations ever since the possibility of an interim deal between Russia and Ukraine arose in March 2022. The talk of an endless war by Western politicians and the arming of Ukraine have resulted in Russia’s February 21, 2023, withdrawal from the New START treaty, which—with the unilateral withdrawal of the US from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 and the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty in 2019—ends the nuclear weapons control regime.

Vieira’s comment about the need to “build the possibility of a solution” is one that is shared across the developing countries, who do not see the endless war as beneficial to the planet. As Colombia’s Vice President Francia Márquez said  on the same panel, “We don’t want to go on discussing who will be the winner or the loser of a war. We are all losers, and, in the end, it is humankind that loses everything.”

The most powerful statement in Munich was made by Namibia’s Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila. “We are promoting a peaceful resolution of that conflict” in Ukraine, she said, “so that the entire world and all the resources of the world can be focused on improving the conditions of people around the world instead of being spent on acquiring weapons, killing people, and actually creating hostilities.” When asked why Namibia abstained at the United Nations on the vote regarding the war, Kuugongelwa-Amadhila said, “Our focus is on resolving the problem… not on shifting blame.” The money used to buy weapons, she said, “could be better utilized to promote development in Ukraine, in Africa, in Asia, in other places, in Europe itself, where many people are experiencing hardships.” A Chinese plan for peace in Ukraine—built on the principles of the 1955 Bandung Conference—absorbs the points raised by these Global South leaders.

European leaders have been tone-deaf to the arguments being made by people such as Kuugongelwa-Amadhila. The European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell had earlier shot himself in the foot with his ugly remarks  in October 2022 that “Europe is a garden. The rest of the world is a jungle. And the jungle could invade the garden… Europeans have to be much more engaged with the rest of the world. Otherwise, the rest of the world will invade us.” In the February 2023 Munich Security Conference, Borrell—who is originally from Spain — said  that he shared “this feeling” of Macron’s that the West had to “preserve or even to rebuild trustful cooperation with many of the so-called Global South.” The countries of the South, Borrell said, are “accusing us of [a] double standard” when it comes to combating imperialism, a position that “we must debunk.”

A series of reports published by leading Western financial houses repeat the anxiety of people such as Borrell. BlackRock notes  that we are entering “a fragmented world with competing blocs,” while Credit Suisse points  to the “deep and persistent fractures” that have opened up in the world order. Credit Suisse’s assessment of these “fractures” describes them accurately: “The global West (Western developed countries and allies) has drifted away from the global East (China, Russia, and allies) in terms of core strategic interests, while the Global South (Brazil, Russia, India, and China and most developing countries) is reorganizing to pursue its own interests.”

This reorganization is now manifesting itself in the refusal by the Global South to bend the knee to Washington.

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor, and journalist. He is a writing fellow and chief correspondent at Globetrotter. He is an editor of LeftWord Books and the director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He is a senior non-resident fellow at Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China. He has written more than 20 books, including The Darker Nations and The Poorer Nations. His latest books are Struggle Makes Us Human: Learning from Movements for Socialism and (with Noam Chomsky) The Withdrawal: Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and the Fragility of US Power.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global

United Nation General Assembly divides over Ukraine resolution and Belarus amendment

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Analysis by CPNN

The United States and its allies claimed victory at the United Nations with the vote on a resolution condemning the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. The final vote was 141 for, 7 against and 32 abstentions.

But a thorough analysis suggests that the victory was not so one-sided. If one considers the votes on the Belarus amendment to condemn arms shipments to the Ukraine, the General Assembly was divided with more than half (101 countries) failing to follow the American line regarding the vote on this amendment.

Of the 91 votes that defeated the Belarus amendment, 45 were cast by Europe and the US/Canada while 46 by all the rest of the world.


Voting on Belarus resolution condemning arms shipments to Ukraine

Here are the operative paragraphs of the two resolutions and the voting details.

Principles of the Charter of the United Nations underlying a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine Draft resolution A/ES-11/L.7

1. Underscores the need to reach, as soon as possible, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine in line with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

2. Welcomes and expresses strong support for the efforts of the SecretaryGeneral and Member States to promote a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine, consistent with the Charter, including the principles of sovereign equality and territorial integrity of States;

3. Calls upon Member States and international organizations to redouble support for diplomatic efforts to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine, consistent with the Charter;

4. Reaffirms its commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, extending to its territorial waters;

5. Reiterates its demand that the Russian Federation immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, and calls for a cessation of hostilities;

6. Demands that the treatment by the parties to the armed conflict of all prisoners of war be in accordance with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949 2 and Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, 3 and calls for the complete exchange of prisoners of war, the release of all unlawfully detained persons and the return of all internees and of civilians forcibly transferred and deported, including children;

7. Calls for full adherence by the parties to the armed conflict to their obligations under international humanitarian law to take constant care to spare the civilian population and civilian objects, to ensure safe and unhindered humanitarian access to those in need, and to refrain from attacking, destroying, removing or rendering useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population;

8. Also calls for an immediate cessation of the attacks on the critical infrastructure of Ukraine and any deliberate attacks on civilian objects, including those that are residences, schools and hospitals;

9. Emphasizes the need to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law committed on the territory of Ukraine through appropriate, fair and independent investigations and prosecutions at the national or international level, and ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes;

10. Urges all Member States to cooperate in the spirit of solidarity to address the global impacts of the war on food security, energy, finance, the environment and nuclear security and safety, underscores that arrangements for a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine should take into account these factors, and calls upon Member States to support the Secretary-General in his efforts to address these impacts;

11. Decides to adjourn the eleventh emergency special session of the General Assembly temporarily and to authorize the President of the General Assembly to resume its meetings upon request from Member States.

Belarus: A/ES-11/L.9 – amendment to draft resolution A/ES-11/L.7

1 ; After the eighth preambular paragraph, insert a new preambular paragraph reading: Noting with concern the continuing supply of weapons by third parties to the zone of conflict that obstructs the prospects for sustainable peace,

2. After operative paragraph 5, insert a new operative paragraph reading: Calls for the start of peace negotiations;

3. After existing operative paragraph 10, insert a new operative paragraph reading: Calls upon Member States to address the root causes of the conflict in and around Ukraine, including legitimate security concerns of Member States;

4. After existing operative paragraph 10, insert a new operative paragraph reading: Also calls upon Member States to refrain from sending weapons to the zone of conflict.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Question related to this article:
 
Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

Here are the voting details of the 101 countries that did not follow the American line regarding the vote on the Belarus amendment.

15 countries voted for the Belarus amendment

Angola
Belarus
China
Cuba
North Korea
Egypt
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Honduras
Iran
Mali
Nicaragua
Russia
Syria
Zimbabwe

52 countries abstained on the Belarus amendment

Afghanistan
Algeria
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Bhutan
Bolivia
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei Daresalam
Burundi
Colombia
Congo
Djibouti
El Salvador
Gabon
Ghana
Guinea
Guyana
India
Indonesia
Iraq
Jordan
Kenya
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Lesotho
Libya
Malaysia
Mexico
Mongolia
Mozambique
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Philippines
Saint Vincent
Saudi Arabia
South Africa
South Sudan
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Tajikistan
Thailand
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
Uwbekistan
Yemen

17 countries did not vote on the Belarus amendment although they voted for the final resolution

Cambodia
Chad
Comoros
DR Congo
Kiribati
Madagascar
Mauritania
Mauritius
Morocco
Niger
Rwanda
Saint Lucia
Serbia
Seychelles
Solomon Islands
Somalia
Timor Leste

4 countries did not vote on the Belarus resolution while they abstained on the final resolution

Armenia
Central African Republic
Kazakhstan
Vietnam

13 countries did not vote on the Belarus or the final resolution

Azerbaijan
Burkina Faso
Cameroun
Dominica
Equatorial Africa
Eswatini
Grenada
Guinea Bissau
Lebanon
Senegal
Turkmenistan
UR Tanzania
Venezuela

Note 1: The fact that a country does not vote on a resolution is not always a political statement. However, in this case, 21 countries did not vote on the Belarus amendment but voted or abstained on the final resolution while no country did the opposite, voting or abstaining only on the Belarus amendment. The other 13 that failed to vote on either the amendment or the resolution tend to be aligned with other countries that abstained rather than being aligned with the US, NATO and their allies. Thus it seems likely that in most cases the absence of a vote was a political statement, and it has been counted as such here.

Note 2: The representative of Mexico voiced his regret that the last-minute amendments by Belarus had not been tabled in sufficient time for their full consideration.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global, United Nations,

Celebrating Radio Day in Haiti

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

An article from Loop news

The Office for the Protection of Citizens (OPC) reaffirms its support for press workers on the occasion of World Radio Day, UNESCO distributes safety kits to journalists…

Monday, February 13, 2023 marked the 12th edition of World Radio Day. It is celebrated this year under the theme “Radio and Peace”. On this occasion, the Office for the protection of the Citizen takes a stand for a culture of tolerance through information.


Ceremony for handing over materials to journalists by UNESCO. Photos taken by Marc Henley Augustin

The OPC says it reaffirms its support for radio stations and journalists, pillars of democracy and a rule of law based on the universal virtues of respect for freedoms.

“Just as a program can bring peace, reconciliation, just as it can cause misunderstandings and dissension”, noted the OPC in a note which bears the signature of the Protector of the Citizen, Ms Renan Hedouville.

On this occasion, the OPC urged media workers to fully play their role in order to continue to help society preserve democratic gains in the processing of information.

(continued in right column)

(Click here for the French original of this article.)

Question(s) related to this article:

Will UNESCO once again play a role in the culture of peace?

How can peace be promoted by radio?

(continued from left column)

He took the opportunity to support Vision 2000 radio journalist Jean Thony Lorthé, kidnapped for more than two weeks. The OPC strongly condemned these practices which endanger individual freedoms, invoking article 3 of the universal declaration of human rights which stipulates that “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of his person.

Finally, according to this independent body, independent radio as a pillar of conflict prevention and peacebuilding must be at the service of all, mainly minorities. It must play its role at all times for a culture of peace by informing the public objectively, stated Ms Renan Hédouville.

For its part, the UNESCO office in Port-au-Prince celebrated the 12th edition of World Radio Day by distributing equipment (PRESS vests, helmets and gas masks) to four associations of media and journalists: the Collective of Online Media (CMEL), the Haitian Association of Online Media (AHML), the National Network of Online Media (RENAMEL) and the Association of Haitian Journalists (AJH).

In her speech for the occasion, the head of UNESCO in Haiti, Tatiana Villegas, stated that due to the security, socio-political situation and the actions of armed gangs, “the Haitian context is currently increasingly very worrying”.

“This is why,” she stated,” we want to raise awareness among both media and social actors of the very important and indispensable role that the media (radio) could play in resolving conflicts and establishing a climate of peace. security and peace in Haiti”.

By distributing these safety kits for the benefit of journalist-reporters, UNESCO says it wants to “fight against misinformation by encouraging journalists to identify themselves very clearly in order to go to the source and bring quality information to the public. It is also a concrete way to promote the safety of journalists considering that last year 9 journalists were murdered in the exercise of their function in Haiti”.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, Latin America

Interview with Helen Caldicott: “We’ve never been closer to nuclear catastrophe”

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article produced by Earth | Food | Life, a project of the Independent Media Institute and pubished by the Asia Times.

The following interview took place on January 25, 2023, one day after the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists advanced  the hands of the Doomsday Clock to 90 seconds before midnight – in large part because of developments in Ukraine.

Helen Caldicott (above), an Australian peace activist and environmentalist, discussed the extreme and imminent threat of a nuclear holocaust due to a proxy war between the US and Russia in Ukraine. She also addressed the announcement by the US Department of Energy of a controlled nuclear reaction and outlines the relationship between the nuclear power industry and nuclear weapons.

Caldicott is the author of numerous books and is a recipient of at least 12 honorary doctorates. She was nominated for the Nobel Prize by physicist Linus Pauling and named by the Smithsonian Institution as one of the most influential women of the 20th century. Her public talks describing the horrors of nuclear war from a medical perspective raised the consciousness of a generation.

Caldicott believes that the reality of destroying all of life on the planet has receded from public consciousness, making doomsday more likely. As the title of her recent book  states, we are “sleepwalking to Armageddon.”

Steve Taylor: What is the Doomsday Clock, and why is it now set to 90 seconds to midnight?

Helen Caldicott: For the last year, it’s been at 100 seconds to midnight, which is the closest it’s ever been. Each year they reset the clock according to international problems, nuclear problems. Ninety seconds to midnight – I don’t think that is close enough; it’s closer than that. I would put it at 20 seconds to midnight.

I think we’re in an extremely invidious position where nuclear war could occur tonight, by accident or by design. It’s very clear to me, actually, that the United States is going to war with Russia. And that means, almost certainly, nuclear war – and that means the end of almost all life on Earth.

ST: Do you see similarities with the 1962 Cuban missile crisis?

HC: Yes. I got to know John F Kennedy’s secretary of defense, Robert McNamara, later in his life. He was in the Oval Office at the time of the Cuban missile crisis. He once told me, “Helen, we came so close to nuclear war – three minutes.” Three minutes. We’re in a similar situation now.

ST: So back then, though, famously, the world held its breath during the missile crisis.

HC: Oh, we were terrified. Terrified, absolutely terrified.

ST: That doesn’t seem to be the case today.

HC: Today, the public and policymakers are not being informed adequately about what this really means – that the consequences would be so bizarre and so horrifying.

It’s very funny; New York City  put out a video  as a hypothetical [public service announcement] in July 2022 showing a woman in the street, and it says the bombs are coming, and it’s going to be a nuclear war. It says that what you do is go inside, you don’t stand by the windows, you stand in the center of the room, and you’ll be all right. I mean, it’s absolutely absurd.

ST: That is what you were fighting against back in the ’70s and ’80s – this notion that a nuclear war is survivable.

HC: Yes. There was a US defense official called T K Jones who reportedly said, don’t worry; “if there are enough shovels to go around,” we’ll make it. And his plan was if the bombs are coming and they take half an hour to come, you get out the trusty shovel. You dig a hole. You get in the hole. Someone puts two doors on top and then piles on dirt.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Continued from left column)

I mean, they had plans. But the thing about it is that evolution will be destroyed. We may be the only life in the universe. And if you’ve ever looked at the structure of a single cell, or the beauty of the birds or a rose, I mean, what responsibility do we have?

ST: During the Cuban missile crisis, the US did not want missiles pointed at it from Cuba, and the Soviet Union did not want missiles pointed at it from Turkey. Do you see any similarities with the conflict in Ukraine?

HC: Oh, sure. The United States has nuclear weapons in European countries, all ready to go and land on Russia. How do you think Russia feels – a little bit paranoid?

Imagine if the Warsaw Pact moved into Canada, all along the northern border of the US, and put missiles all along the northern border. What would the US do? She’d probably blow up the planet as she nearly did with the Cuban missile crisis. I mean, it’s so extraordinarily unilateral in the thinking, not putting ourselves in the minds of the Russian people.

ST: Do you feel we’re more at risk of nuclear war now than we were during the Cold War?

HC: Yes. We’re closer to nuclear war than we’ve ever been. And that’s what the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists indicated by moving the clock to 90 seconds to midnight.

ST: Does it seem like political leaders are more cavalier about nuclear exchange now?

HC: Yes, because they haven’t taken in what nuclear war would really mean. And the Pentagon is run by these cavalier folks who are making millions out of selling weapons. Almost the whole of the US budget goes to killing and murder, rather than to health care and education and the children in Yemen, who are, millions of them, starving.

I mean, we’ve got the money to fix everything on Earth, and also to power the world with renewable energy. The money is there. It’s going into killing and murder instead of life.

ST: You mentioned energy. The US Department of Energy has announced  a so-called fusion breakthrough. What do you think about the claims that fusion may be our energy future?

HC: The technology wasn’t part of an energy experiment. It was part of a nuclear weapons experiment  called the Stockpile Stewardship Program. It is inappropriate; it produced an enormous amount of radioactive waste and very little energy. It will never be used to fuel global energy needs for humankind.

ST: Could you tell us a little bit about the history of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, where scientists developed this fusion technology?

HC: The Lawrence Livermore Laboratory was where the first hydrogen bombs were developed. It was set up in 1952, by Edward Teller, a wicked man.

ST: There is this promotion of nuclear energy as a green alternative. Is the nuclear-energy industry tied to nuclear weapons?

HC: Of course. In the ’60s, when people were scared stiff of nuclear weapons, there was a Pentagon psychologist who said, look, if we have peaceful nuclear energy, that will alleviate the people’s fear.

ST: At the end of your 1992 book If You Love This Planet, you wrote, “Hope for the Earth lies not with leaders, but in your own heart and soul. If you decide to save the Earth, it will be saved. Each person can be as powerful as the most powerful person who ever lived – and that is you, if you love this planet.” Do you stand by that?

HC: If we acknowledge the horrifying reality that there is an extreme and imminent threat of nuclear war, it’s like being told that as a planet, we have a terminal disease. If we’re scared enough, every one of us can save the planet. But we have to be very powerful and determined.

– – – – –

This interview has been edited for clarity and length. A video of the description of nuclear war from the interview can be viewed on Vimeo. Listen to the entire interview, available for streaming on Breaking Green’s website  or wherever you get your podcasts. Breaking Green  is produced by the Global Justice Ecology Project.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Let’s “work together for peace”, Nuns, Clergy Appeal after South Sudan Peace Pilgrimage

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

An article from ACI Africa

The ecumenical visit to South Sudan undertaken by Pope Francis, the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, and the Moderator of the Church of Scotland, Rev. Dr. Iain Greenshields, is a challenge to be instruments of peace and hope to the people of God in the East-Central African nation, ACI Africa has been told.

Pope Francis ended his ecumenical trip in South Sudan with a farewell ceremony at Juba international after presiding over Holy Mass at the grounds of Dr. John Garang Mausoleum.


Photo credit: Vatican Media

More than 100,000 people participated in the Papal Mass that was held at the Mausoleum commemorating Dr. John Garang, a liberation leader known as the “father of South Sudan”.

In an interview with ACI Africa at the Papal Mass venue, a member of Solidarity with South Sudan (SSS), an initiative of the International Union of Superiors General (UISG) and the Union of Superiors General (USG), established in response to a request from the members of the Sudan Catholic Bishops’ Conference (SCBC), described the ecumenical trip as an “epoch-making visit”.

“The fact that the three of them have come together to visit us in South Sudan gives a great signal that we can come together as Christians to work together for peace,” Sr. Cecilia Nya said.

The Nigerian-born member of the Society of the Holy Child Jesus (SHCJ) emphasized, “South Sudan is mostly a Christian country, so we can come together to work together for peace.”

Sr. Nya who serves at the Good Shepherd Peace Center went on to recall the 11 April 2019 dramatic gesture when Pope Francis knelt and kissed the feet of President Salva Kiir and opposition leader Dr. Riek Machar among other South Sudanese political leaders.

She is both ecumenically and interfaith minded and works “The powerful gesture that Pope Francis made … by inviting the President and the Vice presidents and the politicians of this country to Rome for a special retreat was a fantastic gesture and in fact I heard somebody saying one of the politicians who was there saying that he cried,” she told ACI Africa on February 5 just before the Papal Mass started.

Sr. Nya who has previously been part of SHCJ Leadership Team continued, “This coming of the Pope to South Sudan is a clarion call that let our hearts be broken, not our garments torn. I think it is a big call for all of us to join hands to fan into flame the fire that Pope Francis has ignited by this visit.”

“All of us from the top to the bottom, from the grassroots, everybody has to be more committed to working for peace, to ensuring that peace is restored in the land,” she said.

The SHCJ member who, from 2009 to 2014, served on the Board of Directors of UNANIMA International, a non-governmental organization advocating on behalf of women and children, immigrants and refugees, and the environment, expressed confidence in realizing peace in South Sudan, saying, “We can make it; we’ve got the Spirit working in and through everybody.”


On her part, Sr. Mary Moraa told ACI Africa that the Apostolic Journey of the Holy Father was “timely and appropriate for us here in South Sudan, especially for what has been going on in these past days.”

The member of the Pious Society of the Daughters of St. Paul (FSP) explained, “South Sudan is a country that has suffered so long in civil wars since 1956. So, in a way, the Pope comes to call us, that we become the people who give hope and peace to the people of South Sudan.”

(Article continued in right column.)

Question for this article

Religion: a barrier or a way to peace?, What makes it one or the other?

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Article continued from left column.)

“People live without hope because of the so much suffering that they have gone through,” Sr. Moraa said during the February 5 interview, adding that “as a person who is supposed to become salt and light, I’m supposed to become that hope that there is a better tomorrow … to bring light in the moment of darkness for these people who have suffered for so long.”

The Kenyan-born FSP member who has been in South Sudan since last August further said, “I pray and hope that the words of the Pope will sink deep into the hearts of our leaders and that they will implement them.”

“Differences on tribal lines should be kept aside and we all work for peace,” Sr. Moraa went on to say, and added, “We need a break from this suffering; all the blood that has been poured has to come to an end … We need a better tomorrow; we need a better South Sudan.”

She reflected on their apostolate in the light of the exhortations of the Holy Father. “As a Congregation of the Daughters of Saint Paul, I think we are also called to become these channels of peace and hope to the people through our apostolate,” she said.

“We are involved in the means of social communication,” Sr. Moraa who has previously served in Uganda, Zambia, Malawi, and her native country of Kenya said, and added, “in the books that we distribute, the major theme in this our South Sudan should be peace and hope so that all the tribes feel that we are working for them.”

“I feel that it’s a challenge that has been brought to us as Daughters of St. Paul to work on this peace in South Sudan in our own ways through the means of social communication that we use in our apostolate,” she said during the February 5 interview in Juba, moments after the Holy Father left for Rome in the company of Archbishop Welby, and Rev. Dr. Greenshields.

“The visit of the Pope has just ended, and from it I take the following for myself: to become Moses, to become salt and light for the people of South Sudan,” Sr. Moraa told ACI Africa.

In carrying out the apostolate as Daughters of St. Paul in South Sudan, she continued, “we are not favoring anybody but we are working for all of them to become one, to become peaceful in their coexistence among themselves, so that we have one country, not a country that is divided among individuals on the lines of tribes and clans.”

Also speaking to ACI Africa after the Papal Mass on the grounds of Dr. John Garang Mausoleum, a member of the Religious Institute of the Salesians of Don Bosco (SDB) said he was touched by the simple gesture of Pope Francis visiting South Sudan.

“I am touched by the simple gesture of the Holy Father coming to our land. This land where there is violence, there is war and all kinds of atrocities yet this Holy man, this humble man comes to us, to be with and to reassure us that better days will surely come,” Fr. Charles Taban said.

The South Sudanese Catholic Priest who ministers among young people in Sudan’s Catholic Diocese of El Obeid added in reference to Pope Francis, “We are encouraged by his presence.”

“We admire the Holy Father for the powerful messages he has left to us,” Fr. Taban said, and added, “The message of hope that he has left to us will give us a kind of impetus to move forward and to work for peace and reconciliation in this country,”

He continued, “I am certain of our politicians; they are all Christians and for certain they have been moved by the message of the Holy Father and above all by the gesture that he made by coming to be with us.”

The native of South Sudan’s Wau Diocese urged all people of goodwill to “to help us in whichever way you can, in your own capacity to help us build a true culture of peace in South Sudan.”

For the Archbishop of Ethiopia’s Addis Ababa Archdiocese, the realization of the previously postponed Papal trip to Africa was “a great joy”.

“A great joy that he finally came to South Sudan because as you know he was supposed to come some months back but he finally came and greeted the people,” Berhaneyesus Demerew Cardinal Souraphiel said about Pope Francis, adding, “He is an instrument of peace and South Sudan needs peace and he spoke also to the leaders yesterday, to the nation (about) enough conflict, enough war.”

In the February 4 interview with ACI Africa at St. Theresa’s Cathedral of Juba Archdiocese, the Cardinal who serves as the President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Ethiopia (CBCE) said South Sudan “is a beautiful country; it is a young country that needs peace and reconciliation and reconstruction.”

“I have the confidence that his (Pope Francis) message has gone down to the people and also to the political leaders,” Cardinal Souraphiel, a member of the Congregation of the Mission (CM) said.

Africa, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, TOLERANCE & SOLIDARITY

Pope Francis: “Hands off the Democratic Republic of the Congo, hands off Africa”

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from Pagina12 (translation by CPNN)

Pope Francis denounced on Tuesday “the economic colonialism” that loots the resources of Africa, shortly after arriving in Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It is the first leg of an African tour.”Hands off the Democratic Republic of the Congo, hands off Africa. Stop suffocating it. Africa is not a mine to be exploited or a land to be plundered”.


frame from video of Pope’s visit

“May Africa be the protagonist of its own destiny,” Francis proclaimed before the authorities and the country’s diplomatic corps. In a speech at the presidential palace in Kinshasa, the Pope stated that the country’s history has been torpedoed by conflicts but also by the domination of foreign interests. “After political colonialism, an equally enslaving ‘economic colonialism’ has been unleashed. Thus, this country, abundantly pillaged, is not able to benefit sufficiently from its immense resources,” said the 86-year-old pontiff.

“The poison of greed has bloodied its diamonds. It is a drama to which the most economically advanced world often closes its eyes, ears and mouths. However, this country and this continent deserve to be respected and listened to,” added the Argentine Pope in his applauded speech.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo, a huge central African country that gained independence from Belgium in 1960, has huge mineral reserves, but is one of the poorest countries on the planet.

About two-thirds of the population lives on less than $2.15 a day, according to the World Bank. Likewise, the east of the country has been devastated by armed conflicts. For this reason, Francis encouraged peace efforts, stressing that “we cannot get used to the blood that has flowed in this country for decades.”

(Article continued in the column on the right)

(Click here for the original Spanish version of the article)

Questions related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

He also stressed the importance of having “free, transparent and credible elections” in a country that plans presidential elections on December 20. “We must not allow ourselves to be manipulated or bought by those who want to keep the country in violence, to exploit it and do shameful business,” Francisco added. Sitting next to him was Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi, who came to power in 2018 in a highly disputed election.

Banners and chants

Joy overflowed the streets of the capital, Kinshasa, where Pope Francis arrived, who was received with banners, songs and in the midst of a strong security device.

“The Pope is here, no more useless fights. This is the support that the country was waiting for to be better served by the international community. We are happy,” Aime Mboyo, one of the hundreds of thousands of fervent Catholics and religious who rushed to receive the pontiff.

At Kinshasa’s Ndjili International Airport – where he was received by the Congolese Prime Minister, Sama Lukonde – and along Lumumba Boulevard, one of the main arteries of the city that Francis traveled in the popemobile, the faithful vibrated by waving their banners and palms. “We are a country of peace and hospitality. The Pope is at home and he can stay here if he wants to,” said Angélique Mutombo, an old woman waving a handkerchief with her hands from the Limete neighborhood in the northeast of the capital. the image of the pontiff.

In addition to the faithful, a strong security device made up of thousands of agents was activated this Tuesday in the capital. Large portraits of the Pope hung on billboards and banners with a welcoming message, such as “Welcome to our home”, were the accessories in the shower of crowds that accompanied Francis as he walked down the avenue on his way to the Palace of the Nation, where he would meet with President Tshisekedi.

“We deployed 7,500 members of the Congolese National Police to guarantee good security for this great guest in the country,” said General Sylvain Kasongo, the police officer in Kinshasa.

(Editor’s note: According to CNN , “on Friday the pope leaves Kinshasa for South Sudan’s capital, Juba, where he’ll be joined by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, Iain Greenshields. “This will be a historic visit,” Welby said. “After centuries of division, leaders of three different parts of (Christianity) are coming together in an unprecedented way.”)

Africa, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Lula’s address to CELAC “Nothing should separate us, since everything brings us together”

. DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article from Peoples Dispatch (republished under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA) license)

The much awaited return of Brazil to the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) was celebrated during the VII Summit of the bloc on Tuesday January 24. In his opening address to the Summit, Argentine President Alberto Fernández highlighted the return of Brazil to the bloc and emphasized that “a CELAC without Brazil is a much emptier CELAC”. 


Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva addresses the VII CELAC Heads of State Summit. Photo: Ricardo Stuckert

Fernández received Lula on Monday January 23 at the Casa Rosada, the seat of the Argentine government, and the two leaders defended the resumption of diplomacy and cooperation between the two largest economies in South America.

Brazil left the CELAC during the government of Jair Bolsonaro (PL), a measure that Lula classified as “inexplicable”.

In his speech, the Brazilian president defended points that can collaborate towards regional integration and a “peaceful world order”, such as the potential to participate in the energy transition of Latin American and Caribbean countries.

Read the full speech of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva below:

Dear friend Alberto Fernández, President of Argentina, President pro tempore of CELAC and world football champion, who fraternally welcomes us in Buenos Aires,

Dear fellow heads of state and government of the countries that make up our region, and our friends who are present,

As fate would have it, Comrade Alberto Fernández, my first activity outside the country in this new mandate was in Argentina, and for a Summit meeting of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean Nations.

In my first speech after the election results, I stated that Brazil was returning to the world. Nothing could be more natural than to start this path of return through CELAC.

Throughout the successive Brazilian governments since the re-democratization, we have worked hard and with a sense of mission towards regional integration and the consolidation of a peaceful region, based on relations marked by dialogue and cooperation. The unfortunate exception was the recent years when my predecessor took the inexplicable decision to withdraw Brazil from CELAC.

During my first two mandates, I was dedicated, along with so many that I see gathered here today around this table, to the task of building a Latin America based on bonds of trust.

It is with great joy and very special satisfaction that Brazil is back in the region and ready to work side by side with all of you, with a very strong sense of solidarity and proximity.

Today I renew, with emotion, the spirit that animated us in 2008, when we hosted in Costa do Sauípe, in the Brazilian state of Bahia, the first Latin American and Caribbean Summit, which three years later would evolve into the format of this Community.

That meeting had a historical meaning that is still very current. Because it was the first time that the heads of state and government of Latin America and the Caribbean came together, without any foreign tutelage, to discuss our problems and seek our own solutions to the challenges we share.

This spirit – of solidarity, dialogue, and cooperation – in a region of the size and importance of Latin America and the Caribbean could not be more current and necessary.

The world is going through a time of multiple crises: pandemics, climate change, natural disasters, geopolitical tensions, pressures on food and energy security, threats to representative democracy as a form of political and social organization. All this against an unacceptable backdrop of increasing inequality, poverty, and hunger.

I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of you who have stood up for Brazil and for the Brazilian institutions over the last few days in repudiation of the anti-democratic acts that took place in Brasilia. It is important to emphasize that we are a peaceful region that repudiates extremism, terrorism, and political violence.

Most of these challenges, as we know, are global in nature, and require collective responses. We do not want to import into the region particular rivalries and problems. On the contrary, we want to be part of the solutions to the challenges that belong to all.

CELAC has advanced and collaborated in this recent period to prove the importance and the potential of this mechanism. I was very pleased to learn how much has been built during the recent presidencies of Mexico and Argentina, which coincided with one of the most difficult international periods.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Questions related to this article:

The culture of peace at a regional level, Does it have advantages compared to a city level?

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

CELAC acted promptly during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the constitution of a plan to strengthen the production capacities of vaccines and medicines.

CELAC did not shy away from the challenges of food security, energy security, and climate change.

I am convinced that, with a pragmatic sense and based on collaboration with specialized organizations and agencies, such as FAO, WHO, and ECLAC, among many others, we have much to contribute to each of these issues.

In the area of energy, we have very special capacities to participate, in an advantageous way, in the global energy transition. We have diversified energy matrices and potential for growth in renewable and clean energies.

In addition to this, our territories are home to some of the main biomes; we have strategic natural resources, such as critical minerals; we preserve a significant portion of the planet’s biodiversity; and we are a powerhouse in aquifer resources, key to the future of humanity.

At the COP27, in Egypt, I announced that Brazil will soon convene a Summit of Amazon Countries. The cooperation that comes from outside our region is very welcome, but it is the countries that are part of these biomes that should sovereignly lead the initiatives to take care of the Amazon. That is why it is critical that we value our Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization – ACTO.

Brazil recently presented the candidacy of Belém do Pará to host the COP-30 in 2025. The support we are receiving from the CELAC countries is indispensable for us to show the rest of the world the richness of our biodiversity, the potential for sustainable development and green economy, and, of course, the importance of preserving the environment and fighting climate change.

Ladies and gentlemen,

There is a clear contribution to be made by the region to the construction of a peaceful world order, based on dialogue, the strengthening of multilateralism and the collective construction of multipolarity.

We consider essential the development and deepening of dialogues with extra regional partners such as the European Union, China, India, ASIAN and, especially, the African Union.

My friends

The various crises we are experiencing in the world today demonstrate the value of integration. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the risks associated with our excessive dependence on key inputs for the well-being of our societies.

This does not mean that we should close ourselves off from the world. It only highlights that this integration will be on better terms if we are well integrated in our region. We must join forces for better physical and digital infrastructure, for the creation of value chains between our industries, and for more investment in research and innovation in our region.

Our development strategy must go hand in hand with the reduction of inequality in its various dimensions, with guaranteed access to fundamental rights in the fields of education, health, and work, among many others. In order to grow in a sustainable way, we cannot continue to have unacceptable poverty and hunger rates, nor can we continue to live with the inequality and gender violence that affect half of our populations. It is necessary to respect and protect our Indigenous peoples that are still threatened and neglected. It is necessary to work so that the color of our skin no longer defines the future of our young people.

Nothing should separate us, since everything brings us together. Our colonial past. The intolerable presence of slavery that marked our profoundly unequal societies. The authoritarian temptations that even today challenge our democracy.

But also the immense cultural wealth of our Indigenous peoples and the African diaspora. The diversity of races, origins, and creeds. The shared history of resistance and struggle for autonomy. All this makes us feel part of something greater and feeds our search for a common future of peace, social justice, and respect in diversity.

For this reason, I could not end without paying tribute to an extraordinary Brazilian who dedicated himself to rethinking our region when a Latin American and Caribbean community was still a mirage.

Last October, Darcy Ribeiro, a public man and one of our greatest thinkers, would have turned 100 years old. Having lived in exile in the 1960s and 1970s, he was one of the first to speak of our unity in diversity. This Patria Grande, and the particular contribution to civilization that our region has to give to the world.

Brazil is once again looking to its future with the certainty that we will be associated with our neighbors bilaterally, in Mercosur, in UNASUR and in CELAC.

To comrade Ralph Gonsalves, Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, who takes over CELAC, I wish you all the luck in the world.

It is with this feeling of common destiny and belonging that Brazil returns to CELAC, with the feeling of finding oneself again.

Thank you very much.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, Latin America