In a document summarizing the results of the two-day summit, the bloc reaffirmed its commitment to the “BRICS spirit of mutual respect and understanding, equality, solidarity, openness, inclusiveness, and consensus”.

Conspicuously absent from the 63-point statement is any mention of the fact that the United States and Israel have assassinated Tehran’s senior leadership and killed scores of civilians as part of an ongoing war against member-state Iran.

India, which currently chairs BRICS, said on Friday that “there were differing views among some members” on this matter. The United Arab Emirates, which hosts US military bases that have been targeted by Iranian strikes, reportedly blocked language condemning the US-Israel attack on Iran from appearing in the document.

On the first day of the summit, Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghch said Tehran was a “victim of illegal expansionism and warmongering” and urged BRICS to take a firm stand against “Western hegemony and the sense of impunity that the US believes it is entitled to”.

On Wednesday, at a separate gathering of BRICS representatives in Brazil, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, “urged BRICS members to confront unilateralism and hold aggressors accountable for illegal strikes against member states,” Mehr News reported.

While the statement published on Friday doesn’t include any language about the war being waged against Iran, BRICS foreign ministers were all in agreement on the need to “strengthen international climate action”, and praised the “deepening of cooperation in [WHO-led] global health initiatives”, as evidenced by the WHO Pandemic Agreement.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you: BRICS.

Not the Goldman Sachs-coined acronym we need, but probably the Goldman Sachs-coined acronym we deserve.

Subscribe now

Brazil and the EU said their newly formed Open Coalition on Compliance Carbon Markets will promote “carbon markets as one of the drivers of climate action” while seeking “interoperability of compliance carbon markets in the long term”.

Praising the carbon market alliance with BRICS’ Brazil, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen said:

Carbon pricing has become a central tool to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with a strong business case for the economy and for the people. I am happy to confirm the support of the European Union to the Declaration on the Open Coalition on Compliance Carbon Market. We want to work closely with Brazil and with many like-minded partners on putting a price on carbon.

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was similarly supportive of the coalition’s mission to create international standards for carbon markets.

“Carbon markets can become important sources of public revenue, but they will only gain scale if countries move towards common parameters,” Lula noted.

The carbon market alliance already boasts 18 members, including BRICS’ multipolar powerhouse, China.

Russia, South Africa, and India, all of whom are developing national carbon markets, have not yet joined their fellow BRICS members in the newly formed alliance.

But not everyone is as excited as BRICS about buying and selling carbon.

“Carbon markets are a new way for billionaires and corporations to extract more wealth from our territories,” said Anderson Amaro, a member of Brazil’s Small Farmers’ Movement and the Latin American Coordination of Rural Organizations.

Some might find it strange that the EU (Satanic West) and BRICS members (our multipolar saviors) would work together to integrate their carbon markets.

But it is not so strange if you stop and think about it.

Turning carbon, an essential element for all life on Earth, into a tradable commodity probably won’t protect the environment or prevent Category 5 hurricanes or whatever, but it’s very profitable for Goldman Sachs, and at the end of the day, isn’t that what really matters?

And so it’s perfectly logical that BRICS members would join forces with the EU to “put a price on carbon”.

After all, BRICS is a Goldman Sachs-coined acronym—did you think it would be bad for business?

Subscribe now

To paraphrase the G20’s website: that’s not good—that’s bad.

South Africa has used its G20 Presidency to zero in on this existential threat: “While the challenges we face are common, their causes and consequences are unevenly distributed…A lack of predictable and sustainable financing for development and climate action exacerbates these inequalities.”

Of course, actions speak louder than words, especially when there is dire need for climate action.

BRICS, which serves as the multipolar world order’s Fellowship of the Ring, just with fewer wizards and more public-private partnerships, has been working behind the scenes to lay the groundwork for equitable carbon-accounting mechanisms that will help all relevant stakeholders achieve their SDGs before the world is enveloped in life-ending carbon.

Just in the last six weeks, BRICS states have made huge strides towards accounting for, and eventually exterminating, all carbon on Earth.

September 25: China’s carbon market is booming!

Xinhua news agency provided highlights from the China Carbon Market Conference, held in Shanghai at the end of September:

By the end of August, the cumulative trading volume of China’s carbon emissions trading market was nearly 700 million tonnes, with a trading value of approximately 48 billion yuan (about 6.6 billion U.S. dollars).

Notably, the total transaction volume for the whole of 2024 was the highest since the market began trading in 2021, according to a report on the development of the national carbon market.

October 10: Brazil to propose international standards to integrate global carbon markets

Brazil has cooked up something special for the upcoming UN Climate Conference, COP30, which will be held in the Brazilian port city of Belém from November 10-21.

TV BRICS, a Moscow-based media project funded by the Russian government, reported:

Brazil intends to present the Open Coalition for Carbon Market Integration project at the 30th UN Climate Change Conference (COP30). The initiative by the country’s Ministry of Finance involves harmonising the standards of international carbon emissions trading systems and creating a single, transparent and sustainable market.

The coalition is set to become part of the New Brazil government programme, a strategy aimed at combining economic growth, social justice and environmental protection. Participation in the initiative will be voluntary, and the structure will be open to new members at any time.

According to Cristina Reis, Deputy Secretary for Sustainable Economic Development at the Ministry of Finance, the aim of the project is to accelerate global decarbonisation.

“The idea is for countries to work together to reduce emissions, thereby reducing the threat of climate crisis and the negative impact of greenhouse gases on the planet,” she said.

October 20: Can India’s carbon market fuel the country’s “cleantech future”?

There is growing excitement about India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS), which launched in 2023. Carbon trading is set to begin next year, and there are high hopes that the scheme will “power India’s cleantech future”, whatever that means.

October 22: South Africa to introduce “high-integrity” carbon markets

South Africa has also been busy with its own project to promote “climate-smart growth”.

South African state media announced the good news:

[The] government is set to introduce a new framework to guide and expand high-integrity carbon markets in South Africa.

Addressing the Carbon Markets Africa Summit 2025, the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, Dr Dion George, said when carbon markets are governed with integrity, they can mobilise finance, transfer technology, and drive inclusive growth.

“The framework lays the foundation for developing, governing, and scaling high-integrity carbon markets in South Africa. It is designed to create an enabling environment for credible, transparent, and socially inclusive carbon market activity, aligned with our Nationally Determined Contributions and with the Paris Agreement’s cooperative mechanisms,” the Minister said in Johannesburg on Wednesday.

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) embody South Africa’s efforts to reduce national emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change.

“The future of carbon markets will be defined not by promises but by performance. Our goal is simple: to build a credible system that attracts investment, delivers real emission reductions, and creates lasting value for our people. Through integrity, innovation and partnership, Africa can lead a new era of climate-smart growth,” George said.

The Draft South African Carbon Markets Framework was developed under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.

Meanwhile, South Africa has been working with the G20’s Sustainable Financing Working Group to “enhance the integrity of carbon credit markets, reduce market fragmentation and enhance carbon market efficiency”.

October 27: Russia flaunts carbon market achievements to G20

Ahead of the summit in Johannesburg, Ministry of Economic Development of Russia Nikita Kondratiev met with G20 colleagues in Cape Town to share Moscow’s well-documented affinity for carbon accounting:

G20 countries need to share experiences in the development of low-emission technologies that are a significant driver for climate change mitigation.

This was stated by the Director of the Department of multilateral economic cooperation and special projects of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia Nikita Kondratiev following the final meeting of the working group and the G20 Ministerial Meeting on Environment and Climate Sustainability, which was held in the South African city of Cape Town.

Discussions in the two meetings were based on the priorities set out by the South African presidency. On climate, the parties discussed the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the context of sustainable development and adaptation to climate change, mechanisms to respond to collateral losses and damage, and ensuring equitable transitions to a low-carbon economy.

“Our delegation presented … successes in achieving carbon neutrality in Sakhalin, as well as the first successful results in the development of the national voluntary carbon market in Russia,” concluded Nikita Kondratiev.

Please clap.

Bizarrely, BRICS’ crusade against carbon has been curiously ignored by trusted voices in independent media who preach about the glorious ascendance of the multipolar world order. Why do they remain silent about BRICS’ greatest triumphs? This makes no sense if you are trying to promote what the multipolar world stands for: equitable, sustainable, high-integrity carbon trading.

Subscribe now

On July 6, BRICS member states signed the Joint Declaration of the 17th BRICS Summit, “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance”, in Rio de Janeiro.

Similar to the game-changing Kazan Declaration, this year’s BRICS declaration serves as a manifesto for the Multipolar World Order. Containing 126 commitments, the document reads like a Bill of Rights against the global tyranny of the Collective West.

I encourage you to read the entire declaration, but here are some highlights:

BRICS is committed to improving global governance, with the United Nations playing a central role in the international system

• “We reiterate our commitment to reforming and improving global governance by promoting a more just, equitable, agile, effective, efficient, responsive, representative, legitimate, democratic and accountable international and multilateral system in the spirit of extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits. In this regard, we take note of the adoption of the Pact of the Future at the Summit of the Future, including its two annexes, the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration of Future Generations.”

• “[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), in their entirety and interconnectedness 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.”

BRICS recognizes the International Monetary Fund as the center of the global financial safety net, but is concerned that there aren’t enough women in IMF leadership positions

• “In the current context of uncertainty and volatility, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) must remain adequately resourced and agile, at the center of the global financial safety net (GFSN), to effectively support its members, particularly the most vulnerable countries.”

• “[W]e call for improved management procedures, including through a merit-based and inclusive selection process that would increase regional diversity and representation of EMDEs [Emerging Markets and Developing Economies] in the leadership of the IMF and the WBG [World Bank Group], as well as the role and share of women at the managerial level.”

BRICS is committed to implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

• “[We] commend the work of the BRICS Urbanization Forum to further strengthen collaboration between government and societies at all levels, in all BRICS countries in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and promoting the localization of the SDGs.”

BRICS calls on the international community to maintain and scale up efforts to combat climate change. BRICS will transition to zero- or low-emission transportation to help reduce its carbon footprint

• “We stress our commitment to uphold multilateralism as necessary to address challenges threatening our shared planet and future such as climate change. We resolve to remain united in the pursuit of the purpose and goals of the Paris Agreement and the objectives of the UNFCCC and call on all countries to uphold their existing commitment as Parties to the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement and to maintain and scale up their effort to combat climate change.”

• “We call for a strengthened global response to climate change, in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication. Understanding the urgency of climate change, we endorse the BRICS Climate Leadership Agenda as a statement of our resolve to exercise collective leadership through mutual empowerment, by advancing solutions that support BRICS development needs and priorities, while accelerating action and enhancing cooperation towards the full implementation of the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement. We underscore that this outcome demonstrates that multilateralism and Global South cooperation can shape a more inclusive and sustainable governance for a better future.”

• “We also recognize the need to encourage the use of zero and low emission vehicles in urban mobility. We emphasize the importance of cooperation among BRICS members in the context of reducing carbon emissions in aviation and maritime transport. We recognize the importance of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF), Lower Carbon Aviation Fuels (LCAF), and other Aviation Cleaner Energies as a pathway for reducing carbon emissions from international aviation. We encourage technological cooperation among BRICS countries, considering their national realities, in the development and deployment of cleaner aviation energies and associated technologies. We also emphasize cooperation to enhance air and maritime connectivity and promote decarbonization of maritime transport, as well as to strengthen initiatives in logistics integration and innovation.”

BRICS advocates for a fair and inclusive international system for carbon accounting and is collaborating with the private sector to create carbon markets

• “We encourage, as appropriate, the use of mutually recognized methodologies and standards for assessing greenhouse gas emissions. We appreciate the adoption of the BRICS Principles for Fair, Inclusive and Transparent Carbon Accounting in Product and Facility Footprints Principles as an important BRICS contribution towards a more balanced international approach to guide the design of carbon accounting-based systems, standards and methodologies and underscored the value of identifying knowledge gaps that could be addressed through further work, such as the contextualization of these principles within specific sectors and for all greenhouse gases and their potential for supporting policy frameworks involving carbon accounting. We note the adoption of the BRICS Report on Intellectual Property Options to Enhance Climate Change Related Technology Cooperation as a promising mapping of climate change related cooperative arrangements with potential for future consideration by BRICS member countries, with the aim of supporting and accelerating the development and transfer of technology as a critical enabler of climate action.”

• “We acknowledge Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, as an important instrument for fostering higher ambition in mitigation actions and to promote sustainable development and environmental integrity, by offering pathways to steer private and public investment towards climate efforts. By strengthening these mechanisms, we can catalyze private sector engagement, encourage technology transfer, and complement public finance flows. We note the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding on the BRICS Carbon Markets Partnership and its value for promoting cooperation in the field of carbon markets, with a specific focus on capacity building and exchange of experiences. We look forward to its implementation as a cooperative approach to support members in their climate strategies, including in complementing mitigation efforts and mobilizing needed resources.”

BRICS recognizes the World Health Organization’s leading role in directing and coordinating international health work, especially during crises

• “We underscore the role of the World Health Organization as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work within the UN System, particularly in times of crises and emergencies, and emphasize the necessity of bolstering its mandate, capabilities, and financing mechanisms.”

BRICS understands that a well-funded WHO will help ensure vaccines for all and achieve health-related Sustainable Development Goals

• “A robust and adequately funded WHO is essential to effectively address current and future public health challenges, mitigate inequalities, and ensure equitable access to healthcare services, including medicines, and vaccines for all, particularly in developing countries. We commit to actively supporting efforts to strengthen the global health architecture, fostering equality, inclusivity, transparency, and responsiveness, ensuring no country is left behind in achieving health-related Sustainable Development Goals.”

BRICS applauds the adoption of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, which will help safeguard the world from future pandemics

• “We acknowledge the adoption of the WHO Pandemic Agreement by the 78th World Health Assembly. The Agreement will solidify the foundation for a safer and more equitable world against future pandemics. We stand ready to carry this momentum forward to ensure a timely conclusion of Member States-led and -driven negotiations for the Agreement’s Annex on Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing.”

After nearly a month of total silence, BRICS has expressed serious concern about Israel’s unprovoked attacks against Iran without mentioning Israel by name

• “We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since 13 June 2025, which constitute a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations, and express grave concern over the subsequent escalation of the security situation in the Middle East. We further express serious concern over deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities under full safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in violation of international law and relevant resolutions of the IAEA. Nuclear safeguards, safety, and security must always be upheld, including in armed conflicts, to protect people and the environment from harm. In this context, we reiterate our support for diplomatic initiatives aimed at addressing regional challenges. We call upon the United Nations Security Council to be seized of this matter.”

A new age of sustainable understanding and inclusion

Thanks to BRICS, real people-to-people cooperation based on mutual respect and inclusive carbon markets is replacing the unipolar model of inequitable carbon markets. As the Joint Declaration unequivocally states:

“We want to reaffirm our commitment to the BRICS spirit of mutual respect and understanding, sovereign equality, solidarity, democracy, openness, inclusion, collaboration and consensus. Building upon the past 17 BRICS Summits, we are now extending our commitment to strengthening cooperation within the expanded BRICS, based on three pillars of cooperation: politics and security, economy and finance, and cultural and people-to-people cooperation. We are also enhancing our strategic partnership to benefit our peoples by promoting peace, a fairer and more representative international order, a revitalized and reformed multilateral system, sustainable development, and inclusive growth.”

Subscribe now

When Iran joined BRICS in 2024, it pledged to uphold international law and embrace the group’s “spirit of solidarity”. A year and a half later, BRICS has reciprocated by doing and saying absolutely nothing as Israeli missiles rain down on Tehran.

The Islamic Republic expected BRICS to condemn Israel’s unprovoked aggression after member states met to discuss the conflict on June 16-17, but as of June 19, the group’s consultations have yet to produce an official statement.

Infobrics.org, the joint website of the ministries of foreign affairs of the BRICS member states, has no information about the unlawful attacks against member state Iran. There’s also no mention of the June 16-17 BRICS consultations on the conflict.

Instead, on June 17, infobrics.org announced the creation of the bloc’s “first recommendation on climate finance,” which calls on “multilateral development banks (MDBs) to mobilize private capital for climate action in the Global South”.

BRICS is not a military alliance, but the group sees diplomatic, political, and economic cooperation as key components to “promoting international and regional peace and security”. Adopted in 2023 to pave the way for new members, the bloc’s Guiding Principles, Standards, Criteria and Procedures lists “strengthening cooperation under the three pillars of political and security, economic and financial, and cultural and people-to-people cooperation” as a key objective. The group also claims to support an international system in which “sovereign states cooperate to maintain peace and security”.

What then can explain BRICS’ conspicuous silence?

Part of the answer can be found in a recent news report from the Times of India:

India has distanced itself from a [Shanghai Cooperation Organization] statement condemning Israel’s strikes on Iran, reflecting its continued support for Israel … [India’s] strong relationship with Israel, particularly in defense, appears to be a deciding factor.

Even Moscow, which condemned Israel’s attacks (while only offering to “mediate” an end to the conflict, as opposed to providing material support to help Iran defend itself), has publicly acknowledged it has a gentlemen’s agreement with the Israelis.

Is this the Multipolar World Order we were promised?

Subscribe now

On May 20, the 78th World Health Assembly “adopted” the Pandemic Agreement. Adopted is in scare quotes because the WHA rubber-stamped an agreement that hadn’t been finalized. In other words, WHO member states agreed by consensus (without voting) to “adopt” an incomplete document.

It was historic (source: WHO). Gavi, the Bill Gates-funded vaccine alliance, hailed the completion of the incomplete Pandemic Agreement as a “powerful testament to the strength of multilateralism and shared commitment to global health” and welcomed “the recognition of immunization as a vital tool to prevent pandemics and save lives in this agreement.”

But there were a few party-poopers. A day before being “adopted” without a vote, the agreement was put to the ultimate test: a committee vote in which not a single member state voted Nay: 124 states were in favor, with 11 abstentions (Bulgaria, Egypt, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, The Netherlands, Paraguay, Poland, Russia, and Slovakia.)

Probably like me you are surprised that this fraudulent agreement was able to sneak past the vast majority of BRICS states undetected, and that not a single member of the Multipolar World Order voted against it. What could this mean? I did some research on how the original BRICS bloc, plus the new BRICS members who abstained (Egypt and Iran), felt about this horrible trash-agreement.

Brazil

Brazil called for the “full and timely implementation” of the Pandemic Agreement, describing the treaty as a “historic milestone for global health, and a powerful reaffirmation of multilateralism in a time of growing cultural-political tension and fragmentation.”

The Brazilian delegation added: “President Lula, speaking at the UN General Assembly 2024, called for an urgent conclusion to this agreement, and today we celebrate not the end of the negotiations, but the beginning of a new global commitment to cooperation, equity and shared resilience.”

India

India praised the “adoption” of the Pandemic Agreement as a “collective reaffirmation of our shared responsibility to protect humanity from future health crises.”

The BRICS state highlighted its own contributions to the agreement, noting that it had “co-facilitated the preparation of articles on pandemic prevention and surveillance and the One Health approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

China

The Chinese delegation said Beijing had played “an important role in helping reach consensus” that led to the agreement’s adoption.

Xia Gang, deputy director of China’s National Disease Control and Prevention Administration, said he believed the Pandemic Agreement would “help promote the equitable distribution of technology, funding and resources and support developing countries in strengthening their capacity to detect and respond to pandemics.” Xia cited “China's constructive participation in the negotiations of the pandemic treaty” as a “prime example” of Beijing’s active participation in “global public health governance”.

In an address before the WHA plenary session on May 20, Chinese Vice Premier Liu Guozhong called on WHO member states to “firmly support” the World Health Organization’s leading role in coordinating “global public health governance”, adding that special attention should be given to ensuring equitable “vaccine distribution”:

Five years ago, Chinese President Xi Jinping called on all countries to join hands in building a global community of health for all at the 73rd World Health Assembly, Liu said. China has firmly honored this commitment with concrete actions as the international community widely recognizes China's role in and contributions to combating the COVID-19 pandemic, he added.

Noting that global public health security is now facing significant challenges under the impact of unilateralism and power politics, Liu emphasized that China has always put people and their lives first, implemented a health-first strategy, actively participated in global health governance, and promoted the building of a global community of health for all.

The international community should uphold multilateralism, firmly support the World Health Organization (WHO) in playing its leading and coordinating role in global public health governance, uphold fairness and equity, and firmly support the legitimate demands of developing countries in areas such as public health arrangements, vaccine distribution and technology transfer, he said.

He also announced that China would pledge an additional $500 million over the next five years to the World Health Organization.

Chinese state media said the “historic” Pandemic Agreement will allow for “rapid sharing of data about new diseases, the distribution of medical resources to the WHO in the event of a future outbreak, and the transfer of health technologies to poorer nations.”

“The system will address how countries — especially underdeveloped ones — could benefit from sharing pathogens with pandemic potential, particularly in exchange for pharmaceutical products, if such are developed by drugmakers,” wrote China Daily.

South Africa

The South African delegation argued that the “COVID-19 pandemic” had demonstrated “the urgent need for an international framework to forge a stronger and equitable global health architecture to prevent, prepare for, and respond to future pandemics.” South Africa advocated for the “swift implementation” of the “landmark” Pandemic Agreement, which would mark a “crucial step towards achieving a safer, healthier and more resilient world for all.”

Demonstrating his country’s commitment to the treaty’s implementation, President Cyril Ramaphosa told WHA member states that South Africa would use its G20 presidency to champion “pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.”

Egypt

Concerned by “opaque behavior by some parties prior to the decision”, Egypt abstained when the Pandemic Agreement was put to a vote in Committee A.

Despite its misgivings over protocol, the Egyptian delegation expressed hope that the agreement would “become a tool of empowerment, a shield of equity and a symbol of what multilateralism can achieve when anchored in distrust.”

Iran

The Iranian delegation issued an explanatory note after it abstained from voting on the agreement:

While we appreciate the efforts of the WHO and INB Co-Chairs, we remain concerned that key priorities of developing countries have not been adequately addressed.

Article 12 and its Annex, which are essential for implementation, are still under negotiation. Without them, the agreement cannot be considered final. We also regret the lack of binding commitments on unhindered and equitable access to medical countermeasures, technology transfer, and know-how, as well as the continued silence on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on health systems.

Although it viewed the current version of the treaty as “incomplete, unfinished, and non-conclusive,” Iran expressed “readiness to engage constructively in future negotiations aimed at finalizing the instrument.”

Russia

Russia was the only founding BRICS member to abstain from the Committee A vote.

The reason it abstained differs depending on which explanation you read.

For example, in an interview a month before the WHA convened, Russian Permanent Representative to the UN Office in Geneva, Ambassador Gennady Gatilov, told TASS:

[I[t is already known that a number of countries, including the United States, Argentina, and Slovakia, do not intend to join the agreement. Therefore, it is difficult to speak of the formation of a strong, universally accepted foundation for multilateral cooperation in pandemic preparedness and response. Much work still lies ahead.

To summarize, in any case, effective pandemic response requires, above all, unity within the global community and genuine commitment from all stakeholders, including the private sector, to constructive cooperation based on the principles of solidarity, fairness, and respect for national sovereignty. Regrettably, this has not yet been achieved.

So Moscow has reservations because members of the collective West have not shown “genuine commitment” to the agreement? No! Moscow abstained because the collective West is trying to use the Pandemic Agreement for its own interests.

In response to the Committee A vote on the treaty, the Russian delegation said that the COVID-19 pandemic had “demonstrated that the Global South is vulnerable to the frauds of the collective West and its pharmaceutical giants,” prompting the need for a “more fair” pandemic response instrument.

While supportive of the treaty in principle, the Russian delegation criticized “attempts to impose approaches and standards that do not enjoy universal support, to turn the Agreement into a mechanism of coercion, external control and lobbying for the interests of the industry of individual states.”

After the agreement was formally “adopted”, the Russian delegation wrote:

In explanation of [our] position after the vote, [we] emphasized that the Russian Federation builds its emergency health response based on the interests of the Russian people, national priorities in public health protection, domestic laws, rules, and standards, and in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The adoption of the resolution by the WHA does not mean that countries are joining the Agreement – much less that its implementation has begun.

The Agreement will not be open for signature until the Annex on the “Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System” is developed and approved by the WHA.

Stressing its commitment to “building a multipolar international system”, Moscow pledged to “increase assistance to the states of the Global South, based on their needs and without imposing political conditions, with the aim of partner countries gaining genuine independence and sovereignty in protecting the health of their populations from the threat of infections.”

Is this the same “historic milestone for global health” (Brazil), the “collective reaffirmation of our shared responsibility to protect humanity from future health crises” (India), the “historic” agreement “reached by consensus” (China), the “crucial step towards achieving a safer, healthier and more resilient world for all” (South Africa)? Why is Russia being such a BRICS-downer?

Russia: Protecting the Global South from “the frauds of the collective West and its pharmaceutical giants”?

Naturally, one can’t help but applaud a statement like, “The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that the Global South is vulnerable to the frauds of the collective West and its pharmaceutical giants.”

But the Russian delegation’s statement is missing some important context: Moscow actively participated in, and profited from, “the frauds of the collective West and its pharmaceutical giants” aimed at the Global South during COVID. Putin himself described Russia’s partnership with Western pharmaceutical giants as an example of “unification of efforts” promoted by the World Health Organization.

On December 21, 2020, the Kremlin held a videoconference to mark the signing of an agreement between the Gamaleya Center (the developer of Sputnik V), AstraZeneca, the Russian Direct Investment Fund (Russia’s sovereign wealth fund), and Russian pharmaceutical firm R-Pharm, to strengthen cooperation and conduct joint studies of a Sputnik V-AstraZeneca COVID vaccine “cocktail”.

Russian President Vladimir Putin commended the project as a shining example of “implementing the recommendations of the WHO” in the fight against COVID:

Today, I am pleased to note that it is Russian scientists, our investment structures, and representatives of the partner company AstraZeneca, who are practically implementing the recommendations of the World Health Organization. Today, you are doing what has already been repeated many times by representatives of the WHO - the World Health Organization. They called and still call for a unification of efforts. And you, dear colleagues and friends, are showing an example of leadership in uniting international efforts, thereby bringing victory over this dangerous virus closer. […]

I would like to note that AstraZeneca has been working on the Russian market for several years, successfully implementing a number of investment projects, I know that they even built a factory, investing in joint research and personnel training. […]

I am confident that the cooperation between Russian colleagues and AstraZeneca will allow us to achieve a breakthrough not only in work on vaccines, but also on a whole line of other vital drugs.

Addressing AstraZeneca CEO Pascal Soriot, Putin added:

I want to wish you success not only on the Russian market, but also on global markets, and express hope that the new year will be favorable for your company and for solving the problems we are talking about now.

The partnership between the Russian government and AstraZeneca began in July 2020, nearly a month before Russia unveiled Sputnik V, “the world’s first registered COVID vaccine”. In a July 17, 2020 press release, R-Pharm announced it had received a “cell line and adenoviral vector” from AstraZeneca that would be used to produce the British-Swedish vaccine in Russia:

Russia will be one of the hubs for the production and supply of the vaccine to international markets. It is expected that exports will be organized to more than 30 countries around the world, including the Middle East, the Balkan region and the CIS countries.

AstraZeneca is confident that together with R-Pharm it will be able to provide the vaccine to millions of people in the most effective way.

At the time, R-Pharm had already partnered with RDIF to manufacture what would later be known as Sputnik V.

Russia began exporting AstraZeneca’s vaccine to nations of the Global South in September 2021, six months after European states began suspending the drug’s use over safety concerns. R-Pharm continued to export the British-Swedish shot until September 2022, when it suspended production due to “lack of demand.”

As AstraZeneca’s vaccine faced increasing scrutiny from western media and governments, Russia’s sovereign wealth fund rushed to its partner’s defense.

“The UK media and government must do a better job of protecting the reputation of AstraZeneca, a safe and effective vaccine that its competitors are constantly attacking through the media with facts taken out of context,” the Russian Direct Investment Fund said in a statement released on October 11, 2021.

RDIF’s solidarity with western big pharma wasn’t limited to white-knighting for AstraZeneca. On October 13, 2021, Russia’s sovereign wealth fund announced it was conducting joint research with Pfizer in hopes of developing more Sputnik V/Big Pharma combo shots.

“We already have a joint study with Moderna in Argentina, and Argentina is now studying the combination of Sputnik and Moderna. There are also two other countries that are now studying the combination of Pfizer and Sputnik, and we believe that this will be a very successful combination,” Kirill Dmitriev, CEO of RDIF, said.

Is Moscow actually concerned about the frauds of western big pharma, or is it worried that when the next “pandemic” arrives, its trusted western partners won’t be as generous with the spoils? Does the Russian government oppose anti-human medical tyranny and biosecurity theater, or is it upset that a rival drug cartel is peddling clot-shots on turf that it has claimed for itself? Given Moscow’s active participation in the frauds of the collective West during COVID, it is unreasonable to interpret complaints about the Pandemic Agreement being used as a mechanism for “external control and lobbying for the interests of the industry of individual states” as: Where’s our cut?

To help answer these questions, let’s examine the Russian government’s “emergency health response based on the interests of the Russian people.”

“The interests of the Russian people”

Please email me if you have any evidence to suggests that, as the Russian delegation at the WHA claimed, “the Russian Federation builds its emergency health response based on the interests of the Russian people, national priorities in public health protection, domestic laws, rules, and standards, and in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.”

A few bullet points for your consideration (taken from this blog’s Origin Story, which you should read):

• In a country where 90% of the population opposed digital cattle tags, nearly every region in Russia adopted digital cattle tags.

• In a country where very few people were excited about Sputnik V, all 85 federal subjects introduced compulsory vaccination decrees, coercing tens of millions of Russians to get injected with unproven genetic slurries.

• In a country that was already suffering from the health-destroying effects of “healthcare optimization,” the Russian Health Ministry suspended routine medical care in order to reserve hospital beds for “COVID” patients—who were “treated” with toxic liver pills and HIV medications.

• The Russian government’s decision to suspend routine medical care to focus on “fighting coronavirus” had predictable results:

The authorities held back [COVID], which had very little effect on the increase in mortality, leaving those who really needed it without planned medical care. This was the reason for the huge increase in mortality, at least 200,000 “extra” deaths. We can now speak of this as a proven statistical fact.

• In 2021, at the height of coercive “public health” measures in Russia, the Russian Federation recorded a natural population decline of over 1.04 million people—an “anti-record” that surpassed the worst years of the socioeconomic destruction of the 90s; a figure so unthinkable that it hadn’t been seen since the end of the Great Patriotic War.

But here are some more recent developments concerning Moscow’s tireless efforts to “protect the interests of the Russian people”:

In February of this year, Russia’s Constitutional Court upheld the legality of mandatory COVID vaccination policies, implemented across Russia in autumn 2021, which forced millions of Russians to choose between getting vaccinated and being “indefinitely suspended” from work.

While mandatory vaccination orders were canceled in the first half of 2022, the legal framework for coercive medical intervention remains intact. The law “On the sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population” requires Russian citizens to get vaccinated if ordered to do so by the country’s medical authorities.

Incredibly, there are Russians who still can’t return to work after refusing to get vaccinated in 2021. A report from February in Moskovskij Komsomolets detailed the case of a 39-year-old Muscovite who had been fighting for three years for reinstatement after losing his job due to his unvaccinated status.

The Pandemic Agreement is a Pandora’s Box designed to usher in a “One Health” approach to “pandemics”. However, in its current form, the treaty does not give the WHO “any authority to direct, order, alter or prescribe national laws or policies, or mandate States to take specific actions, such as … impose vaccination mandates.”

In other words, the Russian delegation is blowing smoke when it stresses that Moscow is guided by “domestic laws, rules, and standards”. Tellingly, these homegrown public health policies are far more extreme than anything the WHO could forcefully impose on Russia.

But please don’t get the wrong idea: Moscow’s commitment to respecting national sovereignty has not stopped it from advocating for an international system for permanent biosecurity theater.

In April 2021, Russia unveiled plans to create a “Sanitary Shield” to protect its country from the threat of positive PCR tests. By 2030, dozens of bio-checkpoints will administer not-fit-for-purpose PCR tests to biohazards (people) entering the Russian Federation. The Shield will also allow Russia to expedite the creation of unproven genetic injections to combat the spread of positive PCR tests.

In keeping with its deep commitment to reduce the number of positive PCR tests, Moscow wants the entire world to use its very scientific, health-preserving Shield. TASS has the details:

Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov believes it is possible to create a global sanitary shield to combat threats in the healthcare sector. He expressed this opinion at a joint meeting of finance and healthcare ministers of the G20 countries.

As reported by the Finance Ministry's press service on Saturday, during the meeting the minister shared his experience in creating a rapid response system to pandemics in Russia as part of the federal project “Sanitary Shield”, which involves creating a system for rapid diagnostics of infectious diseases, accelerated development of test systems and vaccines when new epidemiological threats arise. “We believe that a similar sanitary shield could be built at the global level,” Siluanov noted.

The head of the Ministry of Finance also stressed the need to prevent fragmentation of the global health system and maintain the central role of the World Health Organization (WHO) in it.

I have a question…

If BRICS advocates for a sovereign and independent Global South, and serves as a bulwark against the machinations of the collective West, why did BRICS nations express near-unanimous support for the Pandemic Agreement?

It’s a simple question: Why are members of the Global South (including BRICS members) among the most zealous supporters of the treaty?

In a joint statement issued after the Committee A vote, members of the WHO Africa Region said they “eagerly awaited” the adoption of the Pandemic Agreement, which they considered legally binding under the WHO Constitution—a radical position even for many western states that voted in favor of the treaty:

[The Pandemic Agreement] represents the first legally binding framework to address critical gaps that the International Health Regulations (2005) could not fully encompass … We believe the implementation of both instruments will enhance States’ capacity to address future health emergencies and pandemics.

[…]

Lastly, the Africa Region maintains that this instrument [the Pandemic Agreement] should be legally binding under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution. We envision a robust framework capable of fostering enhanced cooperation and coordination in bolstering global preparedness and response capacities.

(The statement was submitted by BRICS state South Africa on behalf of 40+ countries belonging to the Global South.)

Allow me to rephrase my question…

When Very Serious and Independent Internet Thought Leaders salivate over how BRICS boasts 45% of the world’s population, and 35% of global GDP, and half the world’s strategic marmalade reserves, etc., etc., why is there never any discussion about WHAT THIS ALLEGEDLY ASCENDANT GEOPOLITICAL POWER BLOC SUPPORTS, ADVOCATES FOR, LIKES A LOT, AND SO FORTH?

WHY IS DISCUSSION ABOUT BRICS VERY OFTEN VEILED IN A BUNCH OF MEANINGLESS BUZZWORDS AND STATISTICS, INSTEAD OF FAR MORE USEFUL INFORMATION SUCH AS:

BRICS OVERWHELMINGLY (!!!!!!!!!!!) SUPPORTS THE PANDEMIC AGREEMENT, BUT MOSCOW FEELS LEFT OUT BECAUSE IT KNOWS THAT WHEN THE “CAT FLU PANDEMIC” ARRIVES, IT WILL PROBABLY BE MUSCLED OUT OF THE mRNA CAT-SLURRY MARKET BY ITS TRUSTED WESTERN PARTNERS.

Thank you for reading and have a nice Saturday.

Subscribe now

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.

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:

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.

Subscribe now

Greetings.

I recently had a delightful chat with Hrvoje Morić about all sorts of unfortunate things, like the Not War and YouTube Experts.

More uplifting topics, such as the joys of cow milk, were also mentioned.

You can watch/listen to our lively discussion here.

Geopolitics & Empire’s Substack

Riley Waggaman: The Only Alternative Multipolarity Offers is a Faster & Harder Digital Gulag!

Riley Waggaman returns to give us an update on the Not-War in Ukraine and the state of things in the Russian Federation. Denazification has not occurred in Ukraine, Kiev has never been more militarized, and NATO has expanded and been galvanized even more all thanks to Putin and the Kremlin. All of Moscow's "red lines" have been crossed, none of this mak…

Listen now

2 years ago · 9 likes · 5 comments · Geopolitics & Empire and Edward Slavsquat

Don’t forget to follow Hrvoje on Telegram and Substack!

More soon.

— Riley

Subscribe now

A recurring theme here at Eddie Slavsquat is how the proles scream and yell at each other, and sometimes even kill and maim each other in state-sponsored UFC deathmatches (“wars”), while the space lizards frolic in their fields of delicious fiat as they laugh and laugh and laugh.

For example: Have you heard of the Russia-India-Satanic West resource pipeline? Russia sells India discounted crude, which is subsequently exported to the Satanic West in the form of various petroleum products, which are the target of 10 trillion Satanic West sanctions as part of a war of annihilation against Moscow. So it goes.

We wrote about this friendly business arrangement almost a year ago. Has anything changed since then? No, not really. (Bloomberg recently claimed that Satanic West Sanctions have made India more nervous about slurping up rivers of sanctioned Russian oil that it then sells to the Satanic West.)

The current state of Russia-India trade raises questions about whether BRICS is actually fighting an economic shadow war against the Collective West, or if that’s just doggy doo-doo that Zerohedge uses to boost ad revenue.

There are other takeaways from Russia-India trade that are rarely discussed by Very Serious Internet People. At the end of January, the Russian International Affairs Council—which is a think tank operated by the Russian government—listed “the trade imbalance caused by the excess amount of rupees accumulated by Moscow” as one of the main obstacles to trade between Russia and India. As it turns out, “de-dollarization” doesn’t work very well if you trade goods for a non-convertible currency that you have little use for.

All of these Issues were touched upon in an article published at the end of February by Russian outlet Fontanka. So instead of typing up my own blog post, I will share a rough translation of Fontanka’s article with you.

The article does a decent job of explaining Russia-India trade without resorting to mystifying economic gobbledygook. It also provides a concise summary of how Russia’s Very Bad Sanctioned Oil somehow ends up in the West, with India acting as middle-BRICS-man.

Although Fontanka is clearly critical of the massive trade imbalance, and also points to how weird it is that delicious sanctioned Russian crude somehow finds its way to Russia’s Arch Nemeses, the paper correctly notes that there’s great potential and room for growth re: Russia’s trade with India. I fully agree and obviously I am not opposed to nations engaging in mutually beneficial trade. I’m just not sure if that’s how you can describe the current state of affairs. Debatable, at least.

What do we exchange our oil for in India?

February 25, 2024. Fontanka.ru

India was not a particularly noticeable economic partner for Russia, but new realities have made it one of the leaders in attracting foreign currency. At the same time, a colossal trade imbalance has emerged: Russia gives India goods worth $60 billion, while India gives Russia only 4 billion.

What is Russia selling India?

Over three years, the volume of supplies of Russian goods to India has increased 10 times. Already in 2019–2020, the main export items were: oil, coal, diamonds, paper and fertilizers. Russian sunflower oil has always done well. In total, about 6 billion dollars. The caravans also did not go back empty: medicines, simple equipment and telephones, tea, shrimp and some other household items—about $2-2.5 billion.

The cataclysms of 2022–2023 had a huge effect on Indian-Russian mutual trade. Tens of millions of tons of Russian oil went to ports with names exotic to the Russian ear such as Mundra, Kandla, and Maharashtra.

Total crude oil exports from Russia to India in 2023, according to Indian customs data, amounted to 62.2 million tons and another 5.6 million tons of petroleum products. The average annual price is surprising. With the customs value of these 62.2 million tons being $44.99 billion, that comes out to $99.1 per barrel, assuming that there are 7.3 barrels in a ton of Russian oil. This, of course, is very expensive, especially considering that in many countries Russian oil comes at a large discount, and the UAE bought it from Russia for an average of $75 per barrel all last year.

The situation comes into line with reality a little more when we look at the monthly figures. For example, in December, the average price of 6.9 million tons shipped to India was already only $78 per barrel. Be that as it may, according to the documents, it turns out that selling oil to India was very profitable both for our exporters and for the budget. After all, taxes are paid on the price indicated in the documents.

What the Indians are doing with our oil is generally clear. No re-export is visible in customs statistics, but this is not required. The main loading ports of India are home to powerful oil refineries. And their work is visible to the naked eye. If in 2021 the Indians exported 48 million tons of naphtha, gasoline, diesel and jet fuel, then in 2023 the volume reached 104 million tons. The largest buyer is the Netherlands. It is the main European distribution center. The volume of supplies from India there grew over the past year from 9.4 to 18 million tons, at an average of $111/barrel. 7.2 million tons of oil refined in India ( +42% ) went to the United States, the average price was $120/barrel. Great Britain and Italy doubled their purchases. In Portugal the increase is four times, in Romania—seven times. In short, there is demand.

With the exception of oil and petroleum products, which last year accounted for 81.3% of Russia’s export revenue, among the largest items only sunflower oil showed significant growth: +31% in dollars. Both coal and phosphate fertilizers show a minus. Diamond supplies to India are in monetary terms at last year’s level. Russian soybean oil ($178 million, up 78%) and rolled steel ($127 million, up 360%) are successfully winning their place under the hot Indian sun. Gas supplies have doubled ($121 million), but it is not yet possible to transport much of it by sea.

Among the pleasant little things are peas. Last year, Russian farmers managed to earn $34 million from India—before that, supplies were practically zero.

Among the unfortunate losses is the complete loss of the Indian market for polyamide compounds, which are used in the production of stamped plastic parts. Compared to last year’s 41 million dollars, in 2023 Russia sold India polyamide compounds worth $6 million. Russian producers of synthetic rubbers suffered even greater losses. A year ago—$90 million dollars. In 2023—only $8 million.

What India is selling Russia

Studying Indian exports to Russia is much more exciting. There are completely unexpected things that are not usually associated with supplies from India.

The fact that Russia is hooked on Indian pills has been known for a long time. But each year there are fewer and fewer medicines from India. In 2011 we received pharmaceutical products worth $512 million from there—but in 2022, it was $371 million. The decline in supplies occurs in many groups of drugs: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (immediately -60% ), oncology ( -46% ), antihistamines ( -15% ), antihypertensives ( -31% ). Of the major pharmaceutical brands, shipments of Indian ibuprofen declined the most ( -63% ).

A quick analysis fails to find a clear explanation for this phenomenon. Back in 2022, against the background of the curtailment of activity in Russia by Western pharmaceutical firms, the authorities expected an increase in the supply of domestic drugs. Most likely, this is one of the effects of the general principle of government procurement of drugs: in the event of competition between imported tablets and domestic analogues, officials choose Russian ones.

But Indian ferrous metals did well. In general, their supplies doubled over the past year (to $322 million), with some specific items in this category even demonstrating a six-fold increase (such as ferroalloy powder and granules). Of course, we are talking about small volumes of supplies (within tens of millions of dollars), but it is clear that these are unique products that we previously purchased in the West.

Various organic compounds also show a noticeable increase in supplies. In general, an increase of 14% ($323 million), but, for example, aniline derivatives, which are used both in pharmaceuticals and as fuel additives, immediately quadrupled ($52.5 million). Inorganics are also growing primarily due to aluminum oxide—three times at once, to $168 million. It is clear that with such volumes we are not talking about raw materials for aluminum smelters. Most likely, these are molds used to create fire-resistant surfaces and in abrasive production.

The supply of ceramic tiles has also doubled. Russians, who are accustomed to brands with Italian names, don’t know much about the Indian analogues. But apparently, they’ll have to get used to it. India sent Russia $110 million-worth of ceramics.

Indian smartphones were the breakthrough of the year. A year before India exported $6 million in smartphones, now—$97 million. Of course, compared to what China produces, this is simply miniscule. Last year, India, a population of 1.5 billion, produced 146 million of its own smartphones. For them it’s a trifle, but in Russia there would be more than enough phones for everyone.

Also very noticeable is the growth of another product group that is rarely associated with India. Equipment, including industrial equipment, takes first place among imports. Equipment was brought to Russia in 2023 for $576 million, an increase of 112%. But the largest subcategory of equipment was computer technology, which includes computers, laptops, tablets, and server equipment. Imports of this subcategory increased by 175% compared to the year before, reaching $86 million.

Slight bewilderment is caused by a two-fold increase in the supply of goods designated in statistics as frozen beef ($47 million). It is generally believed that Hindus do not do this with their cows. But everything is stable ( +13% ) with the supply of carob gum ($74.9 million). Why exactly do we need it in such quantities, we will have to look on the Internet, but off the top of our head—in the food industry as a thickener.

Oddly enough, tea from India comes to us in very small quantities (69.8 million dollars), and its supplies are falling ( -23% ). The same applies to instant coffee.

In general, the structure of commodity exchange between our countries is very diverse and has enormous growth potential. Just look at the banana expectations that have been talked about loudly against the backdrop of cooling relations with Ecuador. India is still the world's largest banana producer - all that remains is to solve logistics problems.

At the same time, transport experts note that it is logistics, and in a broad sense, including storage and primary processing capacities, that is India’s main Achilles heel as an exporter. Its second problem is domestic consumption of products and raw materials; there is simply not much left for export. And the fact that, despite the huge volumes of rupees that have already been accumulated, Russia still fails to increase imports from India, at least approximately corresponding to the growth of exports, is very symptomatic.

Subscribe now

The 28th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, better known as COP28, is heating up in Dubai. As expected, the conferencegoers are in unanimous agreement that renewable energy scams are very good and carbon is very, very bad.

Sorry for stating the obvious, but Russia’s delegation at COP28 includes a team of elite ESG grifters eco-heroes from Sberbank. It is maybe not so surprising that the bank that created a “Russian branch of the World Economic Forum’s climate initiative” in 2020 is now spearheading Russian “carbon regulation” at a UN conference dedicated to making life insufferable.

Here are some news reports from Russian state media:

Via TASS:

Climate change, according to Sberbank estimates, will annually cause damage to the Russian economy in the amount of 580 billion rubles. This was announced by the bank’s senior vice president for ESG Tatyana Zavyalova.

“Being closely involved in assessing climate risks, we preliminary estimate the damage from climate change in Russia from 2023 to 2027 at an average of 580 billion rubles annually,” she said, speaking at the 28th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP28) .

Zavyalova also noted that for some regions most susceptible to climate change, annual losses can range from 5% to 6% of gross product. In her opinion, the issue of implementing effective climate policy in Russia and the world is “increasingly moving to the economic plane.”

Also via TASS:

Sber proposed creating a platform within BRICS for discussing the climate agenda among members of the association. This was stated by the bank’s senior vice president for ESG (environmental, social responsibility and corporate governance) Tatyana Zavyalova at the 28th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP28).

“In order to create an appropriate platform for resolving interstate issues of managing the climate agenda, for the development of transboundary projects, synchronizing approaches to carbon regulation and developing joint standards for the energy transition, Sber proposes to create a BRICS climate council,” she said.

Sberbank has been very busy over the past few years creating clot-shots, cattle-tags, biometric payment systems, and so much more, as part of the bank’s core mission of creating a safe and convenient “client path” for each and every Russian citizen. Sber’s friendly CEO even takes time out of his busy schedule to chat with Vladimir Putin about how he wants to use AI to transform every aspect of Russian society.

So it’s only natural that Sber should also be intimately involved in the creation of a “BRICS climate council” charged with synchronizing “carbon regulation”. This is what a bank run by a friendly man would do.

WATCH YOUR BACK, CARBON! GREF AND BRICS ARE COMING FOR YOU!

Subscribe now

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? It’s hard to say because these two very distinct groups with vastly different visions for the future can’t stop plagiarizing each other.

If you don’t believe me…

On the vital importance of the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We commit to: … Accelerate the full and effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [and] scale up financing from all sources for accelerating progress on SDGs. […]

At the midway point to 2030, the global progress on SDGs is off-track with only 12 percent of the targets on track. During this Decade of Action, we will leverage the G20’s convening power and its collective resolve to fully and effectively implement the 2030 Agenda and accelerate progress toward the SDGs, in a timely manner, to shape the world we want to see for our future generations.

BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We reaffirm the call for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in its three dimensions: economic, social and environmental, in a balanced and integrated manner by mobilising the means required to implement the 2030 Agenda. […]

We will look to identify solutions for accelerating the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

On the vital importance of integrating SDGs in a Holistic Manner

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

Recognising that the prosperity and well-being of present and future generations depends on our current development and other policy choices and actions, we resolve to pursue environmentally sustainable and inclusive economic growth and development in an integrated, holistic and balanced manner.

BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We recognise the importance of implementing the SDGs in an integrated and holistic manner, inter alia through poverty eradication as well as combating climate change whilst promoting sustainable land use and water management, conservation of biological diversity, and the sustainable use of its components and the biodiversity and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilisation of genetic resources…

On the vital importance of Addressing Climate Change

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We commit to urgently accelerate our actions to address environmental crises and challenges including climate change. We recognize that the impacts of climate change are being experienced worldwide, particularly by the poorest and the most vulnerable. […]

We note with concern that global ambition and implementation to address climate change remain insufficient to achieve the temperature goal of the Paris Agreement to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre­industrial levels, and pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. We highlight the importance of ambitious action on all pillars of the Paris Agreement, taking into account the best available science.

BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We agree to address the challenges posed by climate change while also ensuring a just, affordable and sustainable transition to a low carbon and low-emission economy in line with the principles of [the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]… […]

We reemphasise the importance of implementing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Paris Agreement.

On the vital importance of the World Trade Organization

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We reaffirm that a rules-based, non-discriminatory, fair, open, inclusive, equitable, sustainable and transparent multilateral trading system, with WTO at its core, is indispensable.

BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We reaffirm our support for the open, transparent, fair, predictable, inclusive, equitable, non-discriminatory and rules-based multilateral trading system with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) at its core.

On the vital importance of the World Health Organization

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We remain committed to strengthening the global health architecture, with the World Health Organization (WHO) at its core, and building more resilient, equitable, sustainable, and inclusive health systems to achieve Universal Health Coverage, implement One Health approach, enhance pandemic preparedness and strengthen existing infectious diseases surveillance systems.

BRICS (2022 XIV BRICS Summit Beijing Declaration):

We reaffirm our commitment to multilateralism and continue to support World Health Organization (WHO) to play the leading role in the global health governance, while supporting other UN relevant agencies’ activities. […]

We support the leading role of the WHO in combating the pandemic, as well as acknowledge initiatives such as the COVAX and the ACT-A. We recognize the importance of the discussions in the WTO on relevant IP waiver proposals, as well as capacity building and strengthening local production of vaccines and other health tools, especially in developing countries. We stress the need to continue to strengthen the cooperation on testing methods, therapeutic, research, production and recognition of vaccines, the research on their efficacy and safety in light of new variants of COVID-19 virus and recognition of national document of vaccination against COVID-19 and respective testing, especially for purpose of international travel.

We reaffirm our commitment to multilateralism and continue to support World Health Organization (WHO) to play the leading role in the global health governance, while supporting other UN relevant agencies’ activities.

On the vital importance of Pandemic Preparedness

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We remain committed to strengthening the global health architecture for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response (PPR) through enhanced collaboration between Finance and Health Ministries under the Joint Finance and Health Task Force (JFHTF). Under the JFHTF, we welcome the participation of invited key regional organisations in the Task Force meetings as they enhance the voice of low-income countries. We welcome the discussion on the Framework on Economic Vulnerabilities and Risks (FEVR) and the initial Report for Economic Vulnerabilities and Risks arising from pandemics, created through collaboration between World Health Organisation (WHO), World Bank, IMF, and European Investment Bank (EIB).

BRICS (2022 XIV BRICS Summit Beijing Declaration):

We stress that BRICS countries should be better prepared for COVID-19 and future public health emergencies, and enhance exchanges and cooperation on public health emergency alert, pandemic prevention preparedness and response, and best practices in medical treatment. We welcome the virtual launch of the BRICS Vaccine Research and Development Center and commend the “Initiative on Strengthening Vaccine Cooperation and Jointly Building a Defensive Line against Pandemic”. […]

We call on international agencies and philanthropists to procure vaccines and boosters from manufacturers in developing countries, including in Africa, to ensure that the manufacturing capabilities being developed are retained. This is critical to build health system resilience and preparedness for emerging variants and any future health emergencies including pandemics. In this context access to diagnostics and therapeutics is essential to adopt quality and affordable medical countermeasures and develop overall surveillance capabilities.

Also BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We commit to intensify our efforts towards improving our collective capacity for global pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, and strengthening our ability to fight back any such pandemics in the future collectively. In this regard, we consider it important to continue our support to the BRICS Virtual Vaccine Research and Development Center. We look forward to the holding of the High-Level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response to be to be held on 20th September 2023 at the United Nations General Assembly and we call for an outcome that will mobilise political will and continued leadership on this matter.

On the vital importance of Digital Transformation

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We commend the efforts of the Indian Presidency to accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. To this end, we:

i. Recognise the role of digital transformation, AI, data advances, and the need to address digital divides. We endorse the G20 Principles on Harnessing Data for Development (D4D) and welcome the decision to launch Data for Development Capacity Building Initiative, and other existing initiatives […]

[We resolve to] improve access to digital services and digital public infrastructure, and leverage digital transformation opportunities to boost sustainable and inclusive growth.

BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We agree to explore opportunities on BRICS digital education cooperative mechanisms, hold dialogues on digital education policies, share digital educational resources, build smart education systems, and jointly promote digital transformation of education in BRICS countries and to develop a sustainable education by strengthening the cooperation within BRICS Network University and other institution-to-institution initiatives in this area, including the BRICS University League.

Also BRICS (2022 XIV BRICS Summit Beijing Declaration):

We commend the proposal to organize the BRICS High-level Forum on Sustainable Development. Taking it as an opportunity, we look forward to deepening cooperation on, inter alia, the fight against COVID-19, digital transformation, resilience and stability of industrial and supply chains and low-carbon development. […]

We support the digital transformation in education and TVET space, and commit to ensure education accessibility and equity, and promote the development of quality education. We reiterate the importance of digitalization in education and development of a sustainable education by strengthening the cooperation within BRICS Network University and BRICS University League.

On the vital importance of Being Green

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We reiterate our commitment to promote sustainable capital flows. To this effect, we take note of the OECD’s Report, “Towards Orderly Green Transition – Investment Requirements and Managing Risks to Capital Flows”. […]

Recognizing the importance of supporting the commercialization of early-stage technologies that avoid, abate and remove greenhouse gas emissions and facilitate adaptation, we note the recommendations on financial solutions, policies, and incentives to encourage greater private flows for the rapid development, demonstration, and deployment of green and low-emission technologies.

BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We continue to support the work of the Task Force on Public-Private Partnership (PPP) and Infrastructure in sharing knowledge, good practices and lessons learnt on the effective development and delivery of infrastructure for the benefit of all member countries. In this regard, the Task Force has collated guiding principles that advance the adoption of a programmatic approach in infrastructure delivery and promotes the use of PPPs and other blended finance solutions in infrastructure development and delivery. We look forward to convening the Infrastructure Investment Symposium later this year for a discussion amongst BRICS governments, investors and financiers on ways to work with the private sector to promote the use of green, transition and sustainable finance in infrastructure delivery. […]

We acknowledge the urgent need for tourism industry recovery and the importance of increasing mutual tourist flows and will work towards further strengthening the BRICS Alliance for Green Tourism to promote measures, which can shape a more resilient, sustainable and inclusive tourism sector.

On the vital importance of Carbon Credits

G20 (2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration):

We reiterate the importance of a policy mix consisting of fiscal, market and regulatory mechanisms, including, as appropriate, the use of carbon pricing and non-pricing mechanisms and incentives toward carbon neutrality and net zero.

BRICS (2023 Johannesburg II Declaration):

We call for collaboration amongst the BRICS countries on technological neutrality and further urge for the adoption of common, effective, clear, fair and transparent standards and rules for assessment of emissions, elaboration of compatible taxonomies of sustainable projects as well as accounting of carbon units.

YES OKAY, BUT WHO IS MORE SUSTAINABLE?????????????????

Subscribe now

BLOG-TOBER AUTUMN SUB-SALE! $35 FOR 12 MONTHS OF MIND-BLOWING BLOGGING. GET EXCLUSIVE PAYWALLED CONTENT ON OCCASION. I WOULD BE VERY GRATEFUL.

The fifteenth annual BRICS summit was held in late August in Johannesburg, South Africa. Probably you heard about it.

As part of the festivities, member states signed the “Johannesburg II Declaration — BRICS and Africa: Partnership for Mutually Accelerated Growth, Sustainable Development and Inclusive Multilateralism”. (The link directs to an English-language version of the document hosted by Kremlin.ru.)

A quick summary:

• The UN is the cornerstone of the “international system”, and BRICS members are committed to the full “implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”

• “Public-private partnerships” will help ensure “sustainable development”, and BRICS is excited about the work of its Task Force on Public-Private Partnership.

• The IMF and WTO are valued organizations, but they must be more “inclusive” and “non-discriminatory”.

• “We commit to intensify our efforts towards improving our collective capacity for global pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, and strengthening our ability to fight back any such pandemics in the future collectively.”

• BRICS will double-down on clot-shot “research”.

• “Climate change” is referred to 18 times.

• BRICS is excited about “digital transformation in education” and “sustainable education”.

• A lot of other feel-good word salad about making the world a better, more inclusive and sustainable place by partnering with corporations and strengthening global governance.

• In total, “sustainable development” is mentioned 21 times. (The acronym “SDG” appears 6 times.)

Of course, what makes BRICS special and different is that it promises to carry out a friendly global agenda aimed at crushing your soul in an “integrated and holistic manner”.

Sustainability was the hot topic at this summit. Putin even started his address to the BRICS Business Forum by expressing hope that the “business community” would work towards “accelerated socio-economic growth of our states and achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.”

The Russian president ended his speech by praising BRICS for promoting the “successful achievement of global development goals and targets set by the United Nations.”

De-dollarization was also a major theme of the conference. There has been some noteworthy progress towards dumping the dollar: BRICS’ New Development Bank pledged to increase the share of local currencies in its holdings/dealings. (More on this in a different blog post.)

And these local currencies will be used to achieve Sustainable Development Goals, as the bank helpfully explains on its website.

If you read the bank’s “general strategy” for creating a “sustainable future”, the financial institution explains how its projects are “aligned” with 11 SDGs:

Within the broad spectrum of infrastructure and sustainable development, NDB successfully diversified its operations across a range of key areas and SDGs. By the end of 2021, the Bank’s projects were primarily aligned with 11 SDGs, with the majority of committed financing aligned with SDG 9 on Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure (29%), SDG 11 on Sustainable Cities and Communities (15%), SDG 8 on Decent Work and Economic Growth (14%), and SDG 7 on Affordable and Clean Energy (13%). During the same period, the Bank committed USD 5.2 billion to climate finance, accounting for 18% of cumulative approvals. Excluding the COVID-19 emergency programme loans provided by the Bank, climate finance represented 26% of NDB’s cumulative approvals at the end of 2021, higher than the pre-pandemic level observed at the end of 2019.

Returning to the recently inked Johannesburg II Declaration: Iurie Rosca has provided an invaluable service to us all by sifting through this 26-page declaration, and highlighting the most worrisome passages. I will share excerpts from his findings below (emphasis his own):

“3. We reiterate our commitment to inclusive multilateralism and upholding 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 an international system…”. So, UN is and indisputable authority for them, although it is through this organization that global governance is carried out.

 “5….We also call for increasing the role and share of women from EMDCs at different levels of responsibilities in the international organizations”. Emphasizing the role of women in politics, society, business, etc. it is part of the feminist ideology as a strategy to destroy the family through the masculinization of women.

“6… In this regard, we underline that they should be implemented on the level of global governance as well as at national level”.  The term global governance involves the exercise of world-wide power from a single center.

“7. We support a comprehensive reform of the UN, including its Security Council, with a view to making it more democratic, representative, effective and efficient, and to increase the representation of developing countries in the Council’s memberships so that it can adequately respond to prevailing global challenges and support the legitimate aspirations of emerging and developing countries from Africa, Asia and Latin America, including Brazil, India and South Africa, to play a greater role in international affairs, in particular in the United Nations, including its Security Council”. “UN reform” is the basic bait for the leaders of those countries, who believe that this will escape the domination of former oppressors. But because it is not the states, but the private entities that determine the policy at the international level, these changes will most likely be only decorative.

“8.We reaffirm our support for the open, transparent, fair, predictable, inclusive, equitable, non-discriminatory and rules-based multilateral trading system with the World Trade Organization (WTO) at its core, with special and differential treatment (S&DT) for developing countries, including Least Developed Countries….” The acceptance of the WTO as a body regulating international trade is another proof of the subordination of these countries to the globalist strategy. Any claim to gain benefits and privileges within this organization is proof of either gross naivety or hypocrisy.

“9. We call for the need to make progress towards the achievement of a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system…” Agriculture seen as agribusiness to conquer new markets already has its champions. Monsanto, Vanguard, Black Rock, Bill Gates, George Soros, etc. they will continue to make all the land in the world their private property. And the free trade regime and WTO membership do not reward any protectionist measures at the national level.

“10. We support a robust Global Financial Safety Net with a quota-based and adequately resourced International Monetary Fund (IMF) at its center…”.  Recognizing the IMF as an institution that would have a positive role for the countries of the world means completely ignoring its functions and the harmful effects faced by all the countries of the world that have accepted cooperation with it.

“13. We recognise the importance of the increased participation of women in peace processes including in conflict prevention and resolution, peacekeeping, peacebuilding, post-conflict reconstruction and development, and sustaining peace…”. Once again, "the increased participation of women" implies a decreasing participation of women in family life, i.e. the feminist inversion of the social roles belonging to men and women, which are complementary and not interchangeable.

“22. We express strong condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations whenever, wherever and by whomsoever committed. We recognize the threat emanating from terrorism, extremism conducive to terrorism and radicalization…” Adherence to the myth of combating terrorism, imposed by the globalists after 9/11, shows the subordination of these countries to the strategy of suppressing liberties in favor of a police state. The sacrifice of freedom in favor of security is the well-known formula of this globalist maneuver. 

“25. We reaffirm our commitment to strengthen international cooperation and our collaboration against corruption and continue to implement the relevant international agreements in this regard, in particular the United Nations Convention against Corruption...” "Fighting corruption" is an old globalist trick that covers the desire to totally control the privacy, transactions, money and movement of every person within a global digital prison.

“Partnership for Mutually Accelerated Growth”. Attractive slogan, but which only works to the advantage of corporations, not states. It only presupposes free trade, which is claimed to bring prosperity to nations, while only benefiting cross-border economic sharks.

“30. We reaffirm the importance of the G20 to continue playing the role of the premier multilateral forum in the field of international economic and financial cooperation that comprises both developed and emerging markets and developing countries where major economies jointly seek solutions to global challenges…” Recognizing the ”leading role of the G20” means condemning all the countries of the world to an eternal state of vassalage, and promoting economic colonialism as the norm of international relations. This time it is not states but private entities that represent the world colonizers.

“31. We recognize the important role of BRICS countries working together to deal with risks and challenges to the world economy in achieving global recovery and sustainable development. We reaffirm our commitment to enhance macro-economic policy coordination, deepen economic cooperation, and work to realize strong, sustainable, balanced and inclusive economic recovery. We emphasize the importance of continued implementation of the Strategy for BRICS Economic Partnership 2025 in all relevant ministerial tracks and working groups. We will look to identify solutions for accelerating the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.[6]” Agenda 2030 is worth reading and re-reading with pencil in hand. Those who submit to it condemn their own peoples to death and slavery.

“33. We recognize the dynamism of the digital economy in enabling global economic growth. We also recognize the positive role that trade and investment can play in promoting sustainable development, national and regional industrialization, the transition towards sustainable consumption and production patterns. We recognize the challenges facing trade and investment development in the digital era and acknowledge that BRICS members are at different levels of digital development, and thus recognize the need to address respective challenges including the various digital divides…”. "Digital economy" means the death of the state, of the productive economy based on industry, "surveillance capitalism", the massive use of AI, but also a huge mass of unemployed. Working people become useless under the conditions of the technological revolution. Therefore, the mass of unemployed, "useless eaters" are to be subjected to depopulation, and the survivors to be kept under control by ”tittytainment”,  according to the recipe of Zbigniew Brzezinski.

“36. We commit to strengthening intra-BRICS cooperation to intensify the BRICS Partnership on New Industrial Revolution[7] (PartNIR) and create new opportunities for accelerating industrial development… We reiterate our commitment to continue discussion on the establishment of BCIC in cooperation with UNIDO to jointly support the development of Industry 4.0 skills development among the BRICS countries and to promote partnerships and increased productivity in the New Industrial Revolution. We look forward to the cooperation with UNIDO and request the PartNIR Advisory Group to coordinate with UNIDO.”. This article univocally shows that BRICS countries are totally subjugated by the WEF and subject to the same ”globalist technological revolution” preached by Klaus Schwas, Yuval Noah  Harrari and other exponents of the global elite. It means, in accordance of their explanations, ”The insight "fusion of the digital, biological, and physical worlds" refers to the integration of technology, biology, and physical objects in a seamless way. This integration is made possible by the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), and other advanced technologies”. Therefore, Welcome to the dystopian future! The gates of hell are open! You can enter it under the triumphal sign of BRICS.

“38. We reiterate the commitment to promote employment for sustainable development, including to develop skills to ensure resilient recovery, gender-responsive employment and social protection policies including workers’ rights”. Thus, everything is geared towards realizing the plans of the “unique party of globalists” for sustainable development, including gender theory as part of this strategy. We remind you that gender theory challenges the fact that people are born without any native sexual identity, male or female. It claims that we are born neutral, without any belonging to one of the two ”genders”. In the acceptance of this theory gender is a social construct, which is optional one and could be a subject to infinite changes to the free will of each individual. So welcome to the Satanist universe of transgenderism[9]! You have reached this destination through the BRICS gates.

“39. We acknowledge the urgent need for tourism industry recovery and the importance of increasing mutual tourist flows and will work towards further strengthening the BRICS Alliance for Green Tourism to promote measures, which can shape a more resilient, sustainable and inclusive tourism sector”. Even this alienating attraction of today's world, tourism, is framed in the Procustian formula of the “green economy”, based on the myth of “global warming”, which pretexts the entire Great Reset.

“41. We agree to continue to deepen cooperation on competition amongst BRICS countries and create a fair competition market environment for international economic and trade cooperation”. Here is another point that testifies to the religion of globalist neoliberalism, without state borders, without customs barriers, which ensures the total and totalitarian dominance of corporations.

“42. We agree to enhance dialogue and cooperation on intellectual property rights through, the BRICS IPR cooperation mechanism (IPRCM). As we celebrate a decade of cooperation of the Heads of Intellectual Property Offices, we welcome the alignment of their workplan to the Sustainable Development Goals.” The subordination of the BRICS countries to the rules of “intellectual property” condemns them to chronic underdevelopment and total dependence on the big players of corporate capitalism.

“49. We continue to support the work of the Task Force on Public-Private Partnership (PPP) and Infrastructure in sharing knowledge, good practices and lessons learnt on the effective development and delivery of infrastructure for the benefit of all member countries…” Public-Private Partnerships represent a form of subjugation of states by corporations.

“Partnership for Sustainable Development

52. We reaffirm the call for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in its three dimensions: economic, social and environmental, in a balanced and integrated manner by mobilizing the means required to implement the 2030 Agenda”. Once again, the BRICS states as empty shells of the extraterritorial world empire at the service of the globalists.

“53. We recognise the importance of implementing the SDGs in an integrated and holistic manner, inter alia through poverty eradication as well as combating climate change whilst promoting sustainable land use and water management, conservation of biological diversity, and the sustainable use of its components and the biodiversity and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources…” As we know, SDG means Sustainable Development Goals, 17 in number, which are a kind of “divine commandments” of the globalist-satanic anti-religion, assumed with total obedience by the puppets from BRICS countries.

“56. We reemphasize the importance of implementing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Paris Agreement and the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) enhancing low-cost climate technology transfer, capacity building as well as mobilizing affordable, adequate and timely delivered new additional financial resources for environmentally sustainable projects. We agree that there is a need to defend, promote and strengthen the multilateral response to Climate Change and to work together for a successful outcome of the 28th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP28).” The myth of Climate Change is fully assumed by the globalist servants within BRICS. The same story of Climate Change is exposed in very detailed form in articles 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63. No doubt, they are part of the globalist game. And we are victims of their open conspiracy.

“64. We commit to intensify our efforts towards improving our collective capacity for global pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, and strengthening our ability to fight back any such pandemics in the future collectively. In this regard, we consider it important to continue our support to the BRICS Virtual Vaccine Research and Development Center. We look forward to the holding of the High-Level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response to be to be held on 20th September 2023 at the United Nations General Assembly and we call for an outcome that will mobilize political will and continued leadership on this matter.” During the last three years we have become convinced that the sinister hoax of Covid-19 is being promoted with tyrannical measures in all BRICS countries. They remain part of the depopulation, genetic modification and total tracking of all humans. Nihil novi, we just have to open our eyes to the surrounding realities and give up illusions and self-deception. In the article 65 the same adoration of the religion of vaccinism. Despite of all the striking scientific evidence about the fatal harmfulness of fake vaccines the measure of state terrorism is imposed abusively by BRICS countries. The strategy of enslaving humanity under medical pretexts, and by following of prescriptions of WHO are played by these ”rebellious” countries too.

“78. We acknowledge the critical role of women in economic development and commend the BRICS Women’s Business Alliance. We recognise that inclusive entrepreneurship and access to finance for women would facilitate their participation in business ventures, innovation, and the digital economy. We welcome initiatives that will enhance agricultural productivity and access to land, technology, and markets for women farmers”. Once again, the heritage of Rockefeller’s clan which invented and imposed the ideology of feminism represents the core value for the alliance of the BRICS demographic and territorial giants, but geopolitical dwarfs.

I urge you to read the entirety of Rosca’s write-up, which makes a number of thought-provoking conclusions about what this document tells us about the Multipolar World Order.

More later.

Subscribe now