It is never useless to recall the founding texts. The modernity and relevance of the Charter of the United Nations constitutes the essential reference of international cooperation, that based on multilateralism, there is no other. This is expressed with great clarity in Chapter 9 and Articles 55 and 56 on International Economic and Social Cooperation. What do they say:

 

Article 55: With a view to the creation of conditions of stability and well-being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, the United Nations shall promote:

 

a.higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development;

 

b.solutions of international economic, social, health, and related problems; and international cultural and educational cooperation; and

 

c.universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.

 

Article 56：All Members pledge themselves to take joint and separate action in co-operation with the Organization for the achievement of the purposes set forth in Article 55.

 

The adoption of the Vienna Declaration and its program of action on human rights was marked by the very political decision to create an office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the OHCHR, a decision inseparable from the United Nations reform initiated at that time.

 

After the destruction of the USSR, taking into account the new international balance of power, the objective of the United States and its vassals was to put an end to multilateralism, which was an obstacle to its unilateral vision of a unipolar world. This objective, pursued yesterday, is just as important today. This has not changed, even if the balance of power is no longer the same. In 1993, in the name of the declared promotion of human rights, it was necessary to put an end to the prerogatives and the functioning of the UN Center for Human Rights which had preceded the creation of the OHCHR. The prerogatives of the Center were then limited to a role of administrative secretariat to the Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights. With the establishment of the High Commissioner it was different, it was given a political function.

 

Taking into account the new international reality required Westerners to align the goal and the means in order to distance themselves from the Charter of the United Nations, which in their eyes was obsolete and incompatible with their ambitions to reshape the world.

 

To do this, the OHCHR created on this occasion would therefore have extensive political and financial means allowing it to make the “defense of human rights” a weapon at the disposal of imperialism to subjugate the rest of the world. Today about 1300 employees work in Geneva and New York with a budget in 2019 of more than 200 million US dollars and the growing use of voluntary funds, the financing of which constitutes another means of pressure from Western countries for the implementation. of their strategies with regard to countries whose political orientations do not coincide with theirs.

 

 

This reminder is essential if we want to understand what the real objective of this era was and where we are now. Thus, we wanted to substitute for the multilateral vision, purpose and essential principle of the founding of the United Nations, the unilateral vision of a State, in this case that of the United States which has never concealed anything but their eyes in the UN system remained the survival of a bygone past, a kind of anachronism condemned to evolve or disappear. This is what led them to insist on the establishment of a new order based on new rules (rule base order), which led to the reform of the United Nations, the use of the concept of R2P (right to protect), the missions and the purpose of the OHCHR, or for example the concrete case of maritime traffic through a dangerous and false interpretation of the freedom of navigation (freedom of the seas) allowing the USA and its allies to multiply their provocations in the China Sea, particularly in the Taiwan Strait.

 

At this stage, and through the pressures it exerts through the instrumentalization of the United Nations system, the United States' objective is still to have a tool enabling it to ensure its global supremacy, by granting legitimacy to all the actions and disorders they initiate. This is essential in their eyes for the preventive wars to be waged, for the supposed actions against terrorism, as well as for the promotion of the laws of the market guaranteeing private property. It is therefore necessary in terms of human rights to impose "governance" in order to legalize the imposition of conditions by rich States on poor, weaker and developing countries through the use and systematization of structural adjustments in the name of respect for human rights. The objective is to disempower democratically elected governments by political systems of their choice, by transferring their powers and governance from the inside to the outside in order to entrust them to transnational corporations and financial institutions. This thus makes it possible to make independent states renounce their own institutions by forcing them to adopt a single economic, social and political model allowing their integration into the process of capitalist globalization.

 

At the end of the 1990s and in the name of neo-liberal globalization, this approach made it possible to radically revise the role of the UN General Assembly by limiting its authority and its prerogatives. This was also the case by devitalizing the action of UNCTAD, UNESCO and the ILO by promoting the idea of a new partnership with companies, an idea that had been supported at the World Economic Forum in Davos. We therefore set up an advisory working group of 15 heads of multinational companies, taking the form of an economic security council as in other times had been at European level "the round table of industrialists" ( ERT). 

 

As an illustration of this, we can take the obsessive reference that has become the use of contractors to carry out UN programs and activities, including the search for "strategic partnerships" with non-State actors. and coming from what is called civil society (NGOs) or from the private sector (transnational companies) including, for example, the Merryl Lynch group, which in its time was responsible for piloting the reform of the United Nations itself. Such a radical break therefore required the elimination of the remaining values, principles and very ethics that are linked to the multilateral system.

 

This has also been continued by recent applications. For example, by using consultants and private expert firms in the field of health. In France, this was the case with the management of the Covid crisis which was entrusted to the multinational Merry Lynch or the counter-reform of our pension system to the US financial investment group Blackrock, the largest specialist asset manager in the world. in the management of pension funds. One could multiply the examples which thus directly call into question the state civil service. 

 

In fact, the United States is not only seeking acceptance from member states of its neoliberal and imperialist vision, but rather enlisting them in its application and acceptance of its consequences in the name of the international community ". This is what this contribution must address further through the "Democracy Summits" organized by Joe Biden and which have made it possible to reach new heights of hypocrisy. 

 

As far as human rights are concerned, we have therefore gradually witnessed a clear break with the past. The new orientation involving new organs, new procedures, new working methods, and a new type of personnel having more to do with diplomatic mercenaries than with international civilian service. 

 

As was to be expected, the OHCHR very quickly appeared as a weapon used unilaterally by Western countries, a "Trojan horse" in a way with the aim of putting an end to the very purpose of the United Nations Charter. that is to say: the fundamental principle of sovereign equality, the settlement of international disputes by peaceful voices, cooperation through respect for the sovereignty of states, respect for territorial integrity, the freedom of peoples and their free choice. So many principles whose modernity and relevance make it possible to defend multilateralism by turning our backs on direct unilateralism in the affairs of a state up to interventionism, interference, sanctions and other coercive measures, including including war. 

 

Consequently, 30 years after the Vienna Conference, the balance sheet is therefore highly debatable. We were promised a world of peace, cooperation, development and social progress, we were entitled to wars, actions in favor of regime change, the generalization of sanctions, the direct questioning of sovereignty states, and has a social decline which, according to some countries, takes the form of a decline in civilization. In fact, this Western contestation of the purposes of the Charter, the non-respect of its recommendations has given rise to chaos which has caused human rights to regress. The world has become more unstable, more dangerous and less secure. The crisis of capitalism and its neoliberal system has weakened most nations, their economy, their institutions, their public services have been devastated, mass poverty has increased at the same time that we are witnessing the unprecedented accumulation of wealth, privileges in favor of a parasitic and corrupt oligarchy which intends to rule the world. 

 

In my view, the usefulness of this Forum must therefore enable us to take stock by taking into account this evolution of the international system, as well as the significance of the resistance, of the opposition which is growing in the face of what remains a desire to exploit unilaterally the United Nations system. It is about clarifying in order to overcome what needs to be overcome and open up credible perspectives in favor of alternatives. To do this, we need to take into account a rapidly changing world, a world that is paradoxically promising but also and contradictorily uncertain. We cannot be content with having our gaze fixed on the horizon we must anticipate seeing beyond it, this is an ambition as much as a great responsibility.因此， 

 

 

The international situation is fundamentally characterized by the global geopolitical turn. A paradigm shift giving rise both to unprecedented and worrying dangers and at the same time to the renewal of a movement of emancipation, universal and promising, based on the choice of development, cooperation, respect for sovereignty. This evolution is characterized by the upward movement of states which, starting from their own needs and those of their peoples, unite and come together to make their voices heard in an autonomous and independent manner. This unprecedented situation is illustrated by anti-hegemonic economic, financial, monetary, social and cultural alliances, making it possible to give meaning to the declaration on the right to development and the response to basic human needs.

 

On this point, expectations are immense and on all continents. Thus the beginning of the dedollarization movement that we are witnessing and which contributes to freeing itself from the suffocating tutelage of the dollar in trade is blowing a wind of panic in Washington and in Western capitals and a wind of hope in the rest of the world. This development in which China plays a decisive role alongside other countries such as the BRICS countries contributes to a new win-win state of mind. It is therefore normal that it arouses support and interest, but also attacks from Western governments and certain international institutions that are facing a deep structural crisis.

 

This indisputable fact alone testifies that the means exist to escape the deadly logic that the United States persists in wanting to impose. Basically, everything is a matter of vision and political will. For these reasons, the obstacles put forward by Western leaders together with the blind forces of finance constitute not only a brake, but a barrage on the part of those who intend and at any price to maintain their supremacy on the rest of the world. These orientations have a deliberate character, especially since it is a question of maintaining and saving the neoliberal system which has prevailed until now. The meetings of the G7 and other international or regional institutions are proof of this, the concern has not ceased to believe in the face of the swelling of public debts such as those linked to education, health, housing. Inflation, which is growing very quickly, and the stagnation of the purchasing power of workers and their families raise fears of real social disruption. Wanting, as we do, to create a diversion on other subjects such as what are called societal problems will not solve the deep crisis of countries which choose to sacrifice the social needs of their peoples, of their economy in order to preserve Washington's totalitarian claims. It's hard to turn the wheel of history any other way.

 

For example, the moribund state of the manufacturing industry in the United States as in many European countries is a reality. Deindustrialization has accelerated and generalized. It has thrown millions of people into unemployment and misery, and contributed to slowing down the implementation of the right to development. It has destroyed communities, bankrupted towns and villages. The recent epidemic crisis has revealed this. Diversions could not solve the problem of their ability to effectively resist Covid19 let alone divert people's attention from the domestic crisis of many developed countries. How could this fact alone not make the vast majority of the world's population think when in France, the country of Pasteur and vaccines, we chose to capitulate to the US big pharma and we were unable to produce vaccines and even to give itself the means to fight effectively against the epidemic by the lack of masks and respirators. 

 

The crisis in Ukraine is another significant example. A large majority of countries in the world have refused to align themselves and give in to the threats, the sanctions, the demands of the United States and the European Union in the face of the pitiful consequences and the high social price due to the blind alignment of London, Brussels and Paris with Washington's sanctions that purported to bring the Russian economy to its knees. The default of payment for the USA, the collapse or the extreme weakening of many regional banks as is the case in the USA and in Europe, Germany entered into recession, Great Britain which sees its economy collapsing and the France over-indebted, its international rating downgraded which must also face a social movement for four months never seen for 50 years. Therefore, it is no exaggeration to say that the decline of the political authority of Western countries by blindly following the instructions of Washington contributed to the aggravation of their economic, social, financial and monetary crisis which had not waited for the Ukrainian crisis. These facts are hard to dispute!

 

Also, those who in the aftermath of the fall of the Berlin Wall had, like Francis Fukuyama, prophesied "the end of history" are now admitting that they were wrong. Since the same Fukuyama affirms in a sort of headlong rush “if we let our guard down, the liberal world will disappear”. This excitement is significant. Let's say that on the scale of history this rather dramatic turnaround means that things are changing. 

 

Consequently, we must welcome and encourage the new bilateral or multilateral initiatives which seek to free themselves from the despotism of the principals who remain clinging to the dollar standard or the euro in an awkward position temporarily saved by the restriction of credit. . In fact, the time has come for a complete overhaul of the antiquated legacy of the Bretton Woods agreements. The world needs cooperation that brings about a renewal of the international architecture. The time has come to put an end to the dictatorship of the dollar and the attempts at recolonization, as well as the looting caused by this system designed by the United States through its neo-liberal vision anchored for too long in the Washington consensus. 

 

That is why!

 

It is no longer possible to postpone the reform of the international financial architecture. We need to strengthen the voice and participation of developing countries in international economic decision-making. In order to promote sustainable development in its three dimensions and the full implementation of the 2030 agenda.

 

There is an urgent need to promote technology transfer and capacity building, as well as technological and scientific cooperation from developed countries to developing countries.

 

These are possible and therefore credible urgent actions. But we must go further, there is also a need for in-depth reforms of the trading system in order to promote economic growth; investing in sustainable projects, fighting climate change and its negative effects, moderating food prices by increasing food production in order to build a global system in which no country is left behind.

 

In order to get back on track, it is crucial to have a strong and efficient trade and investment system in place. Thus, as we can see, there are concrete solutions that can make it possible to bring the international community together very broadly.

 

Therefore, if what emerges is made up of potentials and opportunities, lucidity also commands us to see that there are major risks for the future of humanity. We have to admit that the unipolar world, a consequence of the change in the relationship of forces, has in fact produced global instability, a form of chaos, the multiplication of crises, of which that in Ukraine bears witness, the explosion of social inequalities, the coercive measures as a mode of governance, climatic disturbances, the tragedy of refugees, intolerance and the rise of extremes where we thought they had been eradicated.

 

If it is true that there is no fatality in anything and that everything depends on the political will that we demonstrate, we must have the courage to confront the causes that characterize the current international systemic crisis, the 16 crises whose spoke former Nicaraguan foreign minister Miguel D' Escotto Brockman. They are all interdependent on each other and determine the content of fundamental human rights and therefore the level of solutions and reforms that must be undertaken.

 

The peoples are not deprived of instruments enabling them to cope! The world is not condemned to see its development regressed or condemned to solve its problems by resorting to force alone. The debate, the exchange, the sharing in favor of creative decisions, of proposals responding to concrete needs can contribute to the search for solutions to situations of serious crisis as we know them, alternatives allowing cooperation for development of all. This requires freeing oneself from unilateralism, ostracism, sanctions, conditionalities and even the fantasies of some. This requires a new state of mind free from the conservatisms that freeze and divide. The objective that must dominate must be the choice to come together around principles and values while respecting the differences and the sovereignty of each people and their free choice. This is an essential condition. We must re-emphasize the very principles of the Charter of the United Nations and act to bring them to life in concrete terms.

 

Consequently, we have entered a period of important choices to be made, decisive as the issues and challenges that men must face are considerable. The content of the decisions and orientations taken will determine the future of the next generations. 

 

 

In December 2021 and then in March 2023 Joe Biden successively convened two summits “for democracy” whose impact remained basically quite confidential. Far from convincing, these two initiatives were to legitimize the undeniable leadership of the United States. It was otherwise! 

 

Undoubtedly because democracy is not a North American reference but a common good that has been forged over centuries by all human communities in respect of them, a universal and tangible right, which exists and represents a heritage of principles and values accepted by almost all the countries of the world. Thus, and once again, it is the strong requirement represented by the Charter of the United Nations, the content of which is consistent with what must or should dominate the architecture of international relations. 

 

It is through respect for the Charter, specific rules and commitments, conventions, resolutions such as the pact on socio-cultural rights, on the right to development, on civil and political rights, one of the pre- condition is respect for the right of peoples to self-determination, to independence, which humanity has been able to pursue its march forward after two world wars and many other conflicts. However, Joe Biden continues and persists in defending an anachronistic vision of the world which is based on opposition between blocs to the detriment of multilateralism. So we come back to the two successive "Summits" organized by Washington at the cost of hundreds of millions of US dollars and to this vision of good and evil which recalls the "Evil Empire" "the axis of evil” and very bad memories in the early 1960s. Need we add that talking about good and bad as Joe Biden does is a moral category, bad morals and bad politics! In fact it is a speech of holy war. The United States loves to apply to others what they refuse to apply to themselves, as is the blatant case with the use of universal jurisdiction, including the International Criminal Court, which they refuse to follow for themselves. 

 

The future of the world cannot be conceived from a dominating and arrogant vision. However, for more than two centuries, the United States have been persuaded and have sought to persuade all of humanity of their exceptionality and therefore of their divine mission to direct all human activity on earth. In Washington against all odds, cynicism and arrogance still prevail. The one who in his time made Secretary of State Madeleine Albright say “If we have to use force, it is because we are America. We are the indispensable nation. We are big and we see further than other countries in the future”.

 

It is this archaic vision that was expressed during these two "Democracy Summits" of 2021 and 2023 and which continues to influence American foreign policy by manifesting itself through the bipartisan consensus of US Republicans and Democrats. This leads them to want to impose themselves as a natural and undisputed leader, in charge of an “apostolate”. According to them henceforth and for the greater good of humanity, what must prevail is a single and unique interpretation of democracy as of the defense of freedoms: theirs! That is to say “made in USA” exclusive and inclusive.

 

For washington, we must go beyond the obsolete nature of the principles that have prevailed to replace them with new rules, their rules. We remember how before the Australian parliament B. Obama declared in November 2011 to explain the strategic reorientation of the United States "if we do not set the rules, China will set them". This supposedly universal cause, but with an elastic and unilateral interpretation, belongs to the United States alone and justifies in their eyes the rallying of all the states of the planet except those who claim to see the world differently. It has henceforth been conceptualized through the notion of “democracy opposed to autocracy”. This arbitrary classification in the form of a proclamation is typical of the way of seeing and doing the United States, it is also their way of rewriting history. The famous Irish writer and playwright was right to say: “The United States is a country that has passed from barbarism to decadence without having known civilization. 

 

Thus, concerning China and Russia, Joe Biden and the new administration now consider them as adversaries influencing and acting directly on American domestic policy. This testifies to the paranoid vision of a weakened empire which everywhere sees duly designated states taking advantage of its weaknesses and even of the opposition reigning within its borders. 

 

For example, Jake Sullivan, the US National Security Advisor points out with bewilderment the dysfunctions and divisions in the United States. But in fact what is visibly incomprehensible to him is that this is happening in a country where the people have been brought up for two hundred years in the certainty of their invincibility, their exceptionality, their divine planetary mission and their "destiny". manifest". 

 

This is why the United States wants to replace international law with its own rules. Obviously these have nothing to do with the fundamental principles of law at the global level, on a universal scale. It leads to drastic polarization. This polarization of international relations is a dangerous thing. History shows that in the 19th century as in the 20th century, it always ended in wars. This is why the Americans, worried about seeing their world domination regress, want to create (they have already announced it) a new “alliance of democracies against autocracies”. By this we mean creating American and pro-American alliances, forcing everyone else to make their choice, that is to say: “you are with us or you are against us”. Double standards and hypocrisy becoming the norm aimed at justifying their own obsessions with “full spectrum dominance”. If you refuse to recognize this arrogant claim, then you no longer have any moral authority to speak, to propose, to decide. This world reviewed and corrected by the United States is in fact a perfectly totalitarian world.

 

With a hundred hand-picked states, and a few assertions of the so-called “civil society”. The two Democracy Summits therefore excluded the “autocrats” and especially “the greatest threat to democracy and freedom in the world since the Second World War” which are China and its Moscow partner. The two initiatives, however promoted by the main stream media and their experts to the rank of world event, have not yet convinced! “The mountain gave birth to a mouse” to the point that many observers have once again questioned the ability of the USA to claim to be the enlightened leader of the free world. Some even have the audacity to publicly question the amateurism of the team in place and even the early senility of the one who has been baptized “sleepy Joe”. 

 

If we follow Joe Biden and the recommendations of his "Democracy Summit", only one logical conclusion should emerge, we must rewrite this 1945 Charter which defines the purposes and principles of the UN in the name of a fact which in their eyes could not be disputed, namely: the “United States is the first defender of the world democrat”. They are therefore the exclusive depositories and the authorized reference. That's why they want to rewrite the rules in this way. 

 

The objective of these two "conclaves" being to provide a framework for collective action allowing the "democracies" to cope by being more reactive and resilient in the face of China, Washington proposed to "build a community of partners committed to global democratic renewal. 

 

Therefore, the governments that have been invited have been invited on the basis of their support for American foreign policy, in particular for the proxy war waged by the United States and NATO against Russia, or for the military reinforcement of United States against China. 

 

Taiwan was invited, although it is not a country but a part of China, which is recognized as a Chinese province almost unanimously by the countries of the world, and even by the United States themselves. This presence constituted a new provocation against China and was part of the search for a military conflict in East Asia. 

 

That they have the priorities adopted by these two “Summits”: 1- “Help the independent media in the world” in other words the mainstream media and their followers through the control by Google, Facebook and others of the authors of hostile comments in the USA that manifest themselves on social networks. 2- “Put in place tools allowing free and fair elections” which had a foretaste in certain countries, notably in the USA. 3- “Fighting corruption” through national, international and NGO networks guided from Washington. 4- “Pressure the laggards” to carry out pro-democracy reforms. 5- “Prevent coups d'etat before they occur” and “ensure in periods of transition to guarantee the influence of the United States, knowing how to show that it is its “exemplary power and its solidarity with democratic actors”. In view of recent events, we believe we are dreaming. 6-“Pressure on states that have used the Covid19 pandemic to drastically restrict freedoms without public health justification”. Finally, and in conclusion of this inventory 7-“Fight against the anti-democratic influence of China and Russia in order to stem the global anti-democratic tide”. The implementation of its guidelines, the purpose of which is to defeat China and above all else, will have to be based on the establishment of a “partnership for democracy”

 

Thus, the United States seeks to reorganize itself on its pre-square, with those which it considers not as independent states, but as vassals. Moreover, and as always, it is a question for the United States of instrumentalizing the reference to human rights.

 

Therefore, yes the United States, despite all its hypocritical rhetoric, all its smiles, lies and cynical defamations, is the greatest global problem and the greatest challenge to life, democracy, justice and universal peace.

 

 

Those who have understood how much the United States is a disaster and represents a much greater danger, must be clear in their action in effective defense of life on earth, which inevitably requires the existence of a world forum, independent and democratic committed to the real and effective protection of the rights of humanity. This is why it must be insisted and repeated that the United Nations, if it wishes to benefit from confidence and demonstrate credibility, cannot be an instrument of the United States.

 

Institutions of regional coordination and cooperation, and global coordination and cooperation are essential for the effective defense of people's lives. Governments, including many of the more progressive ones, are not sufficiently convinced of this. For those who wish to gain total and absolute control of the planet, war has already been declared. This is so serious that it can be said without a doubt that if the UN is not radically changed, if it is not reinvented, it may disappear. That is why the peoples must reclaim it from the very people who have usurped its name, so that those who are sincerely interested in other international relations can inject new life, new relevance and new effectiveness into our Organization. world.

 

Our survival will depend on the degree of determination that we commit to the defense of life and the speed with which we fulfill our urgent duty to create a United Nations independent of the United States, and capable of combating effectively the various converging crises that confront us. attack, and above all, against this claim of absolute domination of our planet.

 

This is why we insist that the United Nations be reinvented, as quickly as possible, as an organization of struggle, of effective defense for the survival of the human species and of the greater part of life on earth, threatened like this. has never been the case in history. In fact, what should dominate in particular in the field of international relations is respect for the integrity of peoples, their free choice, the response to their social demands, in particular those of youth, their sovereignty, their dignity , to end threats, interference, inhumane coercive measures, destabilization or the pursuit of regime change. For each state and each government, it is therefore necessary to decide, to take a position and to reject false solutions.

 

It is unacceptable to violate international law or replace it with rules written in secret as the United States and its vassals do, to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries and, in general, anything that contradicts the Charter of the United Nations. Conversely, we note that the documents signed by the leaders of Russia and China with other nations always underline the fact that the bilateral strategic interaction and the multifaceted partnership are not directed against anyone, but focus exclusively on the interests of the peoples and countries concerned. They rest on a clear and objective basis of overlapping and complementary interests. 

 

In the years to come, this approach will be decisive. These are the political responses to be made to the choice of development as well as to the preservation of our environment, those which address the response to the social needs of the greatest number, the fight against mass poverty and above all action against the explosion inequalities, waste and corruption. As we can see, we continue to put up with financial speculation, when it has become irrational, mafia-like, it plagues all human activities and is always to the detriment of the real economy and the needs of peoples. Can we decently laissez-faire? We must not only see this, we must move from words to deeds. It's all about will!

 

In this context, the role and place of the media is another revealing subject. This is the case with China. Thus, in official declarations and those of the media, China's development aid in favor of Third World countries is interpreted as if its objective was to make these countries dependent through usurious practices, which is false, while at the same time the United States conditions its cooperation on unilateral political requirements and conditionalities, which is true. This is the case, for example, of a country like Sri Lanka where China's aid has been internationally caricatured to allow the United States, with the help of local accomplices, to guide this founding country of the Non-Aligned Movement from now on. in the sense of conflict with China. We remember that John Kerry, then Chairman of the "Committee on Foreign Relations", had declared in a famous speech before the US Senate: "The United States cannot afford to lose Sri Lanka". At the time, this peremptory assertion was accompanied by a critical assessment of US policy towards China. This, he said, and unlike us, does not impose “any political conditionalities on Colombo. However, as far as our interests are concerned, it is different, we set prerequisites! As a result, we have greatly underestimated the geostrategic importance of this island. This is how Sri Lanka moved away from the West.”

 

The control and trusteeship of Sri Lanka has become a major strategic issue for US imperialism, NATO and the former colonial powers who cannot ignore the original place of this country, which is located a stone's throw from India. , its powerful neighbour.

 

This observation is not without explaining the relentlessness put in over the past twenty years to destabilize, divide, openly contribute to regime change and put back in the saddle the forces of the local oligarchy dependent on London, Brussels and Washington. We cannot forgive Sri Lanka for being invariably supported by China, Russia, Cuba, Iran, Venezuela and many others, but above all, for having to date been the only country which by its own means politically and militarily defeated the separatist LTTE Tiger organization which was said to be the most ruthless terrorist organization in the world. 

 

 

There exists in the world a war of major magnitude which has been declared and which is constantly developing, the one which attacks the billions of poor, hungry, homeless people, people deprived of health, employment and of education, but there is also a war against the Arabs, against the descendants of Africans, Asians and Latin Americans who are the owners of oil, gas or strategic minerals.

 

« La Conférence mondiale des droits de l'Homme affirmait voici 30 ans que l'extrême pauvreté et l'exclusion sociale constituent une violation de la dignité humaine et que des mesures urgentes sont nécessaires pour parvenir à une meilleure connaissance de l'extrême pauvreté et de ses causes, y compris celles liées au problème de développement afin de promouvoir les droits des plus pauvres et de mettre fin à l'extrême pauvreté et l'exclusion sociale et de promouvoir la jouissance des fruits du progrès social. Or ce qui domine c’est la régression sociale dans tous les domaines. 

 

“The World Conference on Human Rights affirmed 30 years ago that extreme poverty and social exclusion constitute a violation of human dignity and that urgent measures are needed to achieve a better understanding of extreme poverty and of its causes, including those related to the problem of development in order to promote the rights of the poorest and to put an end to extreme poverty and social exclusion and to promote the enjoyment of the fruits of social progress. But what dominates is social regression in all areas.

 

As 30 years ago, the context in which we find ourselves is not neutral. In 1993, this United Nations conference in Vienna came shortly after the destruction of the USSR and that of a unique historical experience. Bypassing the United Nations, the member countries of the NATO board were going to push their pawns and prepare to intervene militarily in Yugoslavia in the name of morality, democracy, human rights and "humanitarianism". to address national issues with complex roots. The choice would be to generalize “the right of interference” theorized since in the form of the concept of R2P or “right to protect” including by war. 

 

We know the results: Yugoslavia dismantled, Iraq with millions of dead and immense cultural heritage destroyed, Libya delivered to misery, looting and violence, Syria subjected to the worst abuses, what about Sudan and nearly 60 countries in the world that experience wars, extreme poverty. They are also the tragedies of millions of refugees who flee the conflicts and destruction of their communities and who, when they are looking for a place to live, are rejected beyond the coasts of European countries, or North American borders by those same who invoke respect for human rights as the banner of their action. However, to the detriment of social progress and the most elementary solidarity, armament credits are increasing exponentially. This is the case in the USA to the point of reaching for this year the unprecedented sum of 813 billion dollars when at the same time more than 30 million Americans do not benefit from any health insurance, including a large number of african americans 

 

Another example in France, the government intends to implement an unprecedented repressive arsenal through its new migration policy with racist overtones. But that's not all in this country that claims free thought and human rights, we are witnessing a worrying decline in the critical spirit, intellectual life is framed, normalized, complacent, it accompanies the dominant thought. Trade union, social and environmental action is criminalized.All of this illustrates the seriousness of the attacks on civil liberties, the systematic violation of the prerogatives of Parliament, the use of blind police repression vis-à-vis those who, for example, peacefully challenge the implementation of a counter-reform of our pension system condemned by nearly 80% of the French population. 

 

In fact, what should dominate in particular in the field of international relations is respect for the integrity of peoples, their free choice, the response to their social demands, in particular those of youth, their sovereignty, their dignity, to end threats, interference, inhumane coercive measures, destabilization or the pursuit of regime change. For each state and each government, it is therefore necessary to decide, to take a position and to reject false solutions. 

 

In the years to come, this will be decisive, because some decisions cannot be postponed. These are the political responses to be made to the choice of development as well as to the preservation of our environment, those which address the response to the social needs of the greatest number, the fight against mass poverty and above all action against the explosion inequalities, waste and corruption. 

 

However, this reality is the object of a growing rejection, not only in words but in deeds. We must build on this momentum and encourage it. There is therefore a requirement that no one is exempt from thinking about: being able to anticipate the contours as much as the content of a "community of destiny", helping to give confidence in a credible alternative and an ambition for all peoples without exception. Didn't Sun Tzu say that "he who has no goals is not likely to achieve them".