The 78th General Assembly of the United Nations met
in New York from September 19 to 26, 2023.
The UN summit was dominated by one topic:
The implementation of the SDGs - the Sustainable Development Goals.
These 17 goals in total were enshrined in the 2030 Agenda.
The meeting of nations now took place exactly at the halfway
point of the 2030 Agenda, which was officially proclaimed in 2016.
This means that by the year 2030, these 17 proclaimed Sustainable
Development Goals are to be achieved by the global community.
The most important ones mentioned are 1. the fight for health and welfare,
2. the fight against hunger, 3. against ecological crises and 4. against inequality.
The opening speech immediately before the summit was given by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
His interim balance sheet makes one sit up and take notice.
Quote: [...] as we meet this weekend, the targets are in trouble.
Today, only 15 percent of the targets are on
track, with many heading in the opposite direction.
The SDGs need a global rescue plan.
And the SDG Summit [...] will be the moment for governments to
come to the table with concrete plans and proposals to accelerate progress.
Likewise, German Development Minister Svenja Schulze called for more speed
in the fight against hunger, inequality and ecological crises.
It now needs to catch up, she told the Süddeutsche Zeitung in an interview.
If things continue as they are, the global sustainability goals will not be achieved.
Very laudable goals, one would think.
But is increasing the pace of implementation of the 2030 Agenda actually serving the good?
What exactly is to be implemented?
1. expanding the global powers of the UN:
At the summit, the world community should agree to a UN declaration.
This aims to give the UN
a key role in crisis management.
For example, point 40 of the UN Declaration implies
unconditional submission and support of the consenting countries.
In the event of a declared pandemic, a U.N. body is empowered to enforce
lockdowns worldwide, push for mandatory global vaccination, and censor anything it deems misinformation.
A UN coordinator residing on-site in a country ensures compliance with UN requirements.
However, contrary to expectations, eleven countries refused their
consent - namely: Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, North Korea,
Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, Syria, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.
In a three-page letter, they opposed the global decision.
Reason: This permits unilateral coercive measures and contains blatant violations of international law.
Quote from the letter: As you know, the issue of the negative
impact of unilateral coercive [... ] of existential importance for our peoples.
One third of the world's population is affected by these illegal measures.
Further they give to consider:
As a result of unilateral coercive measures in the past, countries had
already paid a heavy toll, as numerous UN sources would also attest.
This, he said, works against progress in sustainable development and health.
In plain language, this means that the predominantly economically
weaker countries are resisting coercive measures imposed from above,
e.g. in the areas of health, climate or gender...
2. establishment of a fund for developing countries
The UN is pushing for a large SDG fund because indebted countries are unable to meet UN demands.
UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed thus called for a stimulus
package to support developing countries that are completely over-indebted.
Quote: We call on countries to support incentives to
increase affordable long-term financing by at least $500 billion
per year and to support the development of an
effective debt relief mechanism that supports payments, suspensions, longer
loan maturities, and lower interest rates for developing countries
drowning in their debt.
But what does that mean in plain language?
There are already a large number of countries that are completely over-indebted as a result of the predatory interest rate system.
While a few rich people permanently generate billions from debt and crises, now the countries from
which there is still something to get are supposed to pay into an aid fund.
It should be noted that it is first and foremost the taxpayers of the donor countries who are asked to pay.
Indebted countries can apply for funds from the fund for
expensive vaccine procurement, data monitoring systems, vaccination passport surveillance, etc.
The money from this fund then flows to the vaccine manufacturers
or pharmaceutical companies, for example, when a pandemic is declared.
3. managing ecological crises - a labeling scam?
So what about the much-vaunted saving of the
planet, protecting the environment and promoting biodiversity?
These are also proclaimed goals [SDG] of the Agenda 2030.
In this regard, it is important to know that the 2030 Agenda,
with its proclaimed Sustainable Development Goals, was created by the WEF.
This is a powerful forum of corporations and the super-rich without any democratic
legitimacy. Of all things, their plans are now supposed to save the earth?
On this subject, listen to the President of Colombia Gustavo Petro.
The latter gave a moving speech to the UN on October
19, 2022, in which he did not mince his words:
Here are some excerpts: I come from one of the three most beautiful countries in the world.
There is an exuberant nature there.
Thousands of colorful species in the seas, in the sky, on the land.
[ ... ] Who is to blame for the spell being destroyed by terror?
Who or what is responsible for the fact that life is being
drowned by the routine decisions of wealth and capital interests? [...] Nothing
is more hypocritical than the talk about saving the rainforest.
[ ... ] The cause of the climate catastrophe is capital.
The logic of cooperation aimed at consuming more and
more, producing more and more and enriching some more
and more, this is what creates the climate catastrophe.
In other words: How is the destruction of the environment to
be stopped if the sustainability goals are co-formulated by the people
who at the same time profit from this overexploitation?
Conclusion: The question arises whether the UN leadership is
really concerned with the well-being of the people when
it comes to the much-vaunted promotion of health care,
combating hunger, ecological crises as well as justice?
Or are these goals just a clever deception to win
the world community's approval for a centralized world government and
a hidden expansion of power for the super-rich?
Help uncover the deeper intentions behind euphonious words!
The time is ripe for a true salvation of the planet, for sincere concern for the well-being of people and true peace.