Latest news with #InternationalDayofHope
Daily Maverick
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
A chilling new era as US embraces autocracy while disregarding rule of law and democracy
While submerged by the 'flooding of the zone', as former Trump strategist Steve Bannon termed it, moments of clarity are rare. But every now and again, a telling moment cuts through the chaos. Two moments over the past few weeks stand out as emblematic, even if they have been largely drowned out in the media by the harrumphing over tariffs. Last month the United Nations General Assembly voted on two symbolic resolutions; to declare 28 January the 'International Day of Peaceful Coexistence' and 12 July the 'International Day of Hope'. One might think this a foregone conclusion. Why would any nation be against such concepts? Predictably, every country voted in favour of the resolution, apart from one: the United States of America. But even more astonishing than the lone dissenting vote was the justification for it. Edward Heartney, a veteran US career diplomat with a long track record in economic diplomacy, delivered a blistering rejection — and not just of the symbolic days but of the entire UN framework, including the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). According to Heartney, these goals represented a form of 'soft global governance' that undermined US sovereignty, despite the country playing a critical role in their adoption in 2015. The US argued that the UN's embrace of peaceful coexistence and dialogue among civilisations was a front operation for what it sees as a kind of Chinese Trojan horse. 'We have a concern that this resolution is a reaffirmation of Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Although framed in neutral language, Agenda 2030 and the SDGs advance a program of soft global governance that is inconsistent with US sovereignty and adverse to the rights and interests of Americans,' read the official statement. 'We must care first and foremost for our own citizens above others… President Trump set a clear and overdue course correction on 'gender' and climate ideology, which pervade the SDGs. The concept of 'dialogue among civilisations' is rooted in President Xi Jinping's Global Civilization Initiative.' The language was Kafkaesque in its delusional, paranoid insecurity. Amid the flood of headlines that have drowned perspective since 20 January 2025, that the very concept of the Sustainable Development Goals, which have been at the heart of at least the rhetoric of international affairs and development for years, if not always at the crux of its reality, is now being jettisoned by the world's most powerful country is a moment of clarity as to how far the US has changed or, depending on your point of view, has regressed. Even more alarming was what happened on 14 April, when Donald Trump met with El Salvador's strongman vigilante president, Nayib Bukele. That meeting was the moment when the United States openly disregarded a unanimous Supreme Court ruling, choosing instead to align with a foreign autocrat over its own judiciary. Simply put, it was then that the US ceased to have a law-abiding government. The case in question involved the illegal deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia. The Supreme Court had ruled 9-0 that Garcia must be returned to the US. Trump ignored the ruling, falsely claiming the court had sided with him. His attorney-general, secretary of state, and vice-president followed suit. Bukele, known for his authoritarian streak and for spending $163-million (R3-billion) of taxpayers' money gambling on Bitcoin, happily played along. In terms of clarifying moments, Trump's meeting with Bukele is arguably equal to the public humiliation of Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky in late February. Indeed, the contrast is telling. Zelensky, whose country has been fighting for its existence against a ruthless intruder in the shape of Vladimir Putin, was scolded for being insufficiently thankful for US military aid and for failing to wear a suit. A tieless Bukele was showered with praise. Together, they dismissed the court's ruling and labelled Garcia a terrorist — without evidence. The message to the world was unmistakable: under Trump, America's government shows more deference to foreign strongmen than to its own legal institutions. In a chilling aside, Trump even joked about building more supermax prisons in El Salvador — not for foreigners, but for US citizens he labels ' homegrown ' deportees. The implication? If he deems you a threat — a gang member, a terrorist sympathiser, or simply un-American — due process may no longer apply. The official position of the world's oldest constitutional republic is that the courts should have no say in who its executive deports and on what grounds. Foreign travellers to the US should beware. They can be detained without recourse. Americans should too. Bukele is effectively playing host to an American gulag, a kind of outsourced Guantanamo. Meanwhile, warning signs for the US economy are flashing. Morgan Stanley analysts cautioned last week that investors should brace for repeated surprises, referencing Trump's ever-changing justifications for tariffs, saying that they 'should be prepared to be fooled many more times'. And sure enough, Trump's latest target is Jerome Powell and the independence of the Federal Reserve. Markets have sold off again heavily this week, unsurprisingly. But the message extends beyond economics. 'Fool me once, shame on you…' could now apply to American governance itself. Trump has pardoned white-collar criminals who praised or donated to him. He has suspended laws requiring transparency in corporate ownership and weakened anti-bribery measures, while deporting those who merely don't agree with the strong-arming agenda of the administration. If there is any government acting as a Trojan horse, it is not China. The US — once the chief architect and guarantor of the global world order and rule of law — is now seemingly intent on dismantling it. For other nations, and for citizens both around the world and in the US itself, the lesson is clear: the rules have changed. In this new, ruthless world, adapting quickly is the only way to survive. DM
Voice of America
05-03-2025
- Politics
- Voice of America
At UN, Trump's domestic policies enter international arena
The United States made clear Tuesday that it will no longer automatically support core United Nations platforms, including sustainable development and global goals that include eliminating poverty during a vote at the U.N. General Assembly. 'Therefore, the United States rejects and denounces the Agenda 2030 for sustainable development and the sustainable development goals, and will no longer reaffirm them as a matter of course,' U.S. representative Edward Heartney told the assembly. The U.S. voted against a resolution titled 'International Day of Peaceful Coexistence' that reaffirmed the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, 'acknowledging that this includes a commitment to promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.' Heartney said Americans voted in November's election for their government to refocus on U.S. interests. 'Simply put, the globalist endeavors like Agenda 2030 and the SDGs lost at the ballot box,' he said. The measure passed the assembly with 162 countries in favor and three against — the United States, Israel and Argentina. The General Assembly creates 'International Days' to raise awareness of important global issues and promote peace and tolerance. There are more than 150 of them currently, including International Women's Day, which is coming up on March 8, World Environment Day, International Mother Language Day and World Diabetes Day. On Tuesday, delegates voted to create an 'International Day of Hope,' as well as an 'International Day for Judicial Well-Being.' Washington stood alone, the sole no vote on both. Heartney said Washington 'strongly supports efforts to sustain peace and pursue diplomatic solutions to crises around the world and that individual rights are fundamental to U.S. security and the promotion of international peace." 'This resolution, however, contributes to the unnecessary proliferation of multiple international days, many of which have a similar intent,' he said of the International Day of Hope proposal, noting that there is already an International Day of Peace and another on Happiness. 'The current draft resolution also contains references to diversity, equity and inclusion that conflict with U.S. policies that seek to eliminate all forms of discrimination and create equal opportunities for all,' Heartney added. The Trump administration has made the elimination of diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI programs, a core pillar, saying it illegally promotes discrimination. Washington was also the sole vote against a resolution titled 'Education for Democracy,' which reaffirms 'the right of everyone to education' and recognizes 'the importance of equal opportunities for young people, including women.' The text recognizes 'that education for democracy nurtures responsible and active learners, capable of contributing effectively to peace and prosperity in their societies and beyond,' and notes the negative impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had on global education. It calls on governments to invest more in quality education, to bridge the digital divide and 'to advance the prospects of future generations and foster the building of peaceful, just, democratic and sustainable societies.' On Feb. 24, Washington stunned the international community when it voted against a Ukrainian and European Union-drafted General Assembly resolution supporting a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine and submitted its own text that did not name Russia as the aggressor in the war. The assembly voted to amend the U.S. text to include language on Russia's 'full-scale invasion' of Ukraine and supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. When the amended American text was put to a vote, Washington abstained. It was adopted with 93 states in favor, eight against and 73 abstentions. General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding, but they do carry the moral weight of the international community.
