Would you like to know what BRICS just declared?

Riley Waggaman
Nov 2, 2024

BRICS just wrapped up its 16th summit in Kazan. Probably you heard about this momentous event from meticulously researched independent media articles discussing how BRICS just delivered a DOUBLE DEATHBLOW to the globalists.

This is very good news. Let us celebrate together by reading the BRICS’ Kazan Declaration, published on October 23. (English or Russian, compliments of the Kremlin’s official website.)

Please, I beg you—read this Declaration and share it with all your friends. The Kazan Declaration is not just a massive victory for BRICS, it is a victory for all decent freedom-loving people on Earth.

Here are a few highlights from this historic document:

BRICS supports “global governance” and “the central role of the United Nations in the international system”

[W]e reaffirm our commitment to multilateralism and upholding the international law, including the Purposes and Principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations (UN) as its indispensable cornerstone, and the central role of the UN in the international system, in which sovereign states cooperate to maintain international peace and security, advance sustainable development, ensure the promotion and protection of democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all as well as cooperation based on solidarity, mutual respect, justice and equality. We further emphasize the urgent need to achieve equitable and inclusive geographical representation in the staff composition of the Secretariat of the United Nations and other international organizations in a timely manner.”

“We reiterate our commitment to improving global governance by promoting a more agile, effective, efficient, responsive, representative, legitimate, democratic and accountable international and multilateral system.”

BRICS supports the leading role of the IMF in global finance

“We reaffirm our commitment to maintaining a strong and effective Global Financial Safety Net with a quota-based and adequately resourced IMF at its center.”

BRICS supports the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

“We stress the universal and inclusive nature of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals, and that implementation should take into account different national circumstances, capacities and levels of development, whilst respecting national policies and priorities and in conformity with national legislation.”

BRICS supports public-private partnerships to help nations achieve their Sustainable Development Goals

“We recognise that the use of blended finance is an effective way to mobilize private capital to finance infrastructure projects. We note the important role of multilateral development banks and development finance institutions, in particular national development banks, in institutionally scaling up the use of blended finance and other instruments, and thereby contributing to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals in accordance with country-specific needs and priorities. To this end, we commend the work of the BRICS Public-Private Partnership and 17 Infrastructure Task Force and endorse its Technical Report on Infrastructure Projects Blended Finance.”

BRICS supports the reduction and removal of greenhouse gases to combat climate change

“We reiterate that the objectives, principles and provisions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), its Kyoto Protocol and its Paris Agreement, including its principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC) in the light of different national circumstances, must be honoured. We condemn unilateral measures introduced under the pretext of climate and environmental concerns and reiterate our commitment to enhancing coordination on these issues. We will strengthen cooperation on a whole range of solutions and technologies that contribute to the reduction and removal of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs). We also note the role of carbon sinks in absorbing GHGs and mitigating climate change, whilst also highlighting the importance of adaptation and stressing the need for the adequate provision of the means of implementation, namely financial resources, technology transfer and capacity building.”

“We underscore the critical need for active climate adaptation projects, moving beyond research and forecasting to the implementation of practical solutions, advancing renewable energy, sustainable financing, low-emission technologies, and sustainable development investments, while highlighting the importance of collective action and international cooperation to address the adverse impacts of climate change and ensure inclusive, equitable climate initiatives.”

BRICS supports the creation of carbon markets

We recognise the important role of carbon markets as one of the drivers of climate action, and encourage enhancing cooperation and sharing experiences in this field. We oppose unilateral measures introduced under the pretext of climate and environmental concerns and reiterate our commitment to enhancing coordination on these issues. We welcome the adoption of the MoU on the BRICS Carbon Markets Partnership as a platform dedicated to sharing knowledge, experiences and case studies of developing carbon markets and discussing the potential intra-BRICS cooperation on carbon markets to exchange views on potential cooperation under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement among the BRICS countries.”

BRICS supports the World Health Organization and its “central coordinating role” in strengthening “the international pandemic prevention, preparedness and response system”

We reiterate our support to the central coordinating role of the World Health Organization in the implementation of multilateral international efforts to protect public health from infectious diseases and epidemics and commit to reform and strengthen the international pandemic prevention, preparedness and response system. We recognise the fundamental role of primary health care as a key foundation for Universal Health Care and health system’s resilience, as well as on prevention and response to health emergencies. We welcome fostering closer ties among BRICS health institutions responsible for sanitary and epidemiological health and well-being, prevention, preparedness and response to epidemic prone communicable diseases and health impact following disasters and encourage further exploring opportunities for knowledge sharing, exchange of expertise and undertaking joint projects in the health sector.”

BRICS supports the development of safe & effective vaccines

We support the initiatives of the BRICS R&D Vaccine Center, further development of the BRICS Integrated Early Warning System for preventing mass infectious diseases risks and the operations of the BRICS TB Research Network. We welcome the outcomes of the 79th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) HighLevel Meeting on AMR, committing to a clear set of targets and actions, including reducing the estimated 4.95 million human deaths associated with bacterial antimicrobial resistance (AMR) annually by 10% by 2030. We express concern about the growing threat of AMR to all sectors of the economy, in particular healthcare, and note the timeliness of holding the first BRICS Conference on AMR in May 2024.”

BRICS supports “digital transformation” using 5G and other “emerging technologies”

“Recognising the importance of creating an enabling, inclusive, and secure digital economy and that digital connectivity is an essential prerequisite for digital transformation as well as social and economic growth, we emphasize the need to strengthen cooperation among BRICS countries. We also recognise that emerging technologies such as 5G, satellite systems, terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks, have the potential to catalyze the development of the digital economy. We acknowledge that resilient, safe, inclusive and interoperable digital public infrastructure has the potential to deliver services at scale and increase social and economic opportunities for all.”

And so on and so forth.

Strengthening Multilateralism for Just Global Development and Security vs Building a Just World and a Sustainable Planet

The world is at a crossroads. There are two distinct visions for the future of humankind. You must choose one and then argue with strangers on the internet who are inadequately enthusiastic about your choice, which is perhaps the most meaningful and consequential choice you will ever make; your choice will literally change the trajectory of human history. So please choose wisely.

Let me be more specific.

The theme of this year’s BRICS summit was “Strengthening Multilateralism for Just Global Development and Security”. I think we all understand why BRICS chose this theme—because it is very meaningful and profound.

In sharp contrast, the G20 (which includes the USA and many other Unipolar Satanic West nations) will be meeting next month in Rio de Janeiro to discuss “Building a Just World and a Sustainable Planet”.

The contrast could not be more extreme. Like day and night.

G20 vs BRICS: Who is more sustainable?

On August 23, 2023, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa released a joint declaration promising that BRICS would pursue Sustainability.

Two weeks later, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and more than a dozen other countries published their own joint declaration, vowing that the G20 would do everything in its power to make the world extremely Sustainable.

But which intergovernmental organization loves Sustainability the most?
Read More

Let’s play a quick game. Which of these two statements is from BRICS’ Kazan Declaration?

Statement A:

“We reaffirm our support for the rules-based, open, transparent, fair, predictable, inclusive, equitable, non-discriminatory, consensus-based multilateral trading system with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) at its core, with special and differential treatment (S&DT) for developing countries, including Least Developed Countries and reject the unilateral trade restrictive measures that are inconsistent with WTO rules.”

Statement B:

“We express our support for actions aimed at reaffirming that a rules-based, non-discriminatory, fair, open, inclusive, equitable, sustainable and transparent multilateral trading system, with WTO at its core, is indispensable; [we support] policies that enable trade and investment to serve as an engine of growth and prosperity for all … Fostering a favourable trade and investment environment for all.”

Answer: Statement A is from BRICS’ Multipolar Sustainable Agenda 2030 Freedom Vision Declaration. Statement B is from the Second G20 Foreign Ministers’ Call to Action on Global Governance Reform, published exactly one month ago on September 25, 2024, and available on the website of the US State Department.

And yet …. these statements, issued by totally different Poles, are oddly similar. What could this possibly mean?

It’s a mystery, but pro-Putin conservative Russian media has a scandalous hypothesis:

 

source: katyusha.org

After combing through the Kazan Declaration, Katyusha concluded:

It is obvious that the goals of the unification of the countries of this seemingly “alternative to the Atlanticist” bloc are declared to be practically the same as those in the UN declaration “Pact for the Future” recently adopted at the Future Summit in New York. Both the stated goals and the proposed image of the future BRICS association are the same, and everything is even written in the same globalist newspeak.

That is, we have before us a sadly familiar model of globalization, only not for the countries of the Atlantic bloc and their satellites, but for Eurasia and the “global South”—including Africa, and South America. [BRICS] is a kind of subproject from the same curators—in any case, this is precisely what follows from the text of the Kazan Declaration.

Yeah, but … Zerohedge said that Putin was presented with a gimmick BRICS peso, and that I should be excited about that.

I am excited.

I am.

But I just thought that maybe you would like to know what BRICS said about BRICS when it met in Kazan.

 

Source: https://off-guardian.org/2024/11/02/would-you-like-to-know-what-brics-just-declared/

Lebanon's Hezbollah blunts the Israeli war machine

As`ad AbuKhalil
October 22, 2024
Special to Consortium News

The Israeli war machine is accelerating its attacks on North Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank and as far away as Yemen. It even hit Egypt “by mistake.”

The assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah was supposed to eliminate the resistance group once and for all, especially because Israel also hit the command council of the elite military force Al-Rudwan. This was followed by relentless repeated daily bombardment of Beirut, the southern suburbs and the rest of Lebanon.  

Israel was intent on eliminating all leaders of the party. But it pursues once again a policy that relies solely on massive, indiscriminate violence without any observable strategy for attaining its (hitherto largely unknown) political goals. 

Israel, a year after it began its genocide in Gaza, is still not open about its end goal. (The Israeli public does not know, nor the U.S. government, the chief sponsor and enabler of Israeli genocide and aggression.)  

For Israel, which has been intoxicated with unconditional unlimited American support (U.S. President Joe Biden may have truly been the most indulgent president of Israeli savagery since 1948), the slaughter of the large numbers of civilians appears to be a goal in itself.

Since its founding, Israel has operated on the dictum that if it kills a large number of civilians, it will be able to subjugate and instill fear in them to drive them from their ancestral land. 

Zionist gangs introduced terrorism to the region as early as the 1930s for that purpose. They literally wanted to terrorize the native population to push it out of Palestine. Menachem Begin, a former Israeli prime minster, in his book The Revolt, bragged about doing this in the Deir Yassine massacre.

Strategy Failing 

 

Flags of Lebanon, Palestine and Hezbollah in 2007 flying next to the israeli border fence near Kfar Kila, southern Lebanon. (Paul Keller, Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0)

 

That strategy, however, is not working: the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank are not going anywhere despite agonizing displacement after displacement. 

Israel, after a century of conflict, wishes that through its callous and savage methods the population will surrender. Zionists still conceive of a time when the natives will simply embrace their occupation by a racist and brutal power.

In the case of Lebanon, Israel is already facing a big surprise: Hezbollah is not destroyed. Its obituary has been prematurely written in Israeli and Western media. 

This is an organization of (at least) 50,000 well trained, well indoctrinated individuals and no amount of bombardment is going to eliminate it from existence.

If anything, the paradoxical logic of this kind of asymmetrical conflict dictates that the assassination of Nasrallah and the decapitation of the command of the elite military wing will only inspire members in battle and to be better organized than before. 

The rise of a younger generation of commanders into the top leadership ranks will make the fighting force more agile and effective.  Younger members are better educated about modern technology and therefore less likely to fall into the trap the older commanders fell into through the presumably careless use of communication equipment that was laden with explosives after being intercepted by the enemy.

Hezbollah’s recent spectacular attack by a drone on a secret, elite Israeli military base south of Haifa reveals a sophisticated mixture of high-level intelligence and military skills. It also signals that Hezbollah has reorganized to fight back.   

Israel’s constant threat caused Hezbollah to adapt to the elimination of its leaders. The loss of Nasrallah is a devastating blow to the organization, no doubt. It is unlikely that he will ever be replaced, given the many roles he played as leader of an organization whose stature extended well beyond the confines of the party and of Lebanon. 

System of Quick Recovery

 

Al-Radwan Force militant during a drill in May 2023. (Tasnim News Agency, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0)

 

But Nasrallah instituted a system of quick recovery in the event of assassination. Every commander is assisted by a deputy who in turn is assisted by an aide; and all three have access to the same files and can easily play the role of a leader in the event of an assassination. And that’s exactly what happened when the command of Rudwan was directly targeted by Israel.

It’s also noteworthy that Hezbollah has remained committed to rules of combat that are far different from those of Israel.

Israel is willing to flatten six residential buildings to kill one man. Hezbollah has focused on military targets throughout the year of conflict and has deliberately avoided targeting civilians. It wishes to draw a moral line between its rules of war and those of the savage enemy that models itself after fascist regimes. 

But this could soon change. If Israel continues to slaughter civilians in indiscriminate attacks on residential neighborhoods, Hezbollah might find itself compelled to respond in kind and attack Israeli civilians. 

Thus far it has avoided that despite public demands (by supporters of Hezbollah and by displaced people from South Lebanon) for Hezbollah to attack civilians in Israel.

Hezbollah Changing

 

Graffiti of Nasrallah with a pager in Tel Aviv, Israel, in September. (Nizzan Cohen, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0)

 

Hezbollah is already a different organization without Nasrallah and it will continue to change in direction and leadership for months and years to come. 

When the dust settles the organization will undertake a thorough process of reform, reconstruction, punishment and accountability. There will be an attempt to plug holes and locate possible human infiltration within the ranks. 

Although it is most likely that the security breaches were almost all electronic in nature, the presumed failure of Israel’s attack on security chief Wafiq Safa last week may indicate that the party was finally able to trace the method by which Israel locates its leaders.

According to an account by Ibrahim Amin, the publisher of al Al-Akhbar, Safa used a phone that triggered the Israeli security system, which sent fighter jets to basically flatten two residential buildings while missing its target.  Safa may not have been in that area at all.  

Israel’s increasing conundrum is that it has all the tools of mass violence at its disposal and an unlimited supply of weapons and money from Western powers complicit in Israeli crimes, but it still has been unable since 1948 to win without direct military help. 

Israel, more than ever, needs to constantly inflict mass death on Arabs to try to prevail, only to provoke the dialectical logic of resistance.  The more you occupy and kill, the more you unwittingly educate and spur the natives to rebel.  

If this resistance movement fails, another will be around the corner. It is highly logical to assume that generations of Palestinians and Lebanese will grow up with a strong urge for revenge. Gaza will provide the ranks for new organizations that will strike back at Israel for the obliteration of whole families and the destruction of schools, houses of worship, and health centers.

The United States is making the same mistake it made in 1982 when it assumed an Israeli invasion of Lebanon could subjugate the population to enable the U.S. and Israel to reconfigure the political system and install a puppet president who could do Western bidding. 

This time around it will be different. In the early 1980s, the group that would become Hezbollah was no more than a few dozen committed men supported by Iran.

This time around we are talking about tens of thousands of Lebanese aided by thousands more from other political organizations that will be determined to prevent the formation of Israeli-American order in Lebanon. 

And if that happens, and if the U.S. harbors those dreams of conquest, the results will be exceedingly bloody for American troops who might enter into Lebanon and for the local population as the U.S. and Israel will typically take it out on civilians.

                                                         ***

As`ad AbuKhalil is a Lebanese-American professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus. He is the author of the Historical Dictionary of Lebanon (1998), Bin Laden, Islam and America’s New War on Terrorism (2002), The Battle for Saudi Arabia (2004) and ran the popular The Angry Arab blog. He tweets as @asadabukhalil

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Source: https://consortiumnews.com/2024/10/22/asad-abukhalil-lebanon-vs-israeli-savagery/

General Qassem Soleimani wins: Israel falls into the trap of the Axis of Resistance

Lucas Leiroz
October 4, 2024

In 2020, the U.S. military assassinated Iranian General Qassem Solemani in a terrorist attack with drones in Iraq. The purpose of the operation was simply to eliminate one of the greatest military thinkers in history – the man largely responsible for creating the trap that Israel has just fallen into, four years after his death.

Much more than a mere military officer, Soleimani was a strategist and negotiator – perhaps it would not be an exaggeration to even call him a “war diplomat”. An expert in clandestine operations, intelligence and special forces’ tactics, Soleimani was responsible for enabling the network of anti-Zionist organizations known as the “Axis of Resistance”.

Overcoming religious, ethnic and ideological differences between the various Islamic and anti-Zionist movements, Soleimani united different factions in a joint strategy against Israel. Obviously, this strategy was centered on Iran and gave the Islamic Republic the leading role in the fight against the Israeli occupation and its regional proxies. However, one of the keys to the success of the Axis is precisely its largely decentralized nature, guaranteeing autonomy of action for its members, without tight Iranian control over all the acts of the coalition.

The Axis of Resistance was victorious in Syria, where several militias, with the support of Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), defeated ISIS and other Israeli proxies. At the time, Soleimani’s military diplomatic success was so great that even a dialogue with the Kurdish militias (historically supported by the West) was possible at a time of confrontation against more dangerous groups – such as ISIS itself.

Soleimani’s survival was perceived as an existential threat by Israel, encouraging the Zionist lobby in the U.S. to push for a targeted assassination operation. The main problem, however, is that targeted assassinations are rarely effective against highly ideological groups and countries with well-defined war strategies. Soleimani’s death did not dismantle the Axis, but rather further united the militias around Iran – including the Palestinian Sunni militias, which have historically suffered a struggle for influence between Shiites and Wahhabis.

Today, no one can deny Iran’s great influence over the Palestinian Resistance. What few people know, however, is that this process is precisely the result of the diplomatic alliances achieved by Soleimani. By killing Ismail Hannyeh, the Hamas leader closest to Iran in the entire history of the Palestinian party and responsible for the peace between the Palestinian jihadists and the Syrian government, Israel also hoped to destabilize the Axis – reducing Iranian influence and expanding the pro-Wahhabi lobby in Palestine, which, as we know, did not happen.

In the same vein, by killing Hassan Nasrallah, then head of Hezbollah, Israel planned to once again destabilize the Axis, liquidating the leadership of the main Shiite paramilitary organization and thus possibly fomenting an institutional crisis within the group. Contrary to Zionist expectations, Hezbollah did not show any shock from the assassination of its leader, except to become even more organized and confident in its engagement against the occupation.

Tel Aviv will not stop carrying out targeted assassinations. It is quite possible that the response to Iran’s recent attack will be through assassination attempts against other Iranian public figures. This Israeli method is due to a specific characteristic of the regime that was acutely perceived by General Soleimani: Israel’s inability to go to all-out war.

Contrary to the myth of “Israeli invincibility” commonly propagated in the West, Tel Aviv has a natural weakness due to its own geographical limitations. The policy of targeted killings was developed by Israel to try to destabilize its enemies psychologically and institutionally, avoiding prolonged military engagements. Without the capacity for continuous replenishment of troops and resources and having a very small territory with very exposed targets, Israel fears a large-scale war – and this was precisely Soleimani’s assessment.

By creating the Axis of Resistance, the Iranian general has condemned Israel to perpetual war. There will be no peace at any time. If Israel defeats Hamas and the other Palestinian militias, there will still be Hezbollah and the Syrian militias in the north. On the naval front, Yemen will continue to capture ships and strike on strategic targets throughout occupied Palestine. In Iraq, the Resistance will not stop its operations at any time. And in the end, even if it defeats all these enemies, Tel Aviv will still have to face Iran itself – the largest military power in the Middle East, which, unlike Israel, has a large population and a gigantic territory, rich in resources and protected by a complex mountainous geography.

In other words, the existence of the Axis of Resistance is Israel’s death sentence. Soleimani’s strategy was focused on creating a prolonged war, wearing down the Zionist regime to the point of no return of its own state structure. The time will come when Israel becomes unviable as a country and will have to accept negotiating terms to create a demilitarized and non-ethnic state (joint between Jews and Palestinians), putting an end to apartheid. Otherwise, years of war will destroy all the country’s resources and create an irreversible migration crisis, leading millions of citizens to flee the Middle East forever.

Realizing that targeted assassinations had not worked and that the Resistance organizations were politically mature enough to overcome any impact generated by these crimes, Israel, after the humiliation suffered by the Iranian attack, took the decision to finally invade Lebanon by land – just as Hezbollah wanted. The first reports show a true strategic disaster, with Shiite militiamen ambushing and killing dozens of invaders. In parallel, attacks by Yemenis, Palestinians and other resistance groups continue, and Netanyahu keeps being pressured about Iran, knowing that if he responds, Israel will suffer an even more incisive attack, the consequences of which could lead to the collapse of the regime.

Israel has fallen into the Soleimani’s trap. The Zionist regime has entered into perpetual war, from which it can only escape by ceasing to exist as a state.

                                                           ***

Iran Retaliates Against Israel: 5 Dramatic Videos Expose Iron Dome, Arrow Failure

Source: https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/10/04/general-qassem-soleimani-wins-israel-falls-into-the-trap-of-the-axis-of-resistance/